IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i12p9331-d1167420.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Determinants of Economical High School Students’ Attitudes toward Mobile Devices Use

Author

Listed:
  • Mihaela Moca

    (Department of Economics and Business, University of Oradea, 410087 Oradea, Romania)

  • Alina Badulescu

    (Department of Economics and Business, University of Oradea, 410087 Oradea, Romania)

Abstract

Due to recent considerable technology breakthroughs in the education sector, new tools have been developed to improve learning. Motivating students to use new devices for learning rather than just for amusement, however, is a difficulty. The COVID-19 pandemic prompted the adoption of technological devices for course delivery, thereby highlighting the significance of mobile learning (m-learning) and allowing educators, students, and other stakeholders in the education sector to recognize its potential, advantages, drawbacks, and challenges. As m-learning has been an essential aspect of education for some time now, there is growing interest in assessing its long-term viability and usefulness across various educational domains, including economics. New technologies like computers, the internet, and related tools can help by bringing life to the classroom, gauging student progress, simulating economic activities and phenomena, and teaching vital skills needed for the economic world, like entrepreneurship. This study aims to explore the potential of incorporating new technologies in economic education, we study the tendency of the economical high school students towards using mobile devices for learning activities. A total of 407 participants were involved in research, the data from these respondents being collected with the help of a questionnaire survey. The original technology acceptance model (TAM) has been extended and the role of various external factors such as the subjective norm, learning autonomy, facilitating conditions or self-efficacy has been addressed. A list of hypotheses was proposed to validate the underlying model and provide guidance on how external factors affect attitudes towards using mobile devices. The empirical results indicated that perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness are significant predictors to explain the attitudes towards mobile devices use and m-learning and the analyzed external factors have a positive influence on them. In terms of methods used, we characterize the perception of students by structural equations modelling (SEM). This study identifies and analyzes the factors that influence students’ attitude and readiness towards mobile technology use in education, providing valuable insights into improving the adoption of new technologies and to evaluate the sustainability of m-learning in economic education.

Suggested Citation

  • Mihaela Moca & Alina Badulescu, 2023. "Determinants of Economical High School Students’ Attitudes toward Mobile Devices Use," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-21, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:12:p:9331-:d:1167420
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/12/9331/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/12/9331/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nicola J. Beatson & David A. G. Berg & Jeffrey K. Smith, 2020. "The influence of self‐efficacy beliefs and prior learning on performance," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 60(2), pages 1271-1294, June.
    2. Ali Mugahed Al-Rahmi & Waleed Mugahed Al-Rahmi & Uthman Alturki & Ahmed Aldraiweesh & Sultan Almutairy & Ahmad Samed Al-Adwan, 2021. "Exploring the Factors Affecting Mobile Learning for Sustainability in Higher Education," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-22, July.
    3. Ha, Sejin & Stoel, Leslie, 2009. "Consumer e-shopping acceptance: Antecedents in a technology acceptance model," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 62(5), pages 565-571, May.
    4. Basil John Thomas & Tarek Khalil & Nisha Joseph, 2020. "The Role of Educational Technologies in CSR Perception of Tourism Education: The Comparative Analysis of E-Learning and M-Learning Tools as Moderators," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-13, December.
    5. Fred D. Davis & Richard P. Bagozzi & Paul R. Warshaw, 1989. "User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(8), pages 982-1003, August.
    6. Lee Cronbach, 1951. "Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 16(3), pages 297-334, September.
    7. Martine Baars & Olga Viberg, 2022. "Mobile Learning to Support Self-Regulated Learning: A Theoretical Review," International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning (IJMBL), IGI Global Scientific Publishing, vol. 14(4), pages 1-12, October.
    8. Rosseel, Yves, 2012. "lavaan: An R Package for Structural Equation Modeling," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 48(i02).
    9. Constantin Aurelian Ionescu & Liliana Paschia & Nicoleta Luminita Gudanescu Nicolau & Sorina Geanina Stanescu & Veronica Maria Neacsu Stancescu & Mihaela Denisa Coman & Marilena Carmen Uzlau, 2020. "Sustainability Analysis of the E-Learning Education System during Pandemic Period—COVID-19 in Romania," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-22, October.
    10. Viswanath Venkatesh & Fred D. Davis, 2000. "A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(2), pages 186-204, February.
    11. Sanduni I. Senaratne & Samantha M. Samarasinghe, 2019. "Factors Affecting the Intention to Adopt M-Learning," International Business Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 12(2), pages 150-164, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Alessandro Pollini & Gian Andrea Giacobone, 2025. "Unsustainability in Sustainability Education: Limits of Technology In Situ," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(20), pages 1-29, October.
    2. Marko Radovan & Danijela Makovec Radovan, 2024. "Harmonizing Pedagogy and Technology: Insights into Teaching Approaches That Foster Sustainable Motivation and Efficiency in Blended Learning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-19, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Natarajan, Thamaraiselvan & Balasubramanian, Senthil Arasu & Kasilingam, Dharun Lingam, 2017. "Understanding the intention to use mobile shopping applications and its influence on price sensitivity," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 8-22.
    2. Chen Wei, 2021. "The influence of Consumers’ Purchase intention on Smart Wearable Device: A study of Consumers in East China," International Journal of Science and Business, IJSAB International, vol. 5(8), pages 46-72.
    3. Mohammad Tipu Sultan & Farzana Sharmin & Alina Badulescu & Darie Gavrilut & Ke Xue, 2021. "Social Media-Based Content towards Image Formation: A New Approach to the Selection of Sustainable Destinations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-22, April.
    4. Yoon, Jeewhan & Vonortas, Nicholas S. & Han, SungWon, 2020. "Do-It-Yourself laboratories and attitude toward use: The effects of self-efficacy and the perception of security and privacy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    5. Mauricio S. Featherman & Nick Hajli, 2016. "Self-Service Technologies and e-Services Risks in Social Commerce Era," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 139(2), pages 251-269, December.
    6. Donglin Han & Huiying (Cynthia) Hou & Hao Wu & Joseph H. K. Lai, 2021. "Modelling Tourists’ Acceptance of Hotel Experience-Enhancement Smart Technologies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-19, April.
    7. Radoslaw Macik & Dorota Macik, 2011. "Physical vs. Virtual Information Search and Purchase in the Buying Behavior of Polish Young Consumers," MIC 2011: Managing Sustainability? Proceedings of the 12th International Conference, Portorož, 23–26 November 2011 [Selected Papers],, University of Primorska, Faculty of Management Koper.
    8. Tahir Ahmad & Amy Van Looy, 2021. "Development and testing of an explorative BPM acceptance model: Insights from the COVID-19 pandemic," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(11), pages 1-26, November.
    9. Shirazi, Farid & Hajli, Nick & Sims, Julian & Lemke, Fred, 2022. "The role of social factors in purchase journey in the social commerce era," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    10. Kerstin Pezoldt & Jana Schliewe, 2012. "Akzeptanz von Self-Service-Technologien: State of the Art," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 64(2), pages 205-253, March.
    11. Baqar Ali Zardari & Zahid Hussain & Aijaz Ahmed Arain & Wajid H. Rizvi & Muhammad Saleem Vighio, 2021. "Development and Validation of User Experience-Based E-Learning Acceptance Model for Sustainable Higher Education," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-17, May.
    12. Baier, Daniel & Karasenko, Andreas & Rese, Alexandra, 2025. "Measuring technology acceptance over time using transfer models based on online customer reviews," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    13. McLean, Graeme & Osei-Frimpong, Kofi, 2019. "Chat now… Examining the variables influencing the use of online live chat," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 55-67.
    14. Wu, Jih-Hwa & Wu, Chih-Wen & Lee, Chin-Tarn & Lee, Hsiao-Jung, 2015. "Green purchase intentions: An exploratory study of the Taiwanese electric motorcycle market," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(4), pages 829-833.
    15. Fosso Wamba, Samuel & Queiroz, Maciel M. & Trinchera, Laura, 2020. "Dynamics between blockchain adoption determinants and supply chain performance: An empirical investigation," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 229(C).
    16. Ioanna Roussou & Emmanouil Stiakakis & Angelo Sifaleras, 2019. "An empirical study on the commercial adoption of digital currencies," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 223-259, December.
    17. Chenkuo Pai & Sangguk Kang & Yumeng Liu & Yingchuan Zheng, 2021. "An Examination of Revisit Intention Based on Perceived Smart Tourism Technology Experience," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-14, January.
    18. Sepasgozar, Samad M.E. & Hawken, Scott & Sargolzaei, Sharifeh & Foroozanfa, Mona, 2019. "Implementing citizen centric technology in developing smart cities: A model for predicting the acceptance of urban technologies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 105-116.
    19. Jaspers, Esther D.T. & Pearson, Erika, 2022. "Consumers’ acceptance of domestic Internet-of-Things: The role of trust and privacy concerns," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 255-265.
    20. Nguyen Thi Tuyet Mai & Takahashi Yoshi & Nham Phong Tuan, 2013. "Technology acceptance model and the paths to online customer loyalty in an emerging market," Tržište/Market, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Zagreb, vol. 25(2), pages 231-248.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:12:p:9331-:d:1167420. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.