臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

　　由於柬埔寨人傾向於開始在互聯網上學習，本研究旨在探討相關構念間之互動關係。本研究採用創新科技，科技接受模型,價值增加模型及自我決定理論，並以主觀規範及感知覺風險作為調節效應來探討員工線上學習。本研究採取問卷調查，本研究適過個別報名及電子郵件共收集369位消費者之意見進行分析。研究之結果發現以上提到的三種理論具有相互關係，並間受到主觀規範和感知風險的調節。使用者在進行學習時，必須注意線上學習之重要性，而網站與應用程式的開發者應該考慮系統及網路的可靠性，知識的方便來吸引更多用戶使用。

　　Due to Cambodian tends to start to learn on the internet, this research aims to study the interrelationship between each research construct by using technology innovation, Technology Adoption Model (TAM), Value-based Adoption Model (VAM) and Self-Determination Theory (SDT) to determine the behavioral intention of the user in e-learning with subjective norm and perceived risk as the moderation effect. This study is conducted by using the quantitative method of surveying the questionnaire through the social application and e-mail with a total of 369 respondents who get employed in Cambodia. The results found that there is a relationship between the three theories that mentioned which had moderated affect by the subjective norm and perceived risk. It suggests the users need to be aware of the essential of studying on e-learning to adapt with the modern era while the developer of website and application should consider about the reliable system, accurate knowledge, and convenience way to attract the more user to use theirs.

Letter of Recommendation for ABT Masters 　I
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 　II
論文摘要 　III
ABSTRACT 　IV
TABLE OF CONTENT 　V
LIST OF FIGURES 　IX
LIST OF TABLE 　X
CHAPTER ONE- INTRODUCTION 　1
1.1 Research Background and Research Motivation 　1
1.2 Research Objective 　4
1.3 Procedure and Research Structure 　4
CHAPTER TWO- LITERATURE REVIEW 　7
2.1 Theoretical Background 　7
2.1.1 Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) 　7
2.1.2 Value-Based Adoption Model (VAM) 　8
2.1.3 Self Determination Theory (SDT) 　8
2.2 Term and Definition 　9
2.2.1 Technology innovation 　9
2.2.2 Perceived ease of use 　9
2.2.3 Perceived usefulness 　10
2.2.4 Attitude 　10
2.2.5 Perceived benefit 　11
2.2.6 Perceived sacrificed 　11
2.2.7 Perceived value 　12
2.2.8 Perceived autonomy support 　13
2.2.9 Perceived competence 　13
2.2.10 Perceived relatedness 　14
2.2.11 Subjective norm 　14
2.2.12 Perceived risk 　15
2.2.13 Intention of e-learning 　16
2.3 Research Hypothesis 　16
2.3.1 The effect of technology innovation on VAM 　16
2.3.2 The effect of technology innovation on TAM 　17
2.3.3 The effect of SDT on TAM 　18
2.3.4 The effect of VAM on perceived value 　20
2.3.5 The effect of TAM on attitude 　21
2.3.6 The effect of perceived value on attitude 　22
2.3.7 The effect of attitude on behavioral intention 　22
2.3.8 The moderating effect of subjective norm 　23
2.3.9 The moderating effect of perceived risk 　23
CHAPTER THREE- RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 　25
3.1 Research Model 　25
3.2 Instrument 　27
3.3 Construct Measurement 　28
3.3.1 Technology innovation (TI) 　28
3.3.2 VAM 　29
3.3.3 TAM 　29
3.3.4 SDT 　30
3.3.5 Perceived Value (PV) 　32
3.3.6 Attitude (ATT) 　32
3.3.7 Subjective Norm (SN) 　32
3.3.8 Perceived Risk 　33
3.3.9 Intention (BI) 　34
3.3.10 Demographics 　34
3.4 Translation 　35
3.5 Sampling and Data Collection 　35
3.6 Pilot test 　36
3.7 Data Analysis Procedure 　36
3.7.1 Factor Loading & Reliability Test 　36
3.7.2 ANOVA and Independent T-test 　37
3.7.3 Confirmatory Factor Analysis 　37
3.7.4 Partial Linear Square Regression 　38
CHAPTER FOUR- DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS 　39
4.1 Description Analysis 　39
4.1.1 Characteristic of Respondents 　39
4.1.2 Measurement Results for Relevant Research Variables 　41
4.2 Factor Analysis and Reliability 　49
4.2.1 Technology Innovation 　49
4.1.2 Perceived Benefit 　50
4.2.3 Perceived Sacrifice 　51
4.2.4 Perceived Usefulness 　51
4.2.5 Perceived Ease of Use 　52
4.2.6 Perceived Autonomy 　53
4.2.7 Perceived Competence 　54
4.2.8 Perceived Relatedness 　54
4.2.9 Perceived Value 　55
4.2.10 Attitude 　56
4.2.11 Subjective Norm 　57
4.2.12 Security Risk 　57
4.2.13 Privacy Risk 　58
4.2.14 Behavioral Intention of e-learning 　59
4.3 Independent Sample T-test　60
4.3.1 Gender 　60
4.3.2 Type of Industry 　61
4.4 One-way Analysis of Variance ANOVA 　62
4.4.1 Age 　63
4.4.2 Education Level 　64
4.4.3 Occupation Level 　65
4.4.4 Frequency of Using the Internet 　67
4.5 Evaluation of the Measurement Model 　68
4.6 Evaluation of the Strutural Model 　70
4.7 Mediation Effect Testing 　75
4.7.1 Mediation Effect Testing of TAM Factors between Technology Innovation and Attitude 　76
4.7.2 Mediation Effect Testing of VAM Factors between Technology Innovation and Perceived Value 　77
4.7.3 Mediation Effect Testing of Attitude between Perceived Value and Behavioral Intention 　79
CHAPTER FIVE- CONCLUSIONS & SUGGESTIONS 　81
5.1 Research Conclusion 　81
5.2 Discussion and Implication 　86
5.3 Research Limitation and Future Research Suggestion 　89
REFERENCES 　90
APPENDIX QUESTIONNAIRE 　103
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1 Research Procedures 　6
Figure 3.1 Research Model 　25
Figure 4.1Confirmatory Factor Analysis 　70
Figure 4.2 The Measurement of Research 　75
LIST OF TABLE
Table 4.1 Characteristic of Respondents (n=369) 　40
Table 4.2 Descriptive Analysis for Questionnaire Items 　42
Table 4.3 Result of FL and Reliability of Technology Innovation 　49
Table 4.4 Result of FL and Reliability of Perceived Benefit 　50
Table 4.5 Result of FL and Reliability of Perceived Sacrifice 　51
Table 4.6 Result of FL and Reliability of Perceived Usefulness 　52
Table 4.7 Result of FL and Reliability of Perceived Ease of Use 　52
Table 4.8 Result of FL and Reliability of Perceived Autonomy 　53
Table 4.9 Result of FL and Reliability of Perceived Competence 　54
Table 4.10 Result of FL and Reliability of Perceived Relatedness 　55
Table 4.11 Result of FL and Reliability of Perceived Value 　55
Table 4.12 Result of FL and Reliability of Attitude 　56
Table 4.13 Result of FL and Reliability of Subjective Norm 　57
Table 4.14 Result of FL and Reliability of Security Risk 　58
Table 4.15 Result of FL and Reliability of Privacy Risk 　58
Table 4.16 Result of FL and Reliability of Intention of e-learning 　59
Table 4.17 Result of Independent T-test with Gender 　60
Table 4.18 Result of Independent T-test with Type of Industry 　61
Table 4.19 Result of One Way ANOVA of Age 　63
Table 4.20 Result of One Way ANOVA of Education Level　65
Table 4.21 Result of One Way ANOVA of Occupation Level 　66
Table 4.22 Result of One Way ANOVA of Frequency of Using Internet 　67
Table 4.23 Result of Confirmatory Factor Analysis 　68
Table 4.24 Evaluation of the Measurement Model 　71
Table 4.25 Evaluation of Structural Model and Hypothesis Testing 　73
Table 4.26 Regression Analysis of the Indirect Effect between TAM Factors and Attitude 　76
Table 4.27 Regression Analysis of the Indirect Effect between VAM Factors and Perceived Value 　78
Table 4.28 Regression Analysis of the Indirect Effect between Attitude and Behavioral Intention 　80
Table 5.1 Result of the Tested Hypotheses 　82

1. English
1.Aaker, D. A. & Joachimsthaler, E. (2000), The Brand Relationship Spectrum: The Key to the Brand Architecture Challenge, California Management Review, Vol. 42, No. 4, pp. 8-23.
2.Abdullah, F., Ward, R. & Ahmed, E. (2016), Investigating the Influence of the Most Commonly Used External Variables of TAM on Students’ Perceived Ease of Use (PEOU) and Perceived Usefulness (PU) of E-Portfolios, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 63, pp. 75-90.
3.Agarwal, R. & Prasad, J. (1998), A Conceptual and Operational Definition of Personal Innovativeness in the Domain of Informational Technology, Information Systems Research, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 204-215.
4.Ajzen, I. & M. Fishbein (1975), Attitude-Behavior Relations: A Theoretical Analysis and Review of Empirical Research, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 84, No. 5, p. 888.
5.Ajzen, I. (1991), The Theory of Planned Behavior, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 50, No. 2, pp.179-211.
6.Akbari, E., Pilot, A. & Simons, P. R. J. (2015), Autonomy, Competence, and Relatedness in Foreign Language Learning Through Facebook, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 48, pp. 126-134.
7.Alalwan, A. A., Baabdullah, A. M., Rana, N. P., Tamilmani, K. & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2018), Examining Adoption of Mobile Internet in Saudi Arabia: Extending TAM with Perceived Enjoyment, Innovativeness and Trust, Technology in Society, 55, pp. 100-110.
8.Alalwan, A. A., Dwivedi, Y. K. & Rana, N. P. (2017), Factors Influencing Adoption of Mobile Banking by Jordanian Bank Customers: Extending UTAUT2 with Trust, International Journal of Information Management, Vol. 37, No. 3, pp. 99-110.
9.Al-Gahtani, S. S. (2016), Empirical Investigation of E-Learning Acceptance and Assimilation: A Structural Equation Model, Applied Computing and Informatics, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 27-50.
10.Ángel F. Agudo-Peregrina, Ángel Hernández-García, Félix J. & Pascual-Miguel, F. J. (2014), Behavioral Intention, Use Behavior and the Acceptance of Electronic Learning Systems: Differences Between Higher Education and Lifelong Learning, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 34, pp. 301-314.
11.Baumeister, R. & Leary, M. R. (1995), The Need to Belong: Desire for Interpersonal Attachments as a Fundamental Human Motivation, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 117, pp. 497-529.
12.Benita, M., Roth, G. & Deci, E. L. (2014), When Are Mastery Goals More Adaptive? It Depends on Experiences of Autonomy Support and Autonomy, Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 106, No. 1, pp. 258-267.
13.Chang, C. T., Hajiyev, J. & Su, C. R. (2017), Examining the students’ Behavioral Intention to Use E-Learning in Azerbaijan? The General Extended Technology Acceptance Model for E-Learning Approach, Computers & Education, Vol. 111, pp. 128-143.
14.Chen, C. F. & Chen, F. S. (2010), Experience Quality, Perceived Value, Satisfaction and Behavioral Intentions for heritage tourists, Tourism Management, Vol. 31, No. 1, pp. 29-35.
15.Chen, Y., Lin, Y., Yeh, R. & Lou, S. (2013), Examining Factors Affecting College Students’ Intention to Use Web-Based Instruction Systems: Towards an Integrated Model, Turkish Online, Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 111-121.
16.Cheon, J., Lee, S., Crooks, S. M. & Song, J. (2012), An investigation of Mobile Learning Readiness in Higher Education Based on the Theory of Planned Behavior, Computers & Education, Vol. 59, No 3, pp. 1054-1064.
17.Chiu, C. M., Wang, E. T., Fang, Y. H. & Huang, H. Y. (2014), Understanding Customers’ Repeat Purchase Intentions in B2C E-Commerce: The Roles of Utilitarian Value, Hedonic Value, and Perceived Risk, Information Systems Journal, Vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 85-114.
18.Chopdar, P. K., Korfiatis, N., Sivakumar, V. J. & Lytras, M. D. (2018), Mobile Shopping Apps Adoption and Perceived Risks: A Cross-Country Perspective Utilizing the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 86, pp. 109-128.
19.Chung. N. & Koo, C. (2015), The Use of Social Media in Travel Information Search, Telematics and Informatics, Vol. 32, No. 2, pp. 215-229.
20.Ciani, K. D., Middleton, M. J., Summers, J. J. & Sheldon, K. M. (2010), Buffering Against Performance Classroom Goal Structures: The Importance of Autonomy Support and Classroom Community, Contemporary educational psychology, Vol. 35, No. 1, pp. 88-99.
21.Cidral, W. A., Oliveira, T., Di Felice, M. & Aparicio, M. (2018), E-Learning Success Determinants: Brazilian Empirical Study, Computers & Education, Vol. 122, pp. 273-290.
22.Davis F. D (1989), Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 13, No. 3, pp. 319-339.
23.Deci, E. L. & Ryan, R. M. (2002), Handbook of Self-Determination Research, Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.
24.Deng, Y. (2017), A Study on Chinese Mobile Internet Users’ Continuance Intention of Online Brand Community in New Media and Chinese Society, Springer, pp. 207-219.
25.Elkaseh, A. M., Wong, K. W. & Fung, C. C. (2016), Perceived Ease of Use and Perceived Usefulness of Social Media for E-Learning in Libyan Higher Education: A Structural Equation Modeling Analysis, International Journal of Information and Education Technology, Vol. 6, No. 3, p. 192.
26.Fathema, N., Shannon, D. & Ross, M. (2015), Expanding the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) to Examine Faculty Use of Learning Management Systems (LMSs) in Higher Education Institutions, Journal of Online Learning & Teaching, Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 210-232.
27.Furrer, C. & Skinner, E. (2003), Sense of Relatedness as a Factor in Childrens Academic Engagement and Performance, Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 95, No. 1, pp. 148-162.
28.Gallarza, M. G. & Gil-Saura, I. (2006), Value Dimensions, Perceived Value, Satisfaction, and Loyalty: an Investigation of University Students Travel Behaviour, Tourism Management, Vol. 27, No. 3, pp. 437-452.
29.Gefen, D., Karahanna, E. & Straub, D. W. (2003), Trust and TAM in Online Shopping: an Integrated Model, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 51-90.
30.Hafen, C. A., Allen, J. P., Gregory, A., Mikami, A. Y., Hamre, B. & Pianta, R. C. (2012), The Pivotal Role of Autonomy in Secondary School Classrooms, Journal of Youth and Adolescence, Vol. 41, pp. 245-255.
31.Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M. & Sarstedt, M. (2011), PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet, Journal of Marketing theory and Practice, Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 139-152.
32.Hajli, N., Shanmugam, M., Powell, P. & Love, P. E. (2015), A Study on the Continuance Participation in On-Line Communities with Social Commerce Perspective, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 96, pp. 232-241.
33.Han, H. (2015), Travelers Pro-Environmental Behavior in a Green Lodging Context: Converging Value-Belief-Norm Theory and the Theory of Planned Behavior, Tourism Management, Vol. i, pp. 164-177.
34.Henseler, J., Ringle, C.M. & Sinkovics, R.R. (2009), The Use of Partial Least Squares Path Modelling in International Marketing. In New Challenges to International Marketing, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp. 277-319.
35.Hsiao, K.-L. & Chen, C. C. (2017), Value-Based Adoption of E-Book Subscription Services: The Roles of Environmental Concerns and Reading Habits, Telematics and Informatics, Vol. 34, No. 5, pp. 434-448.
36.Hsu, H. H., Lu, H. P. & Hsu, C. L. (2007), Adoption of the Mobile Internet: An Empirical Study of Multimedia Message Service (MMS), Omega, Vol. 35, No. 6, pp. 715-726.
37.Kaplan, K. J. (1972), On the Ambivalence-Indifference Problem in Attitude Theory and Measurement: a Suggested Modification of the Semantic Differential Technique, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 77, No. 5, pp. 361-372.
38.Kautonen, T., Gelderen, M. V. & Fink, M. (2015), Robustness of the Theory of Planned Behavior in Predicting Entrepreneurial Intentions and Actions, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 39, No. 3, pp. 655-674.
39.Kim, C., Mirusmonov, M. & Lee, I. (2010), An Empirical Examination of Factors Influencing the Intention to Use Mobile Payment, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 26, pp. 310-322.
40.Kim, H. W., Chan, H. C. & Gupta, S. (2007), Value-Based Adoption of Mobile Internet: an Empirical Investigation, Decision Support Systems, Vol. 43, No. 1, pp. 111-126.
41.Kim, Y., Park, Y. & Choi, J. (2017), A Study On the Adoption of IoT Smart Home Service: Using Value-Based Adoption Model, Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, Vol. 28, No. (9-10), pp. 1149-1165.
42.Kolsaker, A. & Payne, C. (2002), Engendering Trust in E-Commerce: a Study of Gender-Based Concerns, Marketing Intelligence & Planning, Vol. 20, No. 4, pp. 206-214.
43.Lapierre, J., (2000), Customer-Perceived Value in Industrial Contexts, Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, Vol. 15, pp. 122-145.
44.Lee, M.C. (2010), Explaining and Predicting Users’ Continuance Intention Toward E-Learning: an Extension of the Expectation–Confirmation Model, Computers & Education, Vol. 54, No. 2, pp. 506-516.
45.Lee, Y., Lee, J. & Hwang, Y. (2015), Relating Motivation to Information and Communication Technology Acceptance: Self-Determination Theory Perspective, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 51, No. A, pp. 418-428.
46.Liaw, S. S. & Huang, H. M. (2011), Exploring Learners’ Acceptance Toward Mobile Learning, Technology Acceptance in Education, Sense Publishers, pp. 145-157.
47.Liébana-Cabanillas, F., Sánchez-Fernández, J. & Muñoz-Leiva, F. (2014), The Moderating Effect of Experience in the Adoption of Mobile Payment Tools in Virtual Social Networks: the M-Payment Acceptance Model in Virtual Social Networks (MPAM-VSN), International Journal of Information Management, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 151-166.
48.Lin, K.M. (2011), E-Learning Continuance Intention: Moderating Effects of User E-Learning Experience, Computers & Education, Vol. 56, No. 2, pp. 515-526.
49.Lin, K. M., Chen, N. S. & Fang, K. (2011), Understanding E-Learning Continuance Intention: a Negative Critical Incidents Perspective, Behavior & Information Technology, Vol. 30, No. 1, pp. 77-89.
50.Lin, T. C., Wu, S., Hsu, J. S. C. & Chou, Y. C. (2012), The Integration of Value-Based Adoption and Expectation–Confirmation Models: an Example of IPTV Continuance Intention, Decision Support Systems, Vol. 54, No. 1, pp. 63-75.
51.Liu, I. F., Chen, M. C., Sun, Y. S., Wible, D. & Kuo, C. H. (2010), Extending The TAM Model to Explore the Factors that Affect Intention to Use an Online Learning Community, Computers & Education, Vol. 54, No. 2, pp. 600-610.
52.Martin, A. J. & Dowson, M. (2009), Interpersonal Relationships, Motivation, Engagement, and Achievement: Yields for Theory, Current Issues, and Educational Practice, Review of Educational Research, Vol. 79, No. 1, pp. 327-365.
53.Martins, C., Oliveira, T. & Popovič, A. (2014), Understanding the Internet Banking Adoption: a Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use Of Technology and Perceived Risk Application, International Journal of Information Management, Vol. 34, No. 1, pp. 1-13.
54.Midgley, D. F. & Dowling, G. R. (1978), Innovativeness: The Concept and Its Measurement, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 4, No. 4, pp. 229-242.
55.Minton, E. A., Spielmann, N., Kahle, L. R. & Kim, C. H. (2018), The Subjective Norm of Sustainable Consumption: A Cross-Cultural Exploration, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 82, pp. 400-408.
56.Mohseni, S., Jayashree, S., Rezaei, S., Kasim, A. & Okumus, F. (2018), Attracting Tourists to Travel Companies’ Websites: the Structural Relationship Between Website Brand, Personal Value, Shopping Experience, Perceived Risk and Purchase Intention, Current Issues in Tourism, Vol. 21, No. 6, pp. 616-645.
57.Moon, J. W. & Kin, Y. G. (2001), Extending the TAM for a World-Wide-Web Context, Information & Management, Vol. 38, pp. 217-230.
58.Muñoz-Leiva, F., Climent-Climent, S. & Liébana-Cabanillas, F. (2017), Determinants of Intention to Use the Mobile Banking Apps: An Extension of the Classic TAM Model, Spanish Journal of Marketing - ESIC, Vol. 21, No. 1, pp. 25-38.
59.Ng, J. Y., Ntoumanis, N., Thøgersen-Ntoumani, C., Deci, E.L., Ryan, R.M., Duda, J. & Williams, G.C., (2012), Self-Determination Theory Applied to Health Contexts: A Metaanalysis, Perspectives on Psychological Science, Vol. 7, pp. 325-340.
60.Ngafeeson, M. N. & Sun, J. (2015), E-Book Acceptance Among Undergraduate Students: a Look at the Moderating Role of Technology Innovativeness, International Journal of Web-Based Learning and Teaching Technologies (IJWLTT), Vol. 10, No. 3, pp. 36-51.
61.Ngafeeson, M. N. & Sun, J. (2015), The Effects of Technology Innovativeness and System Exposure on Student Acceptance of E-Textbooks, Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, Vol. 14, pp. 55-71.
62.Niemiec, C. P. & Ryan, R. M. (2009), Autonomy, Competence, and Relatedness in the Classroom: Applying Self-Determination Theory to Educational Practice, Theory and Research in Education, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 133-144.
63.Nikou, S. A. & Economides, A. A. (2017), Mobile-Based Assessment: Integrating Acceptance and Motivational Factors into a Combined Model of Self-Determination Theory and Technology Acceptance, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 68, pp. 83-95.
64.Park, E. & Kim, K. J. (2014), An Integrated Adoption Model of Mobile Cloud Services: Exploration of Key Determinants and Extension of Technology Acceptance Model, Telematics and Informatics, Vol. 31, No. 3, pp. 376-385.
65.Pavlou, P. A. (2003), Consumer Acceptance of Electronic Commerce: Integrating Trust and Risk with the Technology Acceptance Model. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, Vol. 7, No. 3, pp. 101-134.
66.Punnoose, A. C. (2012), Determinants of Intention to Use E-Learning Based on the Technology Acceptance Model, Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 301-337.
67.Rauniar, R., Rawski, G., Yang, J. & Johnson, B. (2014), Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and Social Media Usage: an Empirical Study on Facebook, Journal of Enterprise Information Management, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 6-30.
68.Reeve, J. (2009), Why Teachers Adopt a Controlling Motivating Style toward Students and How They Can Become More Autonomy Supportive, Educational Psychologist, Vol. 44, No. 3, pp. 159-175.
69.Roca, J. C. M. & Gagne, M. (2008), Understanding E-Learning Continuance Intention in the Workplace: a Self-Determination Theory Perspective, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 24, No. 4, pp. 1585-1604.
70.Rogers, E. M., Medina, U. E., Rivera, M. A. & Wiley, C. J. (2005), Complex Adaptive Systems and the Diffusion of Innovations, The Innovation Journal: The Public Sector Innovation Journal, Vol. 10, No. 3, pp. 1-26.
71.Roostika, R. (2012), Mobile Internet Acceptance among University Students: A Value-Based Adoption Model, International Journal of Research in Management & Technology (IJRMT), Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 21-28.
72.Ryan, R. M. & Deci, E. L. (2000), Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New Directions, Contemporary Educational Psychology, Vol. 25, No. 1, pp. 54-67.
73.Ryan, R. M. & Deci, E. L. (2015), Self-Determination Theory, International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.), Vol. 21, pp. 486-491.
74.Ryan, R.M. & Deci, E.L (2000), Self-Determination Theory and the Facilitation of Intrinsic Motivation, Social Development, and Well-Being, American Psychologist, Vol. 55, pp. 68-78.
75.Sawang, S., Sun, Y. & Salim, S. A. (2014), Its Not only What I Think but What They Think! The Moderating Effect of Social Norms, Computers & Education, Vol. 76, pp. 182-189.
76.Schroer, J. & Hertel, G. (2009), Voluntary Engagement in an Open Web-Based Encyclopedia: Wikipedians and Why They Do It, Media Psychology, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 96-120.
77.Shih, H. P. (2004), An Empirical Study on Predicting User Acceptance of E-Shopping on the Web, Information & Management, Vol. 41, pp. 351-368.
78.Siau, K. & Shen, Z. (2003), Building Customer Trust in Mobile Commerce, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 46, No. 4, pp. 91-94.
79.Sørebø, Ø., Halvari, H., Gulli, V. F. & Kristiansen, R. (2009), The Role of Self-Determination Theory in Explaining Teachers Motivation to Continue to Use E-Learning Technology, Computers & Education, Vol. 53, No. 4, pp. 1177-1187.
80.Surendran P. (2012), Technology Acceptance Model: A Survey of Literature, International Journal of Business and Social Research (IJBSR), Vol. 2, No. 4, pp. 175-178.
81.Talukder, M., Quazi, A. & Keating, B. (2014), Virtual Systems in Australia: A Study of Individual Users Commitments and Usage, Journal of Internet Commerce, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 1-21.
82.Tan, G. W. H., Ooi, K. B., Leong, L. Y. & Lin, B. (2014), Predicting the Drivers of Behavioral Intention to Use Mobile Learning: A Hybrid SEM-Neural Networks Approach, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 36, pp. 198-213.
83.Teo, T., Lee, C. B., Chai, C. S. & Choy, D. (2009), Modeling Pre-Service Teachers Perceived Usefulness of an ICT-Based Student-Centered Learning (SCL) Curriculum: A Singapore Study, Asia Pacific Education Review, Vol. 10, No. 4, pp. 535-545.
84.Tsu Wei, T., Marthandan, G., Yee-Loong Chong, A., Ooi, K.-B. & Arumugam, S. (2009), What Drives Malaysian M-Commerce Adoption? An Empirical Analysis, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 109, No. 3, pp. 370-388.
85.Tzeng, J. (2011), Perceived Values and Prospective Users’ Acceptance of Prospective Technology: The Case of a Career E-Portfolio System, Computers & Education, Vol. 56, pp. 157-165.
86.Venkatesh, V. (2000), Determinants of Perceived Ease of Use: Integrating Control, Intrinsic Motivation, and Emotion into the Technology Acceptance Model, Information Systems Research, Vol. 11, No. 4, pp. 342-365.
87.Vinzi, V. E., Chin, W. W., Henseler, J. & Wang, H. (2010), Handbook of Partial Least Squares, ISBN, pp. 1-22.
88.Wakefield, KL. & Barnes, JH., (1996), Retailing Hedonic Consumption: a Model of Sales Promotion of a Leisure Service, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 72, No. 4, pp. 409-427.
89.Wan, C., Shen, G. Q. & Choi, S. (2017), Experiential and Instrumental Attitudes: Interaction Effect of Attitude and Subjective Norm on Recycling Intention, Journal of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 50, pp. 69-79.
90.Wang, Q., Dacko, S. & Gad, M. (2008), Factors Influencing Consumers’ Evaluation and Adoption Intention of Really-New Products or Services: Prior Knowledge, Innovativeness and Timing of Product Evaluation, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 35, pp. 416-422.
91.Welch, B. L. (1947), The Generalization of Students Problem When Several Different Population Variances are Involved, Biometrika, Vol. 34, No. 1/2, pp. 28-35.
92.Xia, M., Zhang, Y. & Zhang, C. (2018), A TAM-Based Approach to Explore the Effect of Online Experience on Destination Image: a Smartphone Users Perspective, Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, Vol. 8, pp. 259-270.
93.Yong, A. G. & Pearce, S. (2013), A Beginner’s Guide to Factor Analysis: Focusing on Exploratory Factor Analysis, Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for psychology, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 79-94.
94.Yoon, C. (2018), Extending the TAM for Green IT: a Normative Perspective, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 83, pp. 129-139.
95.Yu, J., Lee, H., Ha, I. & Zo, H. (2017), User Acceptance of Media Tablets: An Empirical Examination of Perceived Value, Telematics and Informatics, Vol. 34, No. 4, pp. 206-223.
96.Zeithaml, V.A., (1988), Consumer Perceptions of Price, Quality, and Value: a Means-End Model and Synthesis of Evidence, The Journal of Marketing, Vol. 52, pp. 2-22.