Exploring the moderating role of perceived flexibility advantages in mobile learning continuance intention (MLCI)
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>The primary purpose of this study was to explore the key factors that could affect mobile learning continuance intention (MLCI), and examine the moderating effect of perceived flexibility advantages (PFA) on the relationship between key mobile learning elements and continuance intention. Five hundred undergraduate students who had previously adopted mobile devices to learn English took part in this study. Partial least squares (PLS) analysis was utilized to test the hypotheses in this study. It has been found that the perceived usefulness of mobile technology, subjective norm, and self-management of learning could be closely linked to mobile learning continuance intention. With particular respect to the moderating role of perceived flexibility advantages, it has been demonstrated that PFA could moderate the relationship between perceived usefulness of mobile technology and mobile learning continuance intention, as well as the association between subjective norm and mobile learning continuance intention, whereas PFA did not moderate the link between self-management of learning and mobile learning continuance intention.This report has further added to the body of knowledge in the field of mobile learning through empirical examination.</p>
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.023 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it