The adoption of a social learning system: Intrinsic value in the UTAUT model
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
Abstract The purpose of this study is to identify the determinants of the intention to use and the effective use of a learning management system that integrates social learning tools. Data were collected through an online questionnaire and analyzed using structural equation modeling techniques. As our theoretical lens, we adapted the original unified theory of acceptance and the use of technology model by extending it with intrinsic value construct. As such, this research allowed for the first time testing an extended version of the unified theory of acceptance and the use of technology model in a social learning context. Our results show that facilitating conditions and intrinsic value variables explained the behavioral intention to use a learning management system that integrates social media technology and that facilitating conditions variable predicted use behavior. Our research findings suggest fostering both students’ enjoyment and interest in using social learning technologies for education and offering them facilitating conditions to strengthen technology adoption. Practitioner Notes What is already known about this topic Universities know that students are accustomed to use social media for personal purposes. Teachers are trying to integrate social media tools into learning management systems. There is little knowledge about what makes students’ willing to use social media tools for learning. The unified theory of acceptance and use of technology is an approved model that explains the intention to use and the effective use of technology. What this paper adds The paper identifies the determinants that make students’ willing to use a learning management system in which a social media tool is embedded. Apart from the main determinants of the unified theory of acceptance and the use of technology model, intrinsic value—defined as the feeling of both enjoyment and interest from performing an activity—explains behavioral intention and use behavior toward social media systems. Implications for practice and/or policy The paper concludes with advices for decision makers in universities who want to integrate social learning tools in learning management systems: They have to pay attention to not only the social media system’s functionalities, but also to how the system can be enjoyable and interesting to use. They have to think about offering better facilitating conditions to students—like user manuals, an online FAQ, discussion forums, training sessions, or personal human support—to strengthen the adoption of social learning systems.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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