MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3036014676 · doi:10.5539/jel.v9n4p55

Students’ Acceptance of Simulation Games in Management Courses: Evidence from Saudi Arabia

2020· article· en· W3036014676 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dalal Bamufleh, Reem Hussain, Eman Sheikh, Khlood Khodary

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education and Learning · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicTechnology Adoption and User Behaviour
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExpectancy theoryUnified theory of acceptance and use of technologyCreativityPsychologyFlexibility (engineering)Structural equation modelingSocial influenceSample (material)Mathematics educationAffect (linguistics)Learning ManagementApplied psychologySocial psychologyComputer scienceMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As a new trend in learning, simulation games play an active and essential role in the area of educational technology. Gaming makes a positive impact on the learning process. It has the capability to enhance creativity, problem-solving, communication, decision-making, and collaboration (Faizan et al., 2015). This paper is aimed at exploring the factors that affect students’ acceptance and use of simulation games in management courses. In this study, the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) is utilized to investigate students’ intentions regarding using simulation games for learning. The proposed model and its hypotheses are tested by surveying 115 students at Yanbu University College in Saudi Arabia. Data are gathered and analyzed using smart partial least square. After analysis, the results prove that performance expectancy, effort expectancy, and social influence have positive effects on behavioral intentions (BI) and that facilitating conditions have a positive impact on use behavior (UB). In addition, a positive effect is found between BI and UB. The authors utilize the study findings to highlight some recommendations that could improve the implementation of simulation games. Finally, future studies are recommended to increase the sample size for more reliable results and conclusions.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.342

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.125
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.324 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Education and LearningSame topicTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourFrench-language works237,207