Factors Determining Acceptance of Internet of Things in Medical Education: Mixed Methods Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The global increase in the Internet of Things (IoT) adoption has sparked interest in its application within the educational sector, particularly in colleges and universities. Previous studies have often focused on individual attitudes toward IoT without considering a multiperspective approach and have overlooked the impact of IoT on the technology acceptance model outside the educational domain. Objective: This study aims to bridge the research gap by investigating the factors influencing IoT adoption in educational settings, thereby enhancing the understanding of collaborative learning through technology. It seeks to elucidate how IoT can facilitate learning processes and technology acceptance among college and university students in the United Arab Emirates. Methods: A questionnaire was distributed to students across various colleges and universities in the United Arab Emirates, garnering 463 participants. The data collected were analyzed using a hybrid approach that integrates structural equation modeling (SEM) and artificial neural network (ANN), along with importance-performance map analysis to evaluate the significance and performance of each factor affecting IoT adoption. Results: The study, involving 463 participants, identifies 2 primary levels at which factors influence the intention to adopt IoT technologies. Initial influences include technology optimism (TOP), innovation, and learning motivation, crucial for application engagement. Advanced influences stem from technology acceptance model constructs, particularly perceived ease of use (PE) and perceived usefulness (PU), which directly enhance adoption intentions. Detailed statistical analysis using partial least squares-SEM reveals significant relationships: TOP and innovativeness impact PE (β=.412, P=.04; β=.608, P=.002, respectively), and PU significantly influences TOP (β=.381, P=.04), innovativeness (β=.557, P=.003), and learning motivation (β=.752, P<.001). These results support our hypotheses (H1, H2, H3, H4, and H5). Further, the intention to use IoT is significantly affected by PE and usefulness (β=.619, P<.001; β=.598, P<.001, respectively). ANN modeling enhances these findings, showing superior predictive power (R2=89.7%) compared to partial least squares-SEM (R2=86.3%), indicating a more effective identification of nonlinear associations. Importance-performance map analysis corroborates these results, demonstrating the importance and performance of PU as most critical, followed by technology innovativeness and optimism, in shaping behavioral intentions to use IoT. Conclusions: This research contributes methodologically by leveraging deep ANN architecture to explore nonlinear relationships among factors influencing IoT adoption in education. The study underscores the importance of both intrinsic motivational factors and perceived technological attributes in fostering IoT adoption, offering insights for educational institutions considering IoT integration into their learning environments.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".