The integrated model explains 57.1% of satisfaction, 32.2% of use, and 52.5% of individual impact variance¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2018 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? The structural model explains 57.1% of user perceived satisfaction variation, 32.2% of use variation, and 52.5% of individual impact variation. → Cidral 2018

Evidence¶

Cidral 2018¶

Cidral, W. A., Oliveira, T., Di Felice, M. & Aparicio, M. (2018). E-learning success determinants: Brazilian empirical study. Computers and Education, 122, 273-290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.12.001

q2 · i? · associational · r2

Overall PLS-SEM model fit reported for the 301-response Brazilian survey; the authors consider the model substantial based on these explained-variance figures.

"The model explains respectively 57.1% of the variation in user perceived satisfaction, 32.2% of the variation in use of e-learning, and 52.5% of the variation in individual impact."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• System quality, use, and user satisfaction explain individual impact of e-learning — related
• Collaboration quality, information quality, and user satisfaction predict e-learning use — related
• Information quality, system quality, instructor attitude, assessment diversity, and learner interaction predict satisfaction — related
• The Social Cognitive Model of Technology Integration explains 55% of variation in preservice teachers' technology integration intentions — related
• Self-efficacy and attitudes towards technology integration predicted positive experiences in online distance teaching, jointly explaining 52% of variance. — related
• The model explains substantial variance in emotional engagement and active learning with good predictive relevance — related