Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28886019›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

Testing students' e-learning via Facebook through Bayesian structural equation modeling.

Hashem Salarzadeh Jenatabadi, Sedigheh Moghavvemi, Che Wan Jasimah Bt Wan Mohamed Radzi, Parastoo Babashamsi, Mohammad Arashi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Hashem Salarzadeh JenatabadiDepartment of Science and Technology Studies, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9080-009X
Sedigheh MoghavvemiDepartment of Operation and Management Information System, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Che Wan Jasimah Bt Wan Mohamed RadziDepartment of Science and Technology Studies, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Parastoo BabashamsiDepartment of Language Education and Humanities, University Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Malaysia.
Mohammad ArashiDepartment of Applied Mathematics, Shahrood University of Technology, Shahrood, Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Learning is an intentional activity, with several factors affecting students' intention to use new learning technology. Researchers have investigated technology acceptance in different contexts by developing various theories/models and testing them by a number of means. Although most theories/models developed have been examined through regression or structural equation modeling, Bayesian analysis offers more accurate data analysis results. To address this gap, the unified theory of acceptance and technology use in the context of e-learning via Facebook are re-examined in this study using Bayesian analysis. The data (S1 Data) were collected from 170 students enrolled in a business statistics course at University of Malaya, Malaysia, and tested with the maximum likelihood and Bayesian approaches. The difference between the two methods' results indicates that performance expectancy and hedonic motivation are the strongest factors influencing the intention to use e-learning via Facebook. The Bayesian estimation model exhibited better data fit than the maximum likelihood estimator model. The results of the Bayesian and maximum likelihood estimator approaches are compared and the reasons for the result discrepancy are deliberated.

Indexed as

Bayes TheoremLearningSocial MediaAlgorithmsHumansModels, StatisticalReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID28886019
PMCPMC5590745

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.