Understanding individuals' engagement and continuance intention of MOOCs: the effect of interactivity and the role of gender

PurposeThis study aims to examine how three perceived interactivity attributes of massive open online courses (MOOCs), namely, perceived active control, perceived synchronicity and perceived two-way communication, impact individuals' engagement and continuance intention of MOOCs through the stimulus-organism-response (S-O-R) lens and how that effect differs between male and female users.Design/methodology/approachDrawing upon S-O-R as an overarching theoretical framework, this study conducted an empirical study in China and collected 294 valid questionnaires from online learners. Structural equation modeling approach was used to examine the proposed research model.FindingsEmpirical results suggest that perceived active control, perceived synchronicity and perceived two-way communication are significant stimuli of individuals' continuance intention of MOOCs, and the influences of perceived active control and perceived synchronicity are partially or fully mediated by engagement on the platform. Multi-group analysis results further indicate that perceived synchronicity has a stronger influence on engagement on the platform for males, while perceived active control and perceived two-way communication are more salient in stimulating engagement on the platform for females.Practical implicationsResearch findings from the present study can serve as the foundation to guide MOOCs’ administrators to respond to the needs of participants through interactivity designed into the platform and shed light on possible key solutions of high dropout rates in MOOCs.Originality/valueThis study uncovers the mediating mechanism of affective engagement between interactivity and continuance intention in the emerging context of the latest online learning platform MOOCs and reveals the behavioral differences between females and males regarding their affective reactions to the three interactivity attributes.

[1]  Ephraim R. McLean,et al.  The DeLone and McLean Model of Information Systems Success: A Ten-Year Update , 2003, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[2]  Katina Michael,et al.  No limits to watching? , 2013, CACM.

[3]  C. Marci.  A Biologically Based Measure of Emotional Engagement: Context Matters , 2006, Journal of Advertising Research.

[4]  Bernard C. Y. Tan,et al.  Effects of Interactivity on Website Involvement and Purchase Intention , 2010, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[5]  Ling He,et al.  Effects of social-interactive engagement on the dropout ratio in online learning: insights from MOOC , 2018, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[6]  Jang-Sun Hwang,et al.  Measures of Perceived Interactivity: An Exploration of the Role of Direction of Communication, User Control, and Time in Shaping Perceptions of Interactivity , 2002 .

[7]  Rui Chen,et al.  Learning and self-disclosure behavior on social networking sites: the case of Facebook users , 2015, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[8]  Viswanath Venkatesh,et al.  Consumer Acceptance and Use of Information Technology: Extending the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology , 2012, MIS Q..

[9]  Fred D. Davis.  Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology , 1989, MIS Q..

[10]  Hangjung Zo,et al.  Understanding the MOOCs continuance: The role of openness and reputation , 2015, Comput. Educ..

[11]  Trevor T. Moores,et al.  Ethical Decision Making in Software Piracy: Initial Development and a Test of a Four-Component Model , 2006, MIS Q..

[12]  Yuping Liu,et al.  What is Interactivity and is it Always Such a Good Thing? Implications of Definition, Person, and Situation for the Influence of Interactivity on Advertising Effectiveness , 2002 .

[13]  Wen-Lung Shiau,et al.  Continuance intention of blog users: the impact of perceived enjoyment, habit, user involvement and blogging time , 2013, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[14]  Yaobin Lu,et al.  Enhancing perceived interactivity through network externalities: An empirical study on micro-blogging service satisfaction and continuance intention , 2012, Decis. Support Syst..

[15]  J. Jacoby.  Stimulus-Organism-Response Reconsidered: An Evolutionary Step in Modeling (Consumer) Behavior , 2002 .

[16]  David C. Yen,et al.  Improving the quality of online presence through interactivity , 2004, Inf. Manag..

[17]  Jing Ma,et al.  Information privacy, gender differences, and intrinsic motivation in the workplace , 2013, Int. J. Inf. Manag..

[18]  ZhouMingming.  Chinese university students' acceptance of MOOCs , 2016 .

[19]  Lin Wang,et al.  Impact of digital content on young children’s reading interest and concentration for books , 2018, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[20]  Eric B. Weiser,et al.  Gender Differences in Internet Use Patterns and Internet Application Preferences: A Two-Sample Comparison , 2000, Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw..

[21]  Paul Benjamin Lowry,et al.  The CMC Interactivity Model: How Interactivity Enhances Communication Quality and Process Satisfaction in Lean-Media Groups , 2009, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[22]  Saonee Sarker,et al.  Understanding factors affecting users' social networking site continuance: A gender difference perspective , 2017, Inf. Manag..

[23]  A. Hayes.  Beyond Baron and Kenny: Statistical Mediation Analysis in the New Millennium , 2009 .

[24]  M AlraimiKhaled,et al.  Understanding the MOOCs continuance , 2015 .

[25]  Susan A. Brown,et al.  Making Rigorous Research Relevant: Innovating Statistical Action Research , 2018, MIS Q..

[26]  J. Michael Spector,et al.  Remarks on MOOCS and Mini-MOOCS , 2014, Educational Technology Research and Development.

[27]  George R. Milne,et al.  Gender Differences in Privacy-Related Measures for Young Adult Facebook Users , 2010 .

[28]  Xiaohui Chen,et al.  Continuance intention to use MOOCs: Integrating the technology acceptance model (TAM) and task technology fit (TTF) model , 2017, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[29]  Weiquan Wang,et al.  The Determinants and Impacts of Aesthetics in Users’ First Interaction with Websites , 2016, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[30]  Joseph S. Valacich,et al.  The Influence of Website Characteristics on a Consumer's Urge to Buy Impulsively , 2009, Inf. Syst. Res..

[31]  Kristopher J Preacher,et al.  Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models , 2008, Behavior research methods.

[32]  Xi Chen,et al.  Factors Influencing Consumption Experience of Mobile Commerce: a Study from Experiential View , 2012, Internet Res..

[33]  Sheizaf Rafaeli,et al.  Interactivity in online discussions and learning outcomes , 2016, Comput. Educ..

[34]  Jonathan Steuer,et al.  Defining virtual reality: dimensions determining telepresence , 1992 .

[35]  Chu-Chi Liu,et al.  Understanding the quality factors that influence the continuance intention of students toward participation in MOOCs , 2017 .

[36]  Yoris A. Au.  Design Science I: The Role of Design Science in Electronic Commerce Research , 2001, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[37]  Sapna Cheryan,et al.  Why Are Some STEM Fields More Gender Balanced Than Others? , 2017, Psychological bulletin.

[38]  Zetian Fu,et al.  An empirical study on behavioural intention to reuse e-learning systems in rural China , 2012, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[39]  Yulin Fang,et al.  Moderating role of gender in the relationships between perceived benefits and satisfaction in social virtual world continuance , 2014, Decis. Support Syst..

[40]  Yogesh Kumar Dwivedi,et al.  Examining branding co-creation in brand communities on social media: Applying the paradigm of Stimulus-Organism-Response , 2018, Int. J. Inf. Manag..

[41]  Louisa Ha,et al.  Interactivity reexamined: A baseline analysis of early business web sites , 1998 .

[42]  Thomas C. Reeves,et al.  Patterns of engagement in authentic online learning environments , 2003, ASCILITE.

[43]  Judy Chuan-Chuan Lin,et al.  Information sharing behaviour on blogs in Taiwan: Effects of interactivities and gender differences , 2010, J. Inf. Sci..

[44]  Lorena Blasco-Arcas,et al.  Using clickers in class. The role of interactivity, active collaborative learning and engagement in learning performance , 2013, Comput. Educ..

[45]  Sumeet Gupta,et al.  What motivates customers to participate in social commerce? The impact of technological environments and virtual customer experiences , 2014, Inf. Manag..

[46]  K. Hew,et al.  Students’ and instructors’ use of massive open online courses (MOOCs): Motivations and challenges , 2014 .

[47]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  The Nature and Consequences of Trade-Off Transparency in the Context of Recommendation Agents , 2014, MIS Q..

[48]  Mingli Zhang,et al.  Effects of different interactions on students' sense of community in e-learning environment , 2017, Comput. Educ..

[49]  Rafael Anaya-Sánchez,et al.  Exploring the impacts of interactions, social presence and emotional engagement on active collaborative learning in a social web-based environment , 2018, Comput. Educ..

[50]  Rui Chen,et al.  Members' site use continuance on Facebook: Examining the role of relational capital , 2016, Decis. Support Syst..

[51]  Gordon B. Davis,et al.  User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View , 2003, MIS Q..

[52]  F. Bonafini,et al.  The effects of participants’ engagement with videos and forums in a MOOC for teachers’ professional development , 2017 .

[53]  Michael A. Cusumano,et al.  Are the costs of 'free' too high in online education? , 2013, CACM.

[54]  Qing Hu,et al.  Assimilation of Enterprise Systems: The Effect of Institutional Pressures and the Mediating Role of Top Management , 2007, MIS Q..

[55]  Yuping Liu,et al.  Developing a scale to measure the interactivity of websites , 2003, Journal of Advertising Research.

[56]  Neil P. Morris,et al.  Can demographic information predict MOOC learner outcomes , 2015 .

[57]  Gwo-Jen Hwang,et al.  Developing multi-dimensional evaluation criteria for English learning websites with university students and professors , 2011, Comput. Educ..

[58]  Ming Yang,et al.  Impact of Interactivity on Individuals' Continuance Participation in MOOCs Platform , 2017, PACIS.

[59]  Vincent S. Lai,et al.  E-Loyalty to Online Auction Websites: A Stimulus-Organism-Response Model , 2013, PACIS.

[60]  Dong-Hee Shin,et al.  Interaction, engagement, and perceived interactivity in single-handed interaction , 2016, Internet Res..

[61]  Wynne W. Chin,et al.  A Partial Least Squares Latent Variable Modeling Approach for Measuring Interaction Effects: Results from a Monte Carlo Simulation Study and an Electronic - Mail Emotion/Adoption Study , 2003, Inf. Syst. Res..

[62]  Jie Zhang,et al.  Antecedents of student MOOC revisit intention: Moderation effect of course difficulty , 2017, Int. J. Inf. Manag..

[63]  Kai H. Lim,et al.  Web strategies to promote internet shopping: is cultural-customization needed? , 2009 .

[64]  Li Wang,et al.  Interactivity, engagement, and technology dependence: understanding users’ technology utilisation behaviour , 2017, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[65]  Alison Adam,et al.  A Decade of Neglect: Reflecting on Gender and IS , 2004 .

[66]  Michel Tenenhaus,et al.  PLS path modeling , 2005, Comput. Stat. Data Anal..

[67]  Jianhua Shen,et al.  Massive open online course (MOOC) in China: Status quo, opportunities, and challenges , 2016, 2016 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON).

[68]  Stephen D. Rappaport.  Lessons from Online Practice: New Advertising Models , 2007, Journal of Advertising Research.

[69]  Gaby Odekerken-Schröder,et al.  Using PLS path modeling for assessing hierarchial construct models: guidelines and impirical illustration , 2009 .

[70]  Anol Bhattacherjee,et al.  Understanding Information Systems Continuance: An Expectation-Confirmation Model , 2001, MIS Q..

[71]  Eldon Y. Li,et al.  Marketing mix, customer value, and customer loyalty in social commerce: A stimulus-organism-response perspective , 2017, Internet Res..

[72]  Yong Jin Kim,et al.  The impact of interactivity of electronic word of mouth systems and E-Quality on decision support in the context of the e-marketplace , 2015, Inf. Manag..

[73]  Weiguo Fan,et al.  The impact of users' sense of belonging on social media habit formation: Empirical evidence from social networking and microblogging websites in China , 2018, Int. J. Inf. Manag..

[74]  Yue Guo,et al.  Antecedents of trust and continuance intention in mobile payment platforms: The moderating effect of gender , 2019, Electron. Commer. Res. Appl..

[75]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  Structural Equation Modeling and Regression: Guidelines for Research Practice , 2000, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[76]  Tayeb Brahimi,et al.  Learning outside the classroom through MOOCs , 2015, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[77]  Sonia San Martín Gutiérrez,et al.  Online buying perceptions in Spain: can gender make a difference? , 2011, Electron. Mark..

[78]  J. Finn,et al.  Student engagement: What is it? Why does it matter? , 2012 .

[79]  Paul A. Pavlou,et al.  Understanding and Predicting Electronic Commerce Adoption: An Extension of the Theory of Planned Behavior , 2006, MIS Q..

[80]  Sonali Kumar,et al.  Promote physical activity among college students: Using media richness and interactivity in web design , 2014, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[81]  Christy M. K. Cheung,et al.  Why users keep answering questions in online question answering communities: A theoretical and empirical investigation , 2013, Int. J. Inf. Manag..

[82]  S. Shyam Sundar,et al.  Theoretical Importance of Contingency in Human-Computer Interaction , 2016, Commun. Res..

[83]  E. Toms,et al.  What is user engagement? A conceptual framework for defining user engagement with technology , 2008, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[84]  Jie Zhang,et al.  Can MOOCs be interesting to students? An experimental investigation from regulatory focus perspective , 2016, Comput. Educ..

[85]  Qian Huang,et al.  The influence of peer characteristics and technical features of a social shopping website on a consumer's purchase intention , 2016, Int. J. Inf. Manag..

[86]  Hing Kai Chan,et al.  The role of social media in enhancing guanxi and perceived effectiveness of E-commerce institutional mechanisms in online marketplace , 2018, Inf. Manag..

[87]  Sally J. McMillan,et al.  Online Marketing Communications , 2009 .

[88]  M. Sarstedt,et al.  A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling , 2015 .

[89]  Hong Chen,et al.  What Kinds of Forum Activities are Important for Promoting Learning continuance in MOOCs? , 2016, PACIS.

[90]  Antoni Meseguer-Artola,et al.  E-learning continuance: The impact of interactivity and the mediating role of imagery, presence and flow , 2016, Inf. Manag..

[91]  Zhen Shao,et al.  Building Guanxi network in the mobile social platform: A social capital perspective , 2019, Int. J. Inf. Manag..

[92]  Justin Reich,et al.  Rebooting MOOC Research , 2015, Science.

[93]  H. Wilson,et al.  Engagement, telepresence and interactivity in online consumer experience: Reconciling scholastic and managerial perspectives , 2010 .

[94]  Viswanath Venkatesh,et al.  Why Don't Men Ever Stop to Ask for Directions? Gender, Social Influence, and Their Role in Technology Acceptance and Usage Behavior , 2000, MIS Q..

[95]  Paul Capriotti,et al.  Testing the level of interactivity of institutional websites: From museums 1.0 to museums 2.0 , 2016, Int. J. Inf. Manag..

[96]  Kathleen C. Perencevich,et al.  Increasing Reading Comprehension and Engagement Through Concept-Oriented Reading Instruction , 2004 .

[97]  Zhen Shao,et al.  Examining the impact mechanism of social psychological motivations on individuals' continuance intention of MOOCs: The moderating effect of gender , 2017, Internet Res..

[98]  Marylène Gagné,et al.  Understanding e-learning continuance intention in the workplace: A self-determination theory perspective , 2008, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[99]  A. Woodward,et al.  Are child-directed interactions the cradle of social learning? , 2016, Psychological bulletin.

[100]  Judy E. Scott,et al.  Cognitive engagement with a multimedia ERP training tool: Assessing computer self-efficacy and technology acceptance , 2009, Inf. Manag..

[101]  Yi-Ting Wang,et al.  Cultivating Social Capital through Interactivity on Social Network Sites , 2013, PACIS.

[102]  Elaine Toms,et al.  What is user engagement? A conceptual framework for defining user engagement with technology , 2008, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[103]  Bo Li,et al.  What makes MOOC users persist in completing MOOCs? A perspective from network externalities and human factors , 2018, Comput. Hum. Behav..