Examining the Use Behaviour of Augmented Reality Technology Through Marlcardio: Adapting the Utaut Model

Abstract

Augmented reality (AR) is one type of learning process that can be applied through mobile learning known as mobile augmented reality. AR offers an innovative learning space through an active interaction of superimposing digital contents into the real context to enhance learning experiences. Previous studies have found that AR in education is able to lead students to achieve higher levels of engagement in the learning process. In contrast, the potential of AR in education has not been explored intensively. Therefore, this article is to look into factors that might influence pre-service teachers' use behaviour of Mobile Augmented Reality Learning Cardiovascular (MARLCardio). A self-designed MARLCardio app has been used as an experimental instrument in collecting data. The influencing factors towards use behaviour of MARLCardio are performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence and facilitating conditions. This study is a part of an on-going research. In this study, a total of 75 respondents used MARLCardio app before answering a survey questionnaire. The respondents were pre-service teachers at one public university in Malaysia. All data from the questionnaire were analysed using multiple regression analysis. As a result of this investigation, findings showed that effort expectancy is the dominant factor in determining the use behaviour of MARLCardio. Interestingly, performance expectancy did not show any significant relationship.
 KEYWORDS: Augmented Reality, Mobile Augmented Reality, UTAUT Model, Technology Adoption Model, Use Behaviour

Impact of pairing an augmented reality demonstration with online video lectures… Does it improve students’ performance?

“…Because, students show a higher level of participation and maintain a positive attitude (Durrington et al, 2006) when the online lectures are greatly interactive. Also, recent studies found that AR does increase the learners' engagement with the subject content (Nizar, Rahmat, Maaruf and Damio, 2019) AR-based presentations are also welcomed by the students due to their fun-filled content. Studies that compared AR presentations with traditional methods in education revealed that students want to go for an AR demonstration rather than a slide-based presentation (Di Serio, Báñez & Kloos, 2013).…”

The mobile augmented reality acceptance model for teachers and future teachers

“…Specifically, research has suggested that pre-service and in-service teachers' beliefs and attitudes towards technology play an important role in the successful acceptance of any digital technologies in education (Teo, 2015). In this context, some AR studies have already examined the acceptance of MAR in teaching and learning by pre-service teachers (e.g., Cabero-Almenara et al, 2019;Nizar et al, 2019;Rahmat and Mohamad, 2021) and in-service teachers (e.g., Ibili et al, 2019;Jang et al, 2021), with most having used in their methodologies specific models and theories from social psychology and information systems fields, such as the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) (Davis, 1989;Davis et al, 1989) and other modified versions of TAM, as well as the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology model (UTAUT) (Venkatesh et al, 2003).…”

“…However, aside from the fact that there are relatively few studies on MAR acceptance by pre-service and in-service teachers, they too show certain limitations. Firstly, some acceptance models focus on investigating the acceptance of a particular application for a specific subject (e.g., Geometry, Cardiovascular disease, Geography) (e.g., Ibili et al, 2019;Nizar et al, 2019;Pasalidou & Fachantidis, 2021). Secondly, only a small number of previous studies have evaluated the extent to which the proposed models fit the data collected from their samples (Asiri & El-Aasar, 2022;Jang et al, 2021;Ma et al, 2021).…”

“…We believe that, although both these immersive technologies share certain common characteristics and affordances, they also have differences, and therefore, from a methodological point of view, need to be investigated independently. Fourthly, the acceptance models are tested on a sample who used a MAR that had either been developed by the researchers (e.g., Cabero-Almenara et al, 2019;Ibili et al, 2019;Nizar et al, 2019;Rahmat and Mohamad, 2021) or institutions like the Ministry of Education (Jang et al, 2021). Some studies failed to mention whether the sample interacted with the MAR (e.g., Asiri and El-Aasar, 2022), while in others, the sample merely attended a brief seminar or lecture about AR (Ning et al, 2019).…”

A critical outlook at augmented reality and its adoption in education

“…Papers with research questions that investigate the effect of AR on learning outcomes (N=123) [43][44][45][46][47]49,50,55,56,58,59,61,63,65, Papers with research questions that investigate the functionality of AR technology and its effectiveness (N=36) [47,48,51,52,57,62,108,123,133,148,150,[155][156][157]160,162,170,[176][177][178][179][180][181][182][183][184][185][186][187][188][189][190][191][192][193]…”