Advertisement

Technology, Knowledge and Learning

, Volume 24, Issue 1, pp 65–87 | Cite as

Structural Relationships in the Embedding of Role-Play Games in a Class for Japanese Language Proficiency: Towards a Unified View

  • Norazah Mohd SukiEmail author
  • Norbayah Mohd Suki
Original research

Abstract

This study examines the structural relationships at work when embedding role-play games in a class for Japanese language proficiency. It does so by applying the Technology Acceptance Model, and the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Usage of Technology as its guiding principles. The setting was a Malaysian public university and the subjects, 200 students who completed a structured self-administered questionnaire, the data from which was analyzed using the Structural Equation Modelling technique via AMOS software version 21. Based on the significant standardized beta coefficients, all the posited hypotheses were well supported, i.e. strong encouragement to perform, effort expectancy, attitude towards use, social influence, and facilitating conditions, all increase the possibility of students’ behavioural intention to use role-play games in class for Japanese language proficiency. Of these five factors, effort expectancy was the strongest contributing predictor. Learning to participate in the classroom role-play game was perceived as easy, and seen to facilitate improvement in Japanese language learning proficiency. Students’ interaction via the role-play games enabled them to be flexible in their learning, and to become skilful in improving their Japanese language learning proficiency. The findings of this study offer valuable insights for language teachers, and the model developed can be utilized as an instrument for further investigative research.

Keywords

Game-based learning Media in education Improving classroom teaching Distributed learning environment Learning communities 

References

  1. Abrizah, A., Mohd, H., & Norliya, A. K. (2015). Resource-sharing through an inter institutional repository. The Electronic Library, 33(4), 730–748.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Agrebi, S., & Jallais, J. (2015). Explain the intention to use smartphones for mobile shopping. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 22(2015), 16–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ajuwon, G. A., & Popoola, S. O. (2015). Influence of motivational factors on utilisation of internet health information resources by resident doctors in Nigeria. The Electronic Library, 33(1), 103–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behaviour. Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behaviour. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  6. Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (2000). Attitudes and the attitude-behaviour relation: Reasoned and automatic processes. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European Review of Social Psychology (pp. 1–33). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
  7. Ali, A. A., & Fulton, C. (2015). Impact of social networking tools on scholarly communication: A cross-institutional study. The Electronic Library, 33(2), 224–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Annetta, L. A., Minogue, J., Holmes, S. Y., & Cheng, M. T. (2009). Investigating the impact of video games on high school students’ engagement and learning about genetics. Computers and Education, 53(1), 74–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Aqueveque, C. (2006). Extrinsic cues and perceived risk: The influence of consumption situation. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 23(5), 237–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Auter, P. J. (2007). Portable social groups: Willingness to communicate, interpersonal communication gratifications and cell phone use among young adults. International Journal of Mobile Communication, 5(2), 139–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bagozzi, R., Yi, Y., & Phillips, L. (1991). Assessing construct validity in organizational research. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36(3), 421–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Becker, K., & Parker, J. (2014). Methods of design: An overview of game design techniques. In K. Schrier (Ed.), Learning, education and games: Volume one: Curricular and design considerations (pp. 179–198). Pittsburgh: ETC Press.Google Scholar
  13. Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychology Bulletin, 107(2), 238–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Brom, C., Preuss, M., & Klement, D. (2011). Are educational computer micro-games engaging and effective for knowledge acquisition at high-schools? A Quasi-experimental study. Computers and Education, 57(3), 1971–1988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Byrne, B. M. (2001). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.Google Scholar
  16. Carter, L., & Schaupp, L. C. (2009). Relating acceptance and optimism to e-file adoption. International Journal of Electronic Government Research, 5(3), 62–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Chang, K., & Chang, C. C. (2009). Library self-service. The Electronic Library, 27(6), 938–949.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Chang, C. C., Lin, C. L., Chen, Y. C., & Chin, Y. C. (2009). Predicting information-seeking intention in academic digital libraries. The Electronic Library, 27(3), 448–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Chang, S., & Tung, F. (2008). An empirical investigation of students’ behavioural intentions to use the online learning course websites. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(1), 71–83.Google Scholar
  20. Chang, H. H., & Wang, I. C. (2008). An investigation of user communication behaviour in computer mediated environments. Computers in Human Behaviour, 24(5), 2336–2356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Chau, P. Y. K., & Hu, P. J. H. (2002). Investigating healthcare professionals’ decisions to accept telemedicine technology: An empirical test of competing theories. Information and Management, 39(4), 297–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Cheng, Y. M. (2014). Roles of interactivity and usage experience in e-learning acceptance: A longitudinal study. International Journal of Web Information Systems, 10(1), 2–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Cheung, R. D., & Vogel, D. (2013). Predicting user acceptance of collaborative technologies: An extension of the technology acceptance model for e-learning. Computers and Education, 63(2013), 160–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Chin, D. B., Blair, K. P., & Schwartz, D. L. (2016). Got game? A choice-based learning assessment of data literacy and visualization skills. Technology, Knowledge and Learning,. doi: 10.1007/s10758-016-9279-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Chiu, H. Y. T., Fang, S. C., & Tseng, C. C. (2010). Early versus potential adopters: Exploring the antecedents of use intention in the context of retail service innovations. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 38(6), 443–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Chiu, C. M., & Wang, E. T. G. (2008). Understanding web-based learning continuance intention: The role of subjective task value. Information and Management, 45(3), 194–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Chuang, T. Y., & Chen, W. F. (2009). Effect of computer-based video games on children: An experimental study. Educational Technology and Society, 12(2), 1–10.Google Scholar
  28. Coddington, W. (1993). Environmental marketing: Positive strategies for reaching the green consumer. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  29. Conner, M., & Armitage, C. J. (1998). Extending the theory of planned behaviour: A review and avenues for further research. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28(15), 1429–1464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Cornilliea, F., Clarebouta, G., & Desmet, P. (2012). The role of feedback in foreign language learning through digital role playing games. Procedia-Social and Behavioural Sciences, 34(2012), 49–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Davis, F. D. (1993). User acceptance of information technology: System characteristics, user perceptions and behavioural impacts. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 38(3), 475–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982–1003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. DeMagaad, K., Chew, H. E., Huang, G. X., Khan, M. L., Sreenivasan, A., & LaRose, R. (2013). The use of public computing facilities by library patrons: Demography, motivation and barriers. Government Information Quarterly, 30(1), 110–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Denham, A. R. (2016). Improving the design of a learning game through intrinsic integration and play testing. Technology, Knowledge and Learning,. doi: 10.1007/s10758-016-9280-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Dulle, F. W., & Minishi-Majanja, M. K. (2011). The suitability of the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) model in open access adoption studies. Information Development, 27(1), 32–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. El-Gayar, O., Moran, M., & Hawkes, M. (2011). Students’ acceptance of tablet PCs and implications for educational institutions. Educational Technology and Society, 14(2), 58–70.Google Scholar
  38. Falloon, G., & Khoo, E. (2014). Exploring young students’ talk in iPad-supported collaborative learning environments. Computers and Education, 77(2014), 13–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Fay, I. (2014). Playtesting and iterative design: The most important process for making great games. In K. Schrier (Ed.), Learning, education and games: Volume one: Curricular and design considerations (pp. 251–263). Pittsburgh: ETC Press.Google Scholar
  40. Fengfeng, K. (2008). A case study of computer gaming for math: Engaged learning from gameplay? Computers and Education, 51(4), 1609–1620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behaviour: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  42. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Fu, J., Farn, C., & Chao, W. (2006). Acceptance of electronic tax filing: A study of taxpayer intentions. Information and Management, 43(1), 109–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Gallego, M. P., Luna, P., & Bueno, S. (2008). User acceptance model of open source software. Computers in Human Behaviour, 24(5), 2199–2216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Gao, L., & Bai, X. (2014). A unified perspective on the factors influencing consumer acceptance of internet of things technology. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 26(2), 211–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Gruzd, A., Staves, K., & Wilk, A. (2012). Connected scholars: Examining the role of social media in research practices of faculty using the UTAUT model. Computers in Human Behaviour, 28(6), 2340–2350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Gu, F., & Widén-Wulff, G. (2011). Scholarly communication and possible changes in the context of social media: A Finnish case study. The Electronic Library, 29(6), 762–776.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Hair, J. F., Black, B., Babin, B., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: A global perspective. New Jersey: Pearson Education Inc.Google Scholar
  49. Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2014). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  50. Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), 139–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Hair, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Mena, J. A. (2012). An assessment of the use of partial least squares structural equation modeling in marketing research. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 40(3), 414–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Harris, L. C., & Goode, M. M. H. (2004). The four levels of loyalty and the pivotal role of trust: A study of online service dynamics. Journal of Retailing, 80(2004), 139–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Horst, M., Kuttschreuter, M., & Gutteling, J. M. (2007). Perceived usefulness, personal experiences, risk perception and trust as determinants of adoption of e-government services in The Netherlands. Computers in Human Behaviour, 23(4), 1838–1852.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Hsu, H. H. (2012). The acceptance of Moodle: An empirical study based on UTAUT. Creative Education, 3(8B), 44–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Hsu, C. L., & Lu, H. P. (2004). Why do people play online games? An extended TAM with social influences and flow experience. Information and Management, 41(7), 853–868.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Hsu, C., & Lu, H. (2007). Consumer behaviour in online game communities: A motivational factor perspective. Computers in Human Behaviour, 23(3), 1642–1659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Huizenga, J., Admiraal, W., Akkerman, S., & Dam, G. T. (2009). Mobile game-based learning in secondary education: Engagement, motivation and learning in a mobile city game. Journal of Computer Assisted learning, 25(4), 332–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Iacobucci, D. (2010). Structural equation modeling: Fit indices, sample size, and advanced topics. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 20(1), 90–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Ifenthaler, D., & Schweinbenz, V. (2013). The acceptance of Tablet-PCs in classroom instruction: The teachers’ perspectives. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 525–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Jamil, B., & Wong, C. H. (2010). Factors influencing repurchase intention of smartphones. Journal of Marketing Research, 4(12), 289–294.Google Scholar
  61. Kafai, Y. B., Franke, M. L., Ching, C. C., & Shih, J. C. (1998). Game design as an interactive learning environment for fostering students’ and teachers’ mathematical inquiry. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 3(1), 149–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Ke, F., & Im, T. (2013). Virtual-reality-based social interaction training for children with high-functioning autism. The Journal of Educational Research, 106(6), 441–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Khalifa, M., & Shen, K. N. (2008). Explaining the adoption of transactional B2C mobile commerce. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 21(2), 110–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Kim, Y. M. (2010). The adoption of university library web site resources: A multigroup analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(5), 978–993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Lee, K. C., Kang, I., & Kim, J. S. (2007). Exploring the user interface of negotiation support systems from the user acceptance perspective. Computers in Human Behaviour, 23(1), 220–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Lee, D. Y., & Lehto, M. R. (2013). User acceptance of YouTube for procedural learning: An extension of the Technology Acceptance Model. Computers and Education, 61(2013), 193–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Lee, V., & Lin, S. J. (2008). Podcasting acceptance on campus: An extension of the UTAUT model. In DIGIT Proceedings, Paris.Google Scholar
  68. Liao, C., Chen, J., & Yen, D. C. (2007). Theory of planning behaviour (TPB) and customer satisfaction in the continued use of e-service: An integrated model. Computers in Human Behaviour, 23(6), 2804–2822.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Lin, C. P., & Anol, B. (2008). Learning online social support: An investigation of network information technology based on UTAUT. Cyber Psychology and Behavior, 11(3), 268–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Liu, C. C., Cheng, Y. B., & Huang, C. W. (2011). The effect of simulation games on the learning of computational problem solving. Computers and Education, 57(3), 1907–1918.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Liu, S., Liao, H., & Pratt, J. A. (2009). Impact of media richness and flow on e-learning technology acceptance. Computers and Education, 52(3), 599–607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Liyana, S., & Noorhidawati, A. (2014). How graduate students seek for information: Convenience or guaranteed result? Malaysian Journal of Library and Information Science, 19(2), 1–15.Google Scholar
  73. Mason, W. A., Conrey, F. D., & Smith, E. R. (2007). Situating social influence processes: Dynamic, multidirectional flows of influence within social networks. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 11(3), 279–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Mathieson, K. (1991). Predicting user intention: Comparing the technology acceptance model with the theory of planned behaviour. Information System Research, 2(3), 173–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. McGregor, J. (1993). Effectiveness of role playing and antiracist teaching in reducing student prejudice. The Journal of Educational Research, 86(4), 215–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Mei, M., Chow, L. H., Chen, J. A., Yeow, P., & Wong, W. (2012). Conceptual paper: Factors affecting the demand of smartphone among young adult. International Journal on Social Science Economics and Art, 10(2), 332–334.Google Scholar
  77. Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  78. Papastergiou, M. (2009). Digital game-based Learning in high school computer science education: Impact on educational effectiveness and student motivation. Computers and Education, 52(1), 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Pituch, K. A., & Lee, Y. (2006). The influence of system characteristics on e-learning use. Computers and Education, 47(2), 222–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Roscoe, J. T. (1975). Fundamental research statistics for the behavioural sciences (2nd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
  81. Rowlands, I., Nicholas, D., Russell, B., Canty, N., & Watkinson, A. (2011). Social media use in the research workflow. Learned Publishing, 24(3), 183–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Schaupp, L. C., Carter, L., & McBride, M. E. (2010). E-file adoption: A study of US taxpayers’ intentions. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(4), 636–644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Schiffman, L. G., Kanuk, L. L., & Wisenbut, J. (2009). Consumer behaviour (10th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.Google Scholar
  84. Shapley, K., Sheehan, D., Maloney, C., & Caranikas-Walker, F. (2011). Effects of technology immersion on middle school students’ learning opportunities and achievement. The Journal of Educational Research, 104(5), 299–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Shaw, N. (2014). The mediating influence of trust in the adoption of the mobile wallet. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Service, 21(4), 449–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Singh, K. P., & Gill, M. S. (2015). Role and users’ approach to social networking sites (SNSs): A study of universities of North India. The Electronic Library, 33(1), 19–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Suki, N. M., & Suki, N. M. (2007). Mobile phone usage for m-learning: Comparing heavy and light mobile phone users. Campus Wide Information System, 24(5), 355–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Suki N. M., & Suki N. M. (2013). Examining students’ attitudes to the mobile phone as an educational tool. Education Research: Challenges, Training Techniques and Improvements, 33–45.Google Scholar
  89. Sumak, B., Polancic, G., & Hericko, M. (2010). An empirical study of virtual learning environment adoption using UTAUT. In Mobile, Hybrid, and On-Line Learning, 2010. ELML’10. Second International Conference, 17–22. IEEE.Google Scholar
  90. Tosuntas, S. B., Karadag, E., & Orhan, S. (2015). The factors affecting acceptance and use of interactive whiteboard within the scope of FATIH project: A structural equation model based on the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. Computers and Education, 81(2015), 169–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Tung, F. C., & Chang, S. C. (2008). Nursing students’ behavioural intention to use online courses: A questionnaire survey. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 45(9), 1299–1309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Tung, F. C., Chang, S. C., & Chou, C. M. (2008). An extension of trust and TAM model with IDT in the adoption of the electronic logistics information system in HIS in the medical industry. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 77(5), 324–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Van der Heijden, H. (2004). User acceptance of hedonic information systems. MIS Quarterly, 28(4), 695–704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Van Raaij, E. M., & Schepers, J. J. L. (2008). The acceptance and use of a virtual learning environment in China. Computers and Education, 50(3), 838–852.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Wang, Y. S., & Shih, Y. W. (2009). Why do people use information kiosks? A validation of the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. Government Information Quarterly, 26(1), 158–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Yap, V. (2015). New RPG ‘Dragon Blaze’ roars into Malaysia gaming scene. Retrieved 29 October 2015 from http://amanz.net/20153351/new-rpg-dragon-blaze-roars-into-malaysia-gaming-scene/.
  98. Ya-Ting, C. Y. (2012). Building virtual cities, inspiring intelligent citizens: Digital games for developing students’ problem solving and learning motivation. Computers and Education, 59(2), 365–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Labuan Faculty of International FinanceUniversiti Malaysia SabahSabahMalaysia
  2. 2.Faculty of Computing and InformaticsUniversiti Malaysia SabahSabahMalaysia

Personalised recommendations