Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education

• Agarwal, R., Sambamurthy, V., & Stair, R. M. (2000). The evolving relationship between general and specific computer self-efficacy—An empirical assessment. Information systems research, 11(4), 418-430. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.11.4.418.11876.
• Ajzen, I. (1985).From Intentions to Actions: A Theory of Planned Behavior, in Kuhl, J. and Bechkmann, J. (Eds). Action Control: From Cognition to Behavior, New York: Springer-verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-69746-3_2.
• Ajzen, I. (1991).The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T.
• Alenezi, A. R., Abdul karim, A. M., & Veloo, A. (2010). An Empirical Investigation the role of enjoyment, Computer anxiety, Computer Self-Efficacy and internet experience in influencing the students’ intention to use E-learning: A case study from Saudi Arabian governmental universities. The Turkish Online Journal lf Educational Technology, 9(4), 22-34.
• Alsofyani, M. M., Eynon, R., & Majid, N. A. (2012). A preliminary evaluation of short blended online training workshop for TPACK development using technology acceptance model. TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 11(3).
• Arbaugh, J. B. (2000). Virtual classroom characteristics and student satisfaction with internet-based MBA courses. Journal of management education, 24(1), 32-54. https://doi.org/10.1177/105256290002400104.
• Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the Evaluation of Structural Equation Models. Academy of Marking Science, (16), 76-94. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02723327.
• Bandura, A. (1977). Social Learning Theory. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
• Bandura, A., & Cervone, D. (1986). Differential Engagement of Self-Reactive Influences in Cognitive Motivation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 138, 92-113. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(86)90028-2.
• Chang, C. S., Liu, E. Z. F., Sung, H. Y., Lin, C. H., Chen, N. S., & Cheng, S. S. (2014). Effects of online college student’s Internet self-efficacy on learning motivation and performance. Innovations in education and teaching international, 51(4), 366-377. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2013.771429.
• Chen, I. S. (2017). Computer self-efficacy, learning performance, and the mediating role of learning engagement. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 362-370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.02.059.
• Compeau, D. R., & Higgins, C. A. (1995). Computer Self-Efficacy: Development of a Measure and Initial Test. MIS Quarterly, 19(2), 189-211. https://doi.org/10.2307/249688.
• Davis, F. D. (1985). A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: Theory and results (Doctoral dissertation), Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
• Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theorical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982-1003. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982.
• Draft, P. C. (2000). A Framework for the E-publishing Ecology.
• Dunbar, S. B., Koretz, D. M., & Hoover, H. D. (1991). Quality control in the development and use of performance assessments. Applied measurement in education, 4(4), 289-303. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15324818ame0404_3.
• Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement errors. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(2), 39-50. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312.
• Hatlevik, O. E., Throndsen, I., Loi, M., & Gudmundsdottir, G. B. (2018). Students’ ICT self-efficacy and computer and information literacy: Determinants and relationships. Computers & Education, 118, 107-119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.11.011.
• Hill, T., Smith, N. D., & Mann, M. F. (1987). Role of efficacy expectations inpredicting the decision to use advanced technologies: The case of computers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 307-313. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.72.2.307.
• Johnson, R., Thatcher, J., & Gerow, J. (2017, January). A Meta-Analytic Review of Computer Self-Efficacy and Agenda for Future Research. In Academy of Management Proceedings (Vol. 2017, No. 1, p. 13982). Academy of Management. https://doi.org/10.5465/ambpp.2017.13982abstract.
• Kim, B. (2010). An empirical investigation of mobile data service continuance: Incorporating the theory of planned behavior into the expectation–confirmation model. Expert Systems with Applications, 37(10), 7033-7039. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2010.03.015.
• Lee, Y., Kozar, K. A., & Larsen, K. R. (2003). The technology acceptance model: Past, present, and future. Communications of the Association for information systems, 12(1), 50.
• Li, Y., Yang, H. H., Cai, J., & MacLeod, J. (2017, June). College Students’ Computer Self-efficacy, Intrinsic Motivation, Attitude, and Satisfaction in Blended Learning Environments. In International Conference on Blended Learning (pp. 65-73). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-59360-9_6.
• Lu, Y., Zhou, T., & Wang, B. (2009). Exploring Chinese users’ acceptance of instant messaging using the theory of planned behavior, the technology acceptance model, and the flow theory. Computers in human behavior, 25(1), 29-39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2008.06.002.
• Marsh, H. W., & Hocevar, D. (1988). A New More Powerful Approach to Multitrait-Multimethod Analysis: Application of Second-Order Confirmatory Analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73(1), 107-117. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.73.1.107.
• Martocchio, J. J. (1994). Effects of Conceptions of Ability on Anxiety, Self-Efficacy, and Learning in Training. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(6), 819-825. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.79.6.819.
• Martocchio, J. J., & Dulebohn, J. (1994). Performance feedback effects in training: The role of perceived controllability. Personnel Psychology, 47(2), 357-373. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1994.tb01729.x.
• Park, S. Y., Nam, M. W., & Cha, S. B. (2012). University students’ behavioral intention to use mobile learning: Evaluating the technology acceptance model. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(4), 592–605. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2011.01229.x.
• Pierson, C. A., & Beck, S. S. (1993). Performance assessment: The realities that will influence the rewards. Childhood Education, 70(1), 29-32. https://doi.org/10.1080/00094056.1993.10520978.
• Romano, F. J. (2006). The Future of Global Markets for Digital Printing to 2015. Pira International Limited.
• Sanchez-Franco, M. J. (2010). WebCT–The quasimoderating effect of perceived affective quality on an extending Technology Acceptance Model. Computers & Education, 54(1), 37-46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.07.005.
• Schmidt, J. (2008). Advisory services & international co-operation federal institute for vocational education and training (BIBB) Germany. In International Technological and Vocational Education Conference.
• Terzis, V., & Economides, A. A. (2011). The acceptance and use of computer based assessment. Computers & Education, 56(4), 1032-1044. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.11.017.
• Tian, X. (2007, June). Developments in publishing: The potential of digital publishing. In ELPUB (pp. 471-472).
• Tribute, A. (2006). Digital Goes International. Retrieved October, 13, 2008.
• Venkatesh, V., & Morris, M. G. (2000). Why don’t men ever stop to ask for directions? Gender, social influence, and their role in technology acceptance and usage behavior. MIS quarterly, 115-139. https://doi.org/10.2307/3250981.
• Webster, J., & Martocchio, J. J. (1992). Microcomputer playfulness: Development of a measure with workplace implications. MIS quarterly, 201-226. https://doi.org/10.2307/249576.
• Webster, J., & Martocchio, J. J. (1995). The differential effects of software training previews on training outcomes. Journal of Management, 21(4), 757-787. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639502100409.
• Wright, J. H., Brown, G. K., Thase, M. E., & Basco, M. R. (2017). Learning cognitive-behavior therapy: An illustrated guide. American Psychiatric Pub.

APA

Liao, S., Hong, J.-C., Wen, M.-H., Pan, Y.-C., & Wu, Y. (2018). Applying Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) to explore Users’ Behavioral Intention to Adopt a Performance Assessment System for E-book Production. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(10), em1601. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/93575

Vancouver

Liao S, Hong JC, Wen MH, Pan YC, Wu Y. Applying Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) to explore Users’ Behavioral Intention to Adopt a Performance Assessment System for E-book Production. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2018;14(10):em1601. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/93575

AMA

Liao S, Hong JC, Wen MH, Pan YC, Wu Y. Applying Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) to explore Users’ Behavioral Intention to Adopt a Performance Assessment System for E-book Production. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2018;14(10), em1601. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/93575

Chicago

Liao, Shin, Jon-Chao Hong, Ming-Hui Wen, Yi-Chen Pan, and Yun- Wu. "Applying Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) to explore Users’ Behavioral Intention to Adopt a Performance Assessment System for E-book Production". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 2018 14 no. 10 (2018): em1601. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/93575

Harvard

Liao, S., Hong, J.-C., Wen, M.-H., Pan, Y.-C., and Wu, Y. (2018). Applying Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) to explore Users’ Behavioral Intention to Adopt a Performance Assessment System for E-book Production. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(10), em1601. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/93575

MLA

Liao, Shin et al. "Applying Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) to explore Users’ Behavioral Intention to Adopt a Performance Assessment System for E-book Production". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, vol. 14, no. 10, 2018, em1601. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/93575