Nexus Modeling of Trainees’ Satisfaction in a Scientific Writing Context: An Empirical Investigation
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32890/mjli2025.22.2.2Keywords:
Perceived self-efficacy, trainee motivation and satisfaction, online course design, time management, TAMAbstract
Purpose – Scientific writing is one primary way scientists disseminate their discoveries to the broader scientific community. International journals’ extensive scope and stringent peer review procedures have earned them the gold standard for academic publications. However, writing in reputable international journals and publishing them is no easy task. This prompted various online courses to assist researchers in overcoming writing obstacles and raising the caliber of their work to the point where it is acceptable for publication in esteemed publications. The study had two goals: (i) to investigate the correlations between perceived self-efficacy, enjoyment, motivation for courses, online course design, time management, Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), and satisfaction with E-courses, and (ii) to examine whether the motivation for courses and perceived self-efficacy moderate time management.
Methodology – This study employed a quantitative approach and randomly selected 184 trainees from Indonesia who took online courses for scientific writing. The questionnaire to gather the quantitative data used a five-point Likert scale format. Descriptive statistics were obtained using IBM’s SPSS 25 statistical software. The statistical program Smart-PLS 3.0 was used to handle the data analysis, and it used structural equation modeling to assess the measurement model and test the hypotheses.
Findings – The measuring methodology supported the study constructs' convergent and discriminant validity. Three factors directly impacted Indonesian trainees' perceptions of the ease of use of e-courses: perceived self-efficacy, enjoyment, and online course design. Furthermore, there was a negative and significant moderating effect on motivation and the relationship between time management and perceived enjoyment. However, the relationship between online course design and time management was positively moderated by perceived self-efficacy. It was found that 69.9% of the variance in online course satisfaction could be explained by exogenous factors, such as perceived self-efficacy, enjoyment, and online course design, influencing perceived ease of use.
Significance – E-courses in scientific writing assist in improving writing and getting published in reputable journals. Apart from enhancing the academic quality of one’s writing, they helped in networking and gaining a reputation abroad. Besides, it encourages Indonesian researchers and the Indonesian Ministry of Education, Culture, Research, and Technology to develop a more evidence-based national development framework that serves as a basis for more effective policy development and decision-making. The impact of perceived self-efficacy on perceived usefulness was found to be negligible. On the other hand, perceived usefulness and simplicity were positively and directly impacted by both perceived enjoyment and online course design. The TAM was not significantly affected by course motivation, although time management was. The satisfaction of trainees was also positively and indirectly impacted by the following four external factors: perceived self-efficacy, perceived enjoyment, course motivation, and online course design.
References
Aldhahi, M. I., Alqahtani, A. S., Baattaiah, B. A., & Al-Mohammed, H. I. (2022). Exploring the relationship between students' learning satisfaction and self-efficacy during the emergency transition to remote learning amid the coronavirus pandemic: A cross-sectional study. Education and Information Technologies, 27(1), 1323-1340. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10644-7
Alfadda, H. A., & Mahdi, H. S. (2021). Measuring students’ use of zoom application in language course based on the technology acceptance model (TAM). Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 50(4), 883-900.
Andreeva, S., Khalyapina, L., Almazova, N., & Baranova, T. (2020). Development of senior students’ writing skills in genres of academic discourse using massive open online courses. In Akinina Z(Eds.), Integrating engineering education and humanities for global intercultural perspectives, Proceedings of the Conference, March, 25-27, 2020, St.Petersburgs, Russia(pp. 39-46). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-47415-7_5
Bagdi, H., & Bulsara, H. P. (2023). Understanding the role of perceived enjoyment, self-efficacy and system accessibility: Digital natives' online learning intentions. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education(ahead-of-print). https://doi.org/10.1108/JARHE-09-2022-0302
Bandura, A. (1991). Social cognitive theory of self-regulation. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 50(2), 248-287. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90022-L
Bandura, A. (2023). Cultivate self‐efficacy for personal and organizational effectiveness. In E. Locke & C. Pearce (Eds.), Principles of Organizational Behavior: The Handbook of Evidence‐Based Management (3rd Edition, pp113-135). https://doi.org/10.1002/9781394320769.ch6
Barnard, L., Paton, V., & Lan, W. (2008). Online self-regulatory learning behaviors as a mediator in the relationship between online course perceptions with achievement. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 9(2). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v9i2.516
Barnard-Brak, L., Paton, V. O., & Lan, W. Y. (2010). Profiles in self-regulated learning in the online learning environment. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 11(1), 61-80. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v11i1.769
Biwer, F., Wiradhany, W., Oude Egbrink, M., Hospers, H., Wasenitz, S., Jansen, W., & De Bruin, A. (2021). Changes and adaptations: How university students self-regulate their online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. Frontiers in psychology, 12-2021. https://doi.org/10.3389/ fpsyg.2021.642593
Chao, C.-M. (2019). Factors determining the behavioral intention to use mobile learning: An application and extension of the UTAUT model. Frontiers in psychology, 10, https://doi.org/10.3389/ fpsyg.2019.01652
Cheng, S.-L., & Xie, K. (2021). Why college students procrastinate in online courses: A self-regulated learning perspective. The Internet and Higher Education, 50, 100807. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. iheduc.2021.100807
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research designs. Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS quarterly, 13(3), 319-340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1992). Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to use computers in the workplace 1. Journal of applied social psychology, 22(14), 1111-1132. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1992.tb00945.x
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2012). Self-determination theory. Handbook of theories of social psychology, 1(20), 416-436.
Guerra-Macías, Y., & Tobón, S. (2024). Development of transversal skills in higher education programs in conjunction with online learning: Relationship between learning strategies, project-based pedagogical practices, e-learning platforms, and academic performance. Heliyon, 11(2), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e41099
Gunness, A., Matanda, M. J., & Rajaguru, R. (2023). Effect of student responsiveness to instructional innovation on student engagement in semi-synchronous online learning environments: The mediating role of personal technological innovativeness and perceived usefulness. Computers & Education, 205, 104884. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2023.104884
Gutierrez-Aguilar, O., Ticona-Apaza, F., Calliñaupa-Quispe, G., Duche-Pérez, A., Salas-Valdivia, L., & Chicaña-Huanca, S. (2022). Ease of use and perceived usefulness and its influence on motivation, collaboration and behavioral intention in university students in times of Covid-19. 2022 XVII Latin American Conference on Learning Technologies (LACLO),
Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European business review, 31(1), 2-24.
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the academy of marketing science, 43(1), 115-135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
Hoi, S. C. H., Sahoo, D., Lu, J., & Zhao, P. (2021). Online learning: A comprehensive survey. Neurocomputing, 459, 249-289. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neucom.2021.04.112
Hora, M. T., Chen, Z., Wolfgram, M., Zhang, J., & Fischer, J. J. (2024). Designing effective internships: A mixed-methods exploration of the sociocultural aspects of intern satisfaction and development. The Journal of Higher Education, 95(5), 579-606.
Joo, S. (2018). The influence of the tour platform on customer satisfaction and behavioral intention by technology acceptance model. International Journal of Tourism Management and Sciences, 33(4), 57-74.
Kim, S., Jang, S., Choi, W., Youn, C., & Lee, Y. (2022). Contactless service encounters among Millennials and generation z: The effects of millennials and gen z characteristics on technology self-efficacy and preference for contactless service. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, 16(1), 82-100.
Kim, S.-H., & Park, S. (2021). Influence of learning flow and distance e-learning satisfaction on learning outcomes and the moderated mediation effect of social-evaluative anxiety in nursing college students during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional study. Nurse Education in Practice, 56, 103197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2021.103197
Kurniawan, Y., Candra, S., & Tungka, L. Y. (2021). E-learning: MOOC user intention analysis using TAM and TTF with social motivation factor and mooc features. In E. Emmanuel, B. Rahema, P. John S., & D. B. Ganesh (Eds.), Digital Literacy and Socio-Cultural Acceptance of ICT in Developing Countries (pp. 101-117). Springer.
Kyewski, E., & Krämer, N. C. (2018). To gamify or not to gamify? An experimental field study of the influence of badges on motivation, activity, and performance in an online learning course. Computers & Education, 118(1), 25-37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.11.006
Li, N., Marsh, V., & Rienties, B. (2016). Modelling and managing learner satisfaction: Use of learner feedback to enhance blended and online learning experience. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 14(2), 216-242. https://doi.org/10.1111/dsji.12096
Liu, I.-F., Chen, M. C., Sun, Y. S., Wible, D., & Kuo, C.-H. (2010). Extending the TAM model to explore the factors that affect intention to use an online learning community. Computers & education, 54(2), 600-610. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.09.009
Luo, R., & Wang, Y. (2023). Enjoyment, boredom, and perceived effectiveness of learners in language MOOCs: The mediating effect of self-regulated learning. Frontiers in Psychology, 14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1145773
Mejeh, M., & Held, T. (2022). Understanding the development of self-regulated learning: An intervention study to promote self-regulated learning in vocational schools. Vocations and Learning, 15(3), 531-568.
Melissa Ng Lee Yen, A. (2020). The influence of self-regulation processes on metacognition in a virtual learning environment. Educational Studies, 46(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698. 2018.1516628
Mossman, G. J., & Cronin, L. D. (2019). Life skills development and enjoyment in youth soccer: The importance of parental behaviours. Journal of sports sciences, 37(8), 850-856. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2018.1530580
Mullen, C., Pettigrew, J., Cronin, A., Rylands, L., & Shearman, D. (2022). The rapid move to online mathematics support: Changes in pedagogy and social interaction. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 53(1), 64-91. https://doi.org/10. 1080/0020739X.2021.1962555
Nakayama, M., Mutsuura, K., & Yamamoto, H. (2021). Impact of learner’s characteristics and learning behaviour on learning performance during a fully online course. In N. Minoru (Ed.), Note taking activities in e-learning environments, (pp15-36). Springer.
Nikou, S. A. (2024). Factors influencing student teachers’ intention to use mobile augmented reality in primary science teaching. Education and Information Technologies. 29(12),15353-15374. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12481-w
Papakostas, C., Troussas, C., Krouska, A., & Sgouropoulou, C. (2023). Exploring users’ behavioral intention to adopt mobile augmented reality in education through an extended technology acceptance model. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 39(6), 1294-1302. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2022.2062551
Prifti, R. (2022). Self–efficacy and student satisfaction in the context of blended learning courses. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 37(2), 111-125. https://doi.org/10. 1080/02680513.2020.1755642
Rakedzon, T., & Baram-Tsabari, A. (2017). Assessing and improving L2 graduate students’ popular science and academic writing in an academic writing course. Educational psychology, 37(1), 48-66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2016.1192108
Rienties, B., Tempelaar, D., Nguyen, Q., & Littlejohn, A. (2019). Unpacking the intertemporal impact of self-regulation in a blended mathematics environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 100(2), 345-357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.07.007
Saadé, R. G., & AlSharhan, J. A. (2015). Discovering the motivations of students when using an online learning tool. Journal of Information Technology Education. Research, 14, 283-296. http://dx.doi.org/10.28945/2271
Schwarzer, R., & Hallum, S. (2008). Perceived teacher self‐efficacy as a predictor of job stress and burnout: Mediation analyses. Applied psychology, 57(s1), 152-171. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j. 1464-0597.2008.00359.x
Shi, H., Zhou, Y., Dennen, V. P., & Hur, J. (2023). From unsuccessful to successful learning: Profiling behavior patterns and student clusters in Massive open online courses. Education and Information Technologies, 29(5), 5509-5540.
Shree, S. (2020). Augmenting training–learning experience by design: A conceptual framework. Industrial and Commercial Training, 52(1), 50-64.
Smelser, W. W., Laviana, A. A., & Chang, S. S. (2022). Time Management. Navigating Organized Urology: A Practical Guide, 147-160.
Smirnova, N. V. (2016). Writing-for-publication: Online pedagogy for post/graduate research writing. In Research literacies and writing pedagogies for masters and doctoral writers (pp. 68-92). Brill.
Strong, D. M., Dishaw, M. T., & Bandy, D. B. (2006). Extending task technology fit with computer self-efficacy. ACM SIGMIS Database: The Data Base for Advances in Information Systems, 37(2-3), 96-107. https://doi.org/10.1145/1161345.1161358
Sun, Y., & Gao, F. (2020). An investigation of the influence of intrinsic motivation on students’ intention to use mobile devices in language learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68, 1181-1198.
Susantini, E., Isnawati, & Raharjo. (2022). HOTS-link mobile learning application: Enabling biology pre-service teachers to devise hots-based lesson plans. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 31(6), 783-794.
Teo, T. (2009). The impact of subjective norm and facilitating conditions on pre-service teachers' attitude toward computer use: A structural equation modeling of an extended technology acceptance model. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 40(1), 89-109. http://dx.doi.org/10.2190/EC.40.1.d
Theobald, M. (2021). Self-regulated learning training programs enhance university students’ academic performance, self-regulated learning strategies, and motivation: A meta-analysis. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 66(1), 101976. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych. 2021.101976
Thompson, G., Aizawa, I., Curle, S., & Rose, H. (2022). Exploring the role of self-efficacy beliefs and learner success in english medium instruction. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 25(1), 196-209. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2019.1651819
Thumvichit, A. (2022). Unfolding the subjectivity of foreign language enjoyment in online classes: AQ methodology study. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 45(1)1-18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2022.2050917
Tran, V. D. (2022). Perceived satisfaction and effectiveness of online education during the COVID-19 pandemic: The moderating effect of academic self-efficacy. Higher Education Pedagogies, 7(1), 107-129. https://doi.org/10.1080/23752696.2022.2113112
Tseng, T. H., Lin, S., Wang, Y.-S., & Liu, H.-X. (2022). Investigating teachers’ adoption of MOOCs: The perspective of UTAUT2. Interactive Learning Environments, 30(4), 635-650. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1674888 Üstün, Ü. D., Kalkavan, A., & Demirel, M. (2016). Investigating free time motivation scores of physical education and faculty of education students according to different variables. The Online Journal of Recreation and Sport, 2(1), 18-26.
Vavasseur, A., Muscari, F., Meyrignac, O., Nodot, M., Dedouit, F., Revel-Mouroz, P., Dercle, L., Rozenblum, L., Wang, L., Maulat, C., Rousseau, H., Otal, P., Dercle, L., & Mokrane, F.-Z. (2020). Blended learning of radiology improves medical students’ performance, satisfaction, and engagement. Insights into Imaging, 11(1), 61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13244-020-00865-8
Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1),157-178. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/41410412
Wolters, C. A., Won, S., & Hussain, M. (2017). Examining the relations of time management and procrastination within a model of self-regulated learning. Metacognition and Learning, 12(2), 381-399. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11409-017-9174-1
Wu, L., Hsieh, P.-J., & Wu, S.-M. (2022). Developing effective e-learning environments through e-learning use mediating technology affordance and constructivist learning aspects for performance impacts: Moderator of learner involvement. The Internet and Higher Education, 55(2), 100871. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2022.100871
Yalçın, Y., & Dennen, V. P. (2024). An investigation of the factors that influence online learners’ satisfaction with the learning experience. Education and Information Technologies, 29(4), 3807-3836. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11984-2
Yang, K., Guo, C.-Y., & Glaser, R. E. (2018). Challenges of globalization and successful adaptation strategies in implementing a “scientific writing and authoring” course in China. Journal of Chemical Education, 95(12), 2155-2163.
Yener, S., Arslan, A., & Kilinç, S. (2021). The moderating roles of technological self-efficacy and time management in the technostress and employee performance relationship through burnout. Information Technology & People, 34(7), 1890-1919. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1108/ITP-09-2019-0462
Zakariya, Y. F., Nilsen, H. K., Goodchild, S., & Bjørkestøl, K. (2022). Self-efficacy and approaches to learning mathematics among engineering students: Empirical evidence for potential causal relations. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 53(4), 827-841. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2020.1783006
Zareisaroukolaei, M., Shams, G., RezaeiZadeh, M., & Ghahramani, M. (2024). Effectiveness evaluation indicators of organizational e-learning courses. Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 15, 100432. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2024.100432
Zhang, S., Zhao, J., & Tan, W. (2008). Extending TAM for online learning systems: An intrinsic motivation perspective. Tsinghua Science and Technology, 13(3), 312-317. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1016/S1007-0214(08)70050-6
Zhou, L., Xue, S., & Li, R. (2022). Extending the technology acceptance model to explore students’ intention to use an online education platform at a university in China. Sage Open, 12(1), 21582440221085259. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221085259
Zhu, M., & Doo, M. Y. (2022). The relationship among motivation, self-monitoring, self-management, and learning strategies of MOOC learners. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 34(2), 321-342. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs12528-021-09301-2
Published
Issue
Section
How to Cite
Research impact
Harvested 2026-09-21Counts differ between services because each indexes a different body of literature. None of them is the whole picture.
