Assessing acceptance of augmented reality in nursing education

Pelin Uymaz, Ali Osman Uymaz, Pelin Uymaz, Ali Osman Uymaz

Abstract

The Covid-19 pandemic has negatively affected every aspect of human life. In these challenging times nursing students, facing academic and psychological issues, are advised to use augmented reality applications in the field of health sciences for increasing their motivations and academic performances. The main motive of the study was to examine the acceptance status of nursing students in implementing augmented reality technology in their education and training. The study is a quantitative research study, and it uses the causal-comparative screening method. The data used in the study was collected online from 419 nursing students. The hybrid method was preferred. First, the hypotheses based on the linear relationships were defined between the variables which were then tested by the method of structural equation modeling. Second, the method of artificial neural networks was used to determine the non-linear relationships between the variables. The results show that the nursing students have a high intention of using augmented reality technology as a way of self-learning. It was also found that the most emphasized motive behind this intention is the expectation that using augmented reality technology will increase their academic performance. They also think that AR technology has many potential benefits to offer in the future. It was observed that a considerable number of students already use augmented reality technology for its usefulness and with a hedonic motivation. In conclusion, nursing students have a high acceptance of using augmented reality technology during their education and training process. Since we live in a world where e-learning and self-learning education/training have become widespread, it is estimated that students will demand augmented reality applications as a part of holistic education, and as an alternative to traditional textbooks.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1. Research model.
Fig 1. Research model.
Fig 2. The research model path analysis.
Fig 2. The research model path analysis.
Fig 3. Model A.
Fig 3. Model A.
Fig 4. Model B.
Fig 4. Model B.

References

    1. Lew S, Tan GWH, Loh XM, Hew JJ, Ooi KB. The disruptive mobile wallet in the hospitality industry: An extended mobile technology acceptance model. Technol Soc. 2020;63:101430. doi: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101430
    1. Bernacki ML, Greene JA, Crompton H. Mobile technology, learning, and achievement: Advances in understanding and measuring the role of mobile technology in education. Contemp Educ Psychol. 2020;60:101827. doi: 10.1016/J.CEDPSYCH.2019.101827
    1. Wu P-H, Hwang G-J, Tsai C-C, Chen Y-C, Huang Y-M. A pilot study on conducting mobile learning activities for clinical nursing courses based on the repertory grid approach. Nurse Educ Today. 2011;31(8):e8–e15. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2010.12.001
    1. Lai C-Y, Wu C-C. Promoting nursing students’ clinical learning through a mobile e-portfolio. CIN Comput Informatics, Nurs. 2016;34(11). doi: 10.1097/CIN.0000000000000263
    1. Chang C-Y, Lai C-L, Hwang G-J. Trends and research issues of mobile learning studies in nursing education: A review of academic publications from 1971 to 2016. Comput Educ. 2018;116:28–48. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2017.09.001
    1. Yale School of Nursing. Yale Nursing Matters.; 2019. Accessed January 11, 2022.
    1. Herbert VM, Perry RJ, LeBlanc CA, et al.. Developing a smartphone app with augmented reality to support virtual learning of nursing students on heart failure. Clin Simul Nurs. 2021;54:77–85. doi: 10.1016/j.ecns.2021.02.003
    1. Radwan E, Radwan A, Radwan W. The role of social media in spreading panic among primary and secondary school students during the COVID-19 pandemic: An online questionnaire study from the Gaza Strip, Palestine. Heliyon. 2020;6(12). doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e05807
    1. Conrad RC, Hahm H “Chris,” Koire A, Pinder-Amaker S, Liu CH. College student mental health risks during the COVID-19 pandemic: Implications of campus relocation. J Psychiatr Res. 2021;136:117–126. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2021.01.054
    1. Mendez KJW, Piasecki RJ, Hudson K, et al.. Virtual and augmented reality: Implications for the future of nursing education. Nurse Educ Today. 2020;93:104531. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2020.104531
    1. Kaur DP, Mantri A, Horan B. Enhancing student motivation with use of augmented reality for interactive learning in engineering education. Procedia Comput Sci. 2020;172:881–885. doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2020.05.127
    1. Council of Higher Education. Yükseköğretim kurumlarında uzaktan öğretime ilişkin usul ve esaslar (Procedures and principles regarding distance education in higher education institutions). Council of Higher Education. Accessed February 3, 2021.
    1. Brown J, Mccrorie P. The iPad: Tablet technology to support nursing and midwifery student earning: An evaluation in practice. CIN Comput Informatics, Nurs. 2015;33(3).
    1. Jamu JT, Lowi-Jones H, Mitchell C. Just in time? Using QR codes for multi-professional learning in clinical practice. Nurse Educ Pract. 2016;19:107–112. doi: 10.1016/j.nepr.2016.03.007
    1. Wu T-T. The Use of a mobile assistant learning system for health education based on project-based learning. CIN Comput Informatics, Nurs. 2014;32(10). doi: 10.1097/CIN.0000000000000089
    1. Milgram P, Kishino F. A taxonomy of mixed reality visual displays. IEICE Trans Inf Syst. 1994;77(12):1321–1329.
    1. Kipper G, Rampolla J. Augmented Reality: An Emerging Technologies Guide to AR. Elsevier; 2013.
    1. Fernández-García C. Effect of augmented reality on school journalism: A tool for developing communication competencies in virtual environments. Electron J Inf Syst Dev Ctries. 2021;87(4):e12169. doi: 10.1002/ISD2.12169
    1. Monteiro Paulo R, Pereira AL, PavaneloE. The constitution of mathematical knowledge with augmented reality. Math Enthus. 2021;18(3):641–668.
    1. El-Ghandour NMF, Ezzat AAM, Zaazoue MA, et al.. Virtual learning during the COVID-19 pandemic: A turning point in neurosurgical education. Neurosurg Focus FOC. 2020;49(6):E18. doi: 10.3171/2020.9.FOCUS20634
    1. Aebersold M, Voepel-Lewis T, Cherara L, et al.. Interactive anatomy-augmented virtual simulation training. Clin Simul Nurs. 2018;15:34–41. doi: 10.1016/j.ecns.2017.09.008
    1. Balian S, McGovern SK, Abella BS, Blewer AL, Leary M. Feasibility of an augmented reality cardiopulmonary resuscitation training system for health care providers. Heliyon. 2019;5(8):e02205. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e02205
    1. Wazirali R. Aligning education with Vision 2030 using augmented reality. Comput Syst Sci Eng. 2021;36(2). doi: 10.32604/csse.2021.014301
    1. Alamäki A, Dirin A, Suomala J. Students’ expectations and social media sharing in adopting augmented reality. Int J Inf Learn Technol. 2021;38(2):196–208. doi: 10.1108/IJILT-05-2020-0072
    1. Azuma R, Baillot Y, Behringer R, Feiner S, Julier S, MacIntyre B. Recent advances in augmented reality. IEEE Comput Graph Appl. 2001;21(6):34–47. doi: 10.1109/38.963459
    1. He Z, Wu L, Li X (Robert). When art meets tech: The role of augmented reality in enhancing museum experiences and purchase intentions. Tour Manag. 2018;68:127–139. doi: 10.1016/J.TOURMAN.2018.03.003
    1. Yoke SK, Ahmad TA, Hasan NH. Exploring the potential of augmented reality in English for report writing: A perceptive overview. Int J Educ. 2019;4(33):13–21. doi: 10.35631/IJEPC.433002
    1. Shorey S, Ng ED. The use of virtual reality simulation among nursing students and registered nurses: A systematic review. Nurse Educ Today. 2021;98:104662. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2020.104662
    1. Huang T-C, Chen C-C, Chou Y-W. Animating eco-education: To see, feel, and discover in an augmented reality-based experiential learning environment. Comput Educ. 2016;96:72–82. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2016.02.008
    1. Yuen S, Yaoyuneyong G, Johnson E. Augmented reality: An overview and five directions for AR in education. J Educ Technol Dev Exch. 2011;4(1):119–140. doi: 10.18785/jetde.0401.10
    1. Jahanmir SF, Cavadas J. Factors affecting late adoption of digital innovations. J Bus Res. 2018;88:337–343. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.01.058
    1. Davis FD. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q Manag Inf Syst. 1989;13(3):319–339. doi: 10.2307/249008
    1. Venkatesh V, Morris MG, Davis GB, Davis FD. User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Q. 2003;27(3):425–478. doi: 10.2307/30036540
    1. Venkatesh V, Davis FD. A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Manage Sci. 2000;46(2):186–204. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926
    1. Dirin A, Laine TH. User experience in mobile augmented reality: Emotions, challenges, opportunities, and best practices. 2018;7(2):33. Accessed October 4, 2021.
    1. Nguyen N, Muilu T, Dirin A, Alamäki A. An interactive and augmented learning concept for orientation week in higher education. Int J Educ Technol High Educ. 2018;15(1):35. doi: 10.1186/s41239-018-0118-x
    1. Venkatesh V, Thong JYL, Xu X. Consumer acceptance and use of information Technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Q. 2012;36(1):157–178. doi: 10.2307/41410412
    1. Lewis CC, Fretwell CE, Ryan J, Parham JB. Faculty use of established and emerging technologies in higher education: A unified theory of acceptance and use of technology perspective. Int J High Educ. 2013;2(2). doi: 10.5430/ijhe.v2n2p22
    1. Akgul Y. Predicting the determinants of mobile payment acceptance: A hybrid SEM-neural network approach. In: Patel HA, Kumar A, eds. Applications of Artificial Neural Networks for Nonlinear Data. IGI Global; 2021:117–153. doi: 10.4018/978-1-7998-4042-8.ch006
    1. Krishnaraju V, Mathew SK, Sugumaran V. Role of web personalization in consumer acceptance of e-government services. In: AMCIS.; 2013.
    1. Raman A, Don Y. Preservice teachers’ acceptance of learning management software: An application of the UTAUT2 model. Int Educ Stud. 2013;6:157–164.
    1. Deng S, Liu Y, Qi Y. An empirical study on determinants of web based question‐answer services adoption. Online Inf Rev. 2011;35(5):789–798. doi: 10.1108/14684521111176507
    1. Fidani A, Idrizi F. Investigating Students Acceptance of a Learning Management System in University Education: A Structural Equation Modeling Approach. In:; 2012.
    1. Paola Torres Maldonado U, Feroz Khan G, Moon J, Jeung Rho J. E‐learning motivation and educational portal acceptance in developing countries. Online Inf Rev. 2011;35(1):66–85. doi: 10.1108/14684521111113597
    1. Saadé RG, Kira D. Computer anxiety in e-learning: The effect of computer self-efficacy. J Inf Technol Educ. 2009;8.
    1. Dönmez-Turan A, Kır M. User anxiety as an external variable of technology acceptance model: A meta-analytic study. Procedia Comput Sci. 2019;158:715–724. doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2019.09.107
    1. Zhu Z, Liu Y, Che X, Chen X. Moderating factors influencing adoption of a mobile chronic disease management system in China. Informatics Heal Soc Care. 2018;43(1):22–41. doi: 10.1080/17538157.2016.1255631
    1. Tsai H-T, Hong J-T, Yeh S-P, Wu T-J. Consumers’ acceptance model for Taiwan agriculture and food traceability system. Anthropol. 2014;17(3):845–856. doi: 10.1080/09720073.2014.11891499
    1. Leso T, Peck KL. Computer anxiety and different types of computer courses. J Educ Comput Res. 1992;8(4):469–478. doi: 10.2190/Q1TJ-8JCU-LDAP-84H8
    1. Ain N, Kaur K, Waheed M. The influence of learning value on learning management system use: An extension of UTAUT2. Inf Dev. 2015;32(5):1306–1321. doi: 10.1177/0266666915597546
    1. Cohen JF, Bancilhon J-M, Jones M. South African physicians’ acceptance of e-prescribing technology: an empirical test of a modified UTAUT model. South Afr Comput J. 2013;50:43–54.
    1. Baysal AC. Learning. In: Baysal AC, Tekarslan E, eds. Behavioral Science. Avciol; 2004:67–100.
    1. Acarli DS, Sağlam Y. Investigation of pre-service teachers’ intentions to use of social media in teaching activities within the framework of technology acceptance model. Procedia—Soc Behav Sci. 2015;176:709–713. doi: 10.1016/J.SBSPRO.2015.01.530
    1. Cobanoglu C, Yang W, Shatskikh A, Agarwal A. Are consumers ready for mobile payment? An examination of consumer acceptance of mobile payment technology in restaurant industry. Hosp Rev. 2015;31:6.
    1. Liébana-Cabanillas F, Marinković V, Kalinić Z. A SEM-neural network approach for predicting antecedents of m-commerce acceptance. Int J Inf Manage. 2017;37(2):14–24. doi: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2016.10.008
    1. Park B, Blevins E, Knutson B, Tsai JL. Neurocultural evidence that ideal affect match promotes giving. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2017;12(7):1083–1096. doi: 10.1093/scan/nsx047
    1. Harley JM, Poitras EG, Jarrell A, Duffy MC, Lajoie SP. Comparing virtual and location-based augmented reality mobile learning: emotions and learning outcomes. Educ Technol Res Dev. 2016;64(3):359–388. doi: 10.1007/s11423-015-9420-7
    1. Brown SA, Venkatesh V. Model of adoption of technology in households: A baseline model test and extension incorporating household life cycle. MIS Q. 2005;29(3):399–426. doi: 10.2307/25148690
    1. Christensen L, Johnson R, Turner L. Research Methods, Design, and Analysis. Pearson; 2014.
    1. Sharma SK, Sharma H, Dwivedi YK. A hybrid SEM-neural network model for predicting determinants of mobile payment services. Inf Syst Manag. 2019;36(3):243–261. doi: 10.1080/10580530.2019.1620504
    1. Sadiq R, Rodriguez MJ, Mian HR. Empirical Models to Predict Disinfection By-Products (DBPs) in Drinking Water: An Updated Review☆. In: Nriagu JBT-E of EH (Second E, ed. Elsevier; 2019:324–338. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-409548-9.11193–5
    1. Chong AYL. A two-staged SEM-neural network approach for understanding and predicting the determinants of m-commerce adoption. Expert Syst Appl. 2013;40(4):1240–1247. doi: 10.1016/J.ESWA.2012.08.067
    1. Fernández-Llamas C, Conde MA, Rodríguez-Lera FJ, Rodríguez-Sedano FJ, García F. May I teach you? Students’ behavior when lectured by robotic vs. human teachers. Comput Human Behav. 2018;80:460–469. doi: 10.1016/J.CHB.2017.09.028
    1. Fan W, Liu J, Zhu S, Pardalos PM. Investigating the impacting factors for the healthcare professionals to adopt artificial intelligence-based medical diagnosis support system (AIMDSS). Ann Oper Res 2018 2941. 2018;294(1):567–592. doi: 10.1007/S10479-018-2818-Y
    1. Hair JF, Hult GT, Ringle CM, Sarstedt M. A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). Second. Sage Publication; 2016.
    1. Fornell C, Larcker DF. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J Mark Res. 1981;18(1):39–50. doi: 10.2307/3151312
    1. Henseler J, Ringle CM, Sarstedt M. A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. J Acad Mark Sci. 2015;43(1):115–135. doi: 10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
    1. Henseler J, Ringle CM, Sinkovics RR. The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing. In: Sinkovics RR, Ghauri PN, eds. Advances in International Marketing. Vol 20. Advances in International Marketing. Emerald Group Publishing Limited; 2009:277–319. doi: 10.1108/S1474-7979(2009)0000020014
    1. Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Second. Lawrence Erlbaum Ass.; 1988.
    1. Tenenhaus M, Vinzi VE, Chatelin Y-M, Lauro C. PLS path modeling. Comput Stat Data Anal. 2005;48(1):159–205. doi: 10.1016/j.csda.2004.03.005
    1. Chin WW. The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. In: Marcoulides GA, ed. Modern Methods for Business Research. Lawrence Erlbaum Ass.; 1998:295–358.
    1. Chiang WYK, Zhang D, Zhou L. Predicting and explaining patronage behavior toward web and traditional stores using neural networks: a comparative analysis with logistic regression. Decis Support Syst. 2006;41(2):514–531. doi: 10.1016/J.DSS.2004.08.016
    1. Yee-Loong Chong A, Liu MJ, Luo J, Keng-Boon O. Predicting RFID adoption in healthcare supply chain from the perspectives of users. Int J Prod Econ. 2015;159:66–75. doi: 10.1016/J.IJPE.2014.09.034
    1. Priyadarshinee P, Raut RD, Jha MK, Gardas BB. Understanding and predicting the determinants of cloud computing adoption: A two staged hybrid SEM-neural networks approach. Comput Human Behav. 2017;76:341–362. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2017.07.027
    1. Sharma SK. Integrating cognitive antecedents into TAM to explain mobile banking behavioral intention: A SEM-neural network modeling. Inf Syst Front. 2019;21(4):815–827. doi: 10.1007/s10796-017-9775-x
    1. Lee V-H, Hew J-J, Leong L-Y, Tan GW-H, Ooi K-B. Wearable payment: A deep learning-based dual-stage SEM-ANN analysis. Expert Syst Appl. 2020;157:113477. doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2020.113477
    1. Haykin S. Neural Networks: A Comprehensive Foundation. Second. Prentice Hall.; 2004.
    1. Parady G, Taniguchi A, Takami K. Travel behavior changes during the COVID-19 pandemic in Japan: Analyzing the effects of risk perception and social influence on going-out self-restriction. Transp Res Interdiscip Perspect. 2020;7:100181. doi: 10.1016/j.trip.2020.100181
    1. Cohn J. “Devilish Smartphones” and the “Stone-Cold” internet: Implications of the technology addiction trope in college student digital literacy narratives. Comput Compos. 2016;42:80–94. doi: 10.1016/J.COMPCOM.2016.08.008
    1. Derevensky JL, Hayman V, Lynette Gilbeau. Behavioral addictions: Excessive gambling, gaming, internet, and smartphone use among children and adolescents. Pediatr Clin North Am. 2019;66(6):1163–1182. doi: 10.1016/j.pcl.2019.08.008
    1. Chassiakos YR, Stager M. Current trends in digital media: How and why teens use technology. In: Moreno AM, Hoopes AJ, eds. Technology and Adolescent Health. Academic Press; 2020:25–56.
    1. Samaha M, Hawi NS. Relationships among smartphone addiction, stress, academic performance, and satisfaction with life. Comput Human Behav. 2016;57:321–325. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.12.045
    1. Alsop T. Forecast augmented (AR) and virtual reality (VR) market size worldwide from 2020 to 2024. . Published 2021. Accessed February 1, 2021. (AR,five-year CAGR over spending

Source: PubMed

Sponsorer och medarbetare

Medicinska tillstånd

Läkemedelsinterventioner

3
Prenumerera