Factors Influencing the Continued Use of Procreate Digital Painting Software by Fine Arts Students in Chongqing, China

Yan Li

doi:10.60027/ijsasr.2024.4863

Authors

Yan Li Professor, Sichuan Fine Arts Institute, China. Ph.D. Candidate, Graduate School of Business and Advanced Technology Management, Assumption University, Bangkok, Thailand. https://orcid.org/0009-0006-6690-7694

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.60027/ijsasr.2024.4863

Keywords:

Procreate; , Digital Painting; , Fine Arts Education; , Influencing Factors

Abstract

Background and Aim: With the rise of digital technology, digital painting software has become a tool for artistic expression. The purpose of this paper is to explore the factors that influence the continued use of Procreate digital painting software by undergraduate art students in Chongqing, China, through three major theories: ECM, UTAUT 2, SCT, and other modeling frameworks.

Materials and Methods: This study adopted a quantitative approach to data collection using a five-point Likert scale for the questionnaire. The sample of this study was undergraduate students of six fine arts programs in different regions of Chongqing, China, and the participants were selected through a Judgmental or purposive sampling technique. The instrument used to collect the data was a questionnaire and the data were analyzed on 487 valid questionnaires, CFA and SEM were executed to validate the fit, validity, and reliability of the model and to confirm the causality between the variables for hypothesis testing.

Results: All hypotheses were supported, with perceived usefulness and satisfaction as direct influences. self-efficacy had the most significant effect on perceived usefulness.

Conclusion: Key factors influencing Chongqing art students' continued use of Procreate digital drawing software include hedonic motivation, confirmation, self-efficacy, and knowledge application, which together contribute to students' continuance intention to use the software by enhancing satisfaction and perceived usefulness. This study provides new perspectives for understanding the use of digital drawing software in art education, offers insights for educational institutions to optimize digital strategies for art education, helps software developers to improve product functionality, and guides art students to make more effective use of digital tools for art creation, thus promoting the in-depth application and development of digital drawing technology in the art field.

References

Ahmad, M., Ahmad, K., & Bhatti, R. (2023). Assessing the impact of knowledge management factors on digital resources acceptance: a survey of postgraduate students of public sector universities of Punjab. The Electronic Library, 41(5), 617-640.

Al-Azawei, A., & Alowayr, A. (2020). Predicting the intention to use and hedonic motivation for mobile learning: A comparative study in two Middle Eastern countries. Technology in Society, 62, 101325.

Al-Emran, Mostafa & Salloum, Said. (2020). An empirical examination of continuous intention to use m-learning: An integrated model. Education and Information Technologies. 25(2), 1-20. DOI:10.1007/s10639-019-10094-2

Al-khresheh, M.H., & Alkursheh, T.O. (2024). An integrated model exploring the relationship between self-efficacy, technology integration via Blackboard, English proficiency, and Saudi EFL students’ academic achievement. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11(1), 1-12.

Bagozzi, R. (1992). The Self-Regulation of Attitudes, Intentions, and Behavior. Social Psychology Quarterly, 55, 178-204. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2786945

Bagozzi, R., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the Evaluation of Structural Equation Models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Sciences, 16, 74-94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02723327

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191

Browne, M.W., & Cudeck, R. (1992) Alternative Ways of Assessing Model Fit. Sociological Methods and Research, 21, 230-258.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124192021002005

Camilleri, M.A., & Camilleri, A.C. (2017). Digital learning resources and ubiquitous technologies in education. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 22, 65-82.

Cheng, Y.M. (2019). How does task-technology fit influence cloud-based e-learning continuance and impact? Education+ Training, 61(4), 480-499.

Dai, H. M., Teo, T., & Rappa, N. A. (2020). Understanding continuance intention among MOOC participants: The role of habit and MOOC performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 112, 106455.

Das, K.R., & Imon, A.H.M.R. (2016). A brief review of tests for normality. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1), 5-12.

Dikmen, C.H., & Demirer, V. (2022). The role of technological pedagogical content knowledge and social cognitive variables in teachers’ technology integration behaviors. Participatory Educational Research, 9(2), 398-415.

Dugar, D. (2018). Skew and kurtosis: 2 important statistics terms you need to know in data science. Codeburst. io, 24.

Etikan, I., & Bala, K. (2017). Sampling and sampling methods. Biometrics & Biostatistics International Journal, 5(6), 00149.

Farsi, M., & Filippini, M. (2004). Regulation and measuring cost-efficiency with panel data models: Application to electricity distribution utilities. Review of Industrial Organization, 25, 1-19.

Fornell, C., & Larcker, D.F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of marketing research, 18(1), 39-50.

Gold, D.P., Andres, D., Etezadi, J., Arbuckle, T., Schwartzman, A., Chaikelson, J. (1995). Structural equation model of intellectual change and continuity and predictors of intelligence in older men. Psychology and Aging. 10, 294–303.

González-Zamar, M.-D., & Abad-Segura, E. (2021). Digital Design in Artistic Education: An Overview of Research in the University Setting. Education Sciences, 11(4), 144.

Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., Anderson, R., & Tatham, R. (2006). Multivariate Data Analysis. 6th edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.

Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., & Anderson, R.E. (2010). Multivariate Data Analysis. 7th Edition, Pearson, New York.

Hair, J.F., Hult, G.T.M., Ringle, C.M. et al. (2016). A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). 2nd edition. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.

Ibrahim, A., & Shiring, E. (2022). The Relationship between Educators' Attitudes, Perceived Usefulness, and Perceived Ease of Use of Instructional and Web-Based Technologies: Implications from Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). International Journal of Technology in Education, 5(4), 535-551.

Inder, S. (2021). Factors influencing student engagement for online courses: A confirmatory factor analysis. Contemporary Educational Technology, 14(1), ep336.

Jenkinson, J. (2009). Measuring the Effectiveness of Educational Technology: What Are We Attempting to Measure? Electronic Journal of E-learning, 7(3), pp273-280.

Kintu, M. J., Zhu, C., & Kagambe, E. (2017). Blended learning effectiveness: the relationship between student characteristics, design features, and outcomes. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 14, 1-20.

Korepanova, A., & Pata, K. (2023). The Transformation of Art Teaching Process: A Qualitative Study of Digitally Mediated Teaching. In Conference on Smart Learning Ecosystems and Regional Development (pp. 151-165). Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore.

Kulviwat, S., C. Bruner II, G., & P. Neelankavil, J. (2014). Self-efficacy as an antecedent of cognition and affect in technology acceptance. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 31(3), 190–199.

McCready, M. (2021). On Born Digital Artwork, New Drawing Applications, and New Opportunities: The case for preserving time-lapse in Procreate and Clip Studio Paint. VRA Bulletin. 48 (2), 1-10.

McNeese, B. (2016). Are the skewness and kurtosis useful statistics? Texas: BPI Consulting, LLC.

Mun, Y.Y., Jackson, J.D., Park, J.S., & Probst, J.C. (2006). Understanding information technology acceptance by individual professionals: Toward an integrative view. Information & Management, 43(3), 350-363.

Nelson, M.J., Voithofer, R., & Cheng, S.L. (2019). Mediating factors that influence the technology integration practices of teacher educators. Computers & Education, 128, 330-344.

Nikou, S.A., & Economides, A.A. (2017). Mobile-based assessment: Investigating the factors that influence behavioral intention to use. Computers & Education, 109, 56–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.02.005

Oliver, R.L. (1980). A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction decisions. Journal of Marketing Research, 17(4), 460-469.

Qu, K., & Wu, X. (2024). ChatGPT as a CALL tool in language education: A study of hedonic motivation adoption models in English learning environments. Education and Information Technologies, 1-33.

Salimon, M.G., Sanuri, S.M.M., Aliyu, O.A., Perumal, S., & Yusr, M.M. (2021). E-learning satisfaction and retention: A concurrent perspective of cognitive absorption, perceived social presence and technology acceptance model. Journal of Systems and Information Technology, 23(1), 109-129.

Shah, J., & Khanna, M. (2022). Extending Information System Success Model with Customer Experience: A MOOC System Evaluation. Business Perspectives and Research. DOI:10.1177/22785337221092836

Soper, D. (2006). Calculator: A-priori Sample Size for Structural Equation Models. Daniel Soper.

Sugiarto, E., Kurniawati, D.W., Febriani, M., Fiyanto, A., & Imawati, R.A. (2021). Computer-based art in folklore illustration: Development of mixed media digital painting in education context. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 1098(3), 032017.

Taber, K.S. (2018). The use of Cronbach’s alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education. Research in Science Education, 48, 1273-1296.

Tamilmani, K., Rana, N. P., Wamba, S. F., & Dwivedi, R. (2021). The extended Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT2): A systematic literature review and theory evaluation. International Journal of Information Management, 57, 102269.

Tarhini, A., Masa’deh, R.E., Al-Busaidi, K.A., Mohammed, A.B., & Maqableh, M. (2017). Factors influencing students’ adoption of e-learning: a structural equation modeling approach. Journal of International Education in Business, 10(2), 164-182.

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, 157-178.

Wang, Y., & Lu, H. (2021). Validating items of different modalities to assess the educational technology competency of pre-service teachers. Computers & Education, 162, 104081.

Zhao, C., & Zhao, L. (2021). Digital nativity, computer self-efficacy, and technology adoption: a study among university faculties in China. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 746292.