Factors Affecting Knowledge Acquisition among Adult Workers in Online Informal Learning Activities
Horng-Ji Lai 1  
More details
Hide details
Department of Counselling Psychology and Human Resource Development, National Chi Nan University, Puli, Nantou County, TAIWAN
Online publish date: 2017-11-15
Publish date: 2017-11-15
EURASIA J. Math., Sci Tech. Ed 2018;14(1):505–515
The purpose of this study was to develop and test a research model that investigates the factors influencing knowledge acquisition among adult workers participating in online informal learning activities. A total of 342 adult workers, all of whom were civil servants working for the government in Taiwan, participated in this study. A survey instrument was used to assess their perceived abilities in information querying, information differentiation, online communication self-efficacy, information evaluation and extraction, and knowledge acquisition. A Structural Equation Modeling was performed using Partial Least Squares regression for data exploration and model estimation. The results of this study indicate that information querying, significantly affected the participants’ information differentiation performance. The construct of information differentiation yielded a positive influence in the respondents’ online communication self-efficacy and information evaluation and extraction. Moreover, information evaluation and extraction was found to be a significant predictor influencing adult workers’ knowledge acquisition. The findings imply that organizations should consider including information literacy training in training initiatives and provide friendly online collaborating tools to enhance employees’ online informal learning experiences.
1. Ajjan, H., Hartshorne, R., & Buechler, S. (2012). Investigating Web 2.0 application impacts on knowledge workers’ decisions and performance. Information Resources Management Journal, 25(4), 65-83.
2. Berg, S. A., & Chyung, S. Y. (2008). Factors that influence informal learning in the workplace. Journal of Workplace Learning, 20(4), 229-244. doi:10.1108/13665620810871097.
3. Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. Modern methods for business research, 295(2), 295-336.
4. Clough, G., Jones, A. C., McAndrew, P., & Scanlon, E. (2008). Informal learning with PDAs and smartphones. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24(5), 359-371. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2007.00268.x.
5. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hilsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
6. Eraut, M. (2004). Informal learning in the workplace. Studies in Continuing Education, 26(2), 247-273. doi:10.1080/158037042000225245.
7. Feng, L., & Ha, J.-L. (2016). Effects of teachers’ information literacy on lifelong learning and school effectiveness. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 12(6), 1653-1663.
8. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of marketing research, 18(1), 39-50.
9. Gu, J., Churchill, D., & Lu, J. (2014). Mobile Web 2.0 in the workplace: A case study of employees’ informal learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(6), 1049-1059. doi:10.1111/bjet.12179.
10. Hair Jr, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2016). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage Publications.
11. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
12. Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), 139-152.
13. 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.
14. Ho, L.-A., Kuo, T.-H., & Lin, B. (2012). The mediating effect of website quality on internet searching behavior. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(3), 840-848. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2011.11.024.
15. Hung, M.-L., Chou, C., Chen, C.-H., & Own, Z.-Y. (2010). Learner readiness for online learning: Scale development and student perceptions. Computers & Education, 55(3), 1080-1090. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.05.004.
16. Kao, C. -P., & Chien, H. -M. (2017). Web-searching to learn: The role of Internet self-efficacy in pre-school educators’ conceptions and approaches. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics Science and Technology Education, 13(6), 2039-2056.
17. Kassens-Noor, E. (2012). Twitter as a teaching practice to enhance active and informal learning in higher education: The case of sustainable tweets. Active Learning in Higher Education, 13(1), 9-21.
18. Kuhlthau, C. C. (1991). Inside the search process: Information seeking from the user’s perspective. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 42(5), 361-371.
19. Kuhlthau, C.C., Heinström, J. & Todd, R.J. (2008). The ‘information search process’ revisited: is the model still useful? Information Research, 13(4). Retrieved from
20. Lai, H.-J., & Wang, C.-Y. (2012). Examining public librarians’ Information literacy, self-directed learning readiness, and e-learning attitudes: A study from Taiwan. Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science, 17(2), 101-125.
21. Li, C., Shi, X., & Dang, J. (2014). Online communication and subjective well-being in chinese college students: The mediating role of shyness and social self-efficacy. Computers in Human Behavior, 34, 89-95.
22. Liu, S.-H. (2017). Relationship between the factors influencing online help-seeking and self-regulated learning among Taiwanese preservice teachers. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 38-45.
23. Lohman, M. C. (2006). Factors influencing teachers’ engagement in informal learning activities. Journal of Workplace Learning, 18(3), 141-156.
24. Lohman, M. C. (2009). A survey of factors influencing the engagement of information technology professionals in informal learning activities. Information Technology, Learning, and Performance Journal, 25(1), 43-53.
25. Macdonald, I., & Chiu, J. (2011). Evaluating the viability of mobile learning to enhance management training. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 37(1).1-13.
26. Marsick, V.J., Watkins, K.E., Callahan, M.W., & Volpe, M. (2009). Informal and incidental learning in the workplace. In M. C. Smith & N. DeFrates-Densch (Eds.), Handbook of research on adult learning and development (pp. 570-599). New York, NY: Routledge.
27. Merriam, S., Caffarella, R., & Baumgartner, L. (2007). Learning in adulthood: A comprehensive guide. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley.
28. Milligan, C., Littlejohn, A., & Margaryan, A. (2014). Workplace Learning in Informal Networks. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 2014(1), p.Art. 6. doi:10.5334/2014-06.
29. Mills, L. A., Knezek, G., & Khaddage, F. (2014). Information seeking, information sharing, and going mobile: Three bridges to informal learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 32(0), 324-334. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2013.08.008.
30. Nikolova, I., Van Ruysseveldt, J., De Witte, H., & Syroit, J. (2014). Work-based learning: Development and validation of a scale measuring the learning potential of the workplace (LPW). Journal of Vocational Behavior, 84(1), 1-10.
31. Noe, R. A., Tews, M. J., & Marand, A. D. (2013). Individual differences and informal learning in the workplace. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 83(3), 327-335. doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2013.06.009.
32. Nunnally, J. (1978). Psychometric methods. New York: McGraw-Hill.
33. Oh, H. J., Ozkaya, E., & LaRose, R. (2014). How does online social networking enhance life satisfaction? The relationships among online supportive interaction, affect, perceived social support, sense of community, and life satisfaction. Computers in Human Behavior, 30, 69-78.
34. Puijenbroek, T., Poell, R. F., Kroon, B., & Timmerman, V. (2014). The effect of social media use on work-related learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 30(2), 159-172. doi:10.1111/jcal.12037.
35. Sackey, D. J., Nguyen, M.-T., & Grabill, J. T. (2015). Constructing learning spaces: What we can learn from studies of informal learning online. Computers & Composition, 35, 112-124. doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2015.01.004.
36. Savolainen, R. (2015). Approaching the affective factors of information seeking: The viewpoint of the information search process model. Information Research: An International Electronic Journal, 20(1), 1-39.
37. Schugurensky, D. (2000). The forms of informal learning: Towards a conceptualization of the field. Retrieved from https://tspace.library.
38. Spagnoletti, P., Za, S., & North-Samardzic, A. (2013). Fostering informal learning at the workplace through digital platforms and information infrastructures. Retrieved from
39. Stoffregen, J., Pawlowski, J. M., & Pirkkalainen, H. (2015). A barrier framework for open e-learning in public administrations. Computers in Human Behavior, 51, Part B, 674-684. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.12.024.
40. Tabatabai, D., & Shore, B. M. (2005). How experts and novices search the web. Library & Information Science Research (07408188), 27(2), 222-248. doi:10.1016/j.lisr.2005.01.005.
41. Walraven, A., Brand-Gruwel, S., & Boshuizen, H. P. A. (2009). How students evaluate information and sources when searching the world wide web for information. Computers & Education, 52(1), 234-246. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2008.08.003.
42. Wihak, C., & Hall, G. (2011). Work-related informal learning: Research and practice in the Canadian context. Toronto, Ontario: Centre for Workplace Skills.
43. Zhang, B., Yin, C., David, B., Xiong, Z., & Niu, W. (2016). Facilitating professionals’ work-based learning with context-aware mobile system. Science of Computer Programming, 129, 3-19. doi:10.1016/j.scico.2016.01.008.