Sustainability of Digital Capital and Social Support during COVID-19: Indonesian Muslim Diaspora’s Case in South Korea
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Conceptual Framework and Hypotheses
2.1. Technology Acceptance Model
2.2. Digital Capital and Technology Acceptance in Online Communities
2.3. Technology Acceptance for Online Community Participation after COVID-19
2.4. Participating in Online Communities for Social Support during COVID-19
3. Methods
3.1. Semi-Structured Interviews
3.2. Sample and Data Collection
3.3. Measures
4. Results
4.1. Reliability and Validity
4.2. Hypotheses Testing
4.3. Post Hoc Analyses
4.3.1. Subgroup Analyses
4.3.2. Mediating Effects of PU and PEOU
5. Discussion
5.1. Implications of TAM during the COVID-19
5.2. Limitations and Future Research
6. Concluding Remarks
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Lai, J.; Widmar, N.O. Revisiting the Digital Divide in the COVID-19 Era. Appl. Econ. Perspect. Policy 2021, 43, 458–464. http://www.alz.org/10.1002/aepp.13104. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kraut, R.M.; Patterson, V.; Lundmark, S.; Kiesler, T.; Mukopadhyay, T.; Scherlis, W. Internet Paradox. A Social Technology that Reduces Social Involvement and Psychological Well-Being? Am. Psychol. 1998, 53, 1017–1031. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Nie, N.H.; Erbring, L. Internet and Society: A Preliminary Report. Stanford Institute for the Quantitative Study of Society. 2000. Available online: www.nomads.usp.br/documentos/textos/cultura_digital/tics_arq_urb/internet_society%20report.pdf (accessed on 19 April 2022).
- Putnam, R.D. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community/Robert D. Putnam; Simon & Schuster: New York, NY, USA; London, UK, 2000. [Google Scholar]
- Ghazi, S.N.; Peter, A.; Johan, S.B.; Jessica, B.; Ana, L.D. Psychological Health and Digital Social Participation of the Older Adults During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Blekinge, Sweden&Mdashan Exploratory Study. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 3711. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Castro-Martinez, A.; Méndez-Domínguez, P.; Valcarcel, A.S.; Castillo de Mesa, J. Social Connectivity, Sentiment and Participation on Twitter During COVID-19. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 8390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ragnedda, M. Conceptualizing Digital Capital. Telemat. Inform. 2018, 35, 2366–2375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Statistika. Percentage of Population Using the Internet in South Korea from 2000 to 2020. 2022. Available online: https://www.statista.com/statistics/255859/internet-penetration-in-south-korea/ (accessed on 10 May 2022).
- Gladkova, A.; Vartanova, E.; Ragnedda, M. Digital Divide and Digital Capital in Multiethnic Russian Society. J. Multicult. Discourses 2020, 15, 1–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jang, I.C.; Choi, L.J. Staying Connected During COVID-19: The Social and Communicative Role of an Ethnic Online Community of Chinese International Students in South Korea. Multilingua 2020, 39, 541–552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Srimulyani, E. Indonesian Muslim Diaspora in Contemporary South Korea: Living as Religious Minority Group in Non-Muslim Country. J. Huk. Kel. Dan Huk. Islam 2021, 5, 668–687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vertovec, S. Religion and Diaspora. In New Approaches to the Study of Religion; Peter, A., Geertz, A.W., Warne, R.R., Eds.; Verlag de Gruyter: Berlin, Germany; New York, NY, USA, 2000. [Google Scholar]
- Vertovec, S.; Cohen, R. Introduction. In Migration, Diasporas, and Transnationalism; Vertovec, S., Cohen, R., Eds.; Edward Elgar: Cheltenham, UK, 2001. [Google Scholar]
- Mandaville, P. Communication and Diasporic Islam: A Virtual Ummah? In The Media of Diaspora; Karim, K.H., Ed.; Routledge: Oxford, UK, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Park, H.S. Food Globalization and Culture War: The Case of the Halal Food Complex in South Korea. 2017. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320871910_Food_globalization_and_culture_war_The_case_of_the_halal_food_complex_in_South_Korea (accessed on 10 May 2022).
- Barrera, M., Jr.; Ainlay, S.L. The Structure of Social Support: A Conceptual and Empirical Analysis. J. Community Psychol. 1983, 11, 133–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dziallas, M.; Blind, K. Innovation Indicators throughout the Innovation Process: An Extensive Literature Analysis. Technovation 2019, 80, 3–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Davis, F.D. Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Q. 1989, 13, 319–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Davis, F.D.; Bagozzi, R.P.; Warshaw, P.R. User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models. Manag. Sci. 1989, 35, 982–1003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Venkatesh, V.; Bala, H. Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions. Decis. Sci. 2008, 39, 273–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Abdullah, F.; Ward, R. Developing a General Extended Technology Acceptance Model for E-Learning (GETAMEL) by Analysing Commonly Used External Factors. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2016, 56, 238–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Venkatesh, V. Determinants of Perceived Ease of Use: Integrating Control, Intrinsic Motivation, and Emotion into the Technology Acceptance Model. Inf. Syst. Res. 2000, 11, 342–365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- King, R.C.; Xia, W. Media Appropriateness: Effects of Experience on Communication Media Choice. Decis. Sci. 1997, 28, 877–910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abbad, M.M.; Morris, D.; De Nahlik, C. Looking under the Bonnet: Factors Affecting Students Adoption of E-Learning Systems in Jordan. Int. Rev. Res. Open Distance Learn. 2009, 10, 1–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Al-alak, B.A.; Alnawas, I.A.M. Measuring the Acceptance and Adoption of E-Learning by Academic Staff. Knowl. Manag. E-Learn. Int. J. 2011, 3, 201–221. [Google Scholar]
- Al-Gahtani, S.S. Empirical Investigation of E-Learning Acceptance and Assibilation: A Structural Equation Model. Appl. Comput. Inform. 2014, 12, 27–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lee, Y.H.; Hsiao, C.; Purnomo, S.H. An Empirical Examination of Individual and System Characteristics on E-Learning Acceptance. Australas. J. Educ. Technol. 2014, 30, 561–579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tynes, R. Nation-Building and the Diaspora on Leonenet: A Case of Sierra Leone in Cyberspace. New Media Soc. 2007, 9, 497–518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Clayton, R.B.; Osborne, R.E.; Miller, B.K.; Oberle, C.D. Loneliness, Anxiousness, and Substance Use as Predictors of Facebook Use. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2013, 29, 687–693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khan, S.A.; Zainuddin, M.; Mahi, M.A.; Arif, I. Behavioral Intention to Use Online Learning During COVID-19: An Analysis of the Technology Acceptance Model. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Innovative Methods of Teaching and Technological Advancements in Higher Education (IMTTAHE), Tbilisi, Georgia, 1 September 2020–15 December 2021. [Google Scholar]
- Lu, I.Y.; Kuo, T.; Lee, W.P. Examining the Effects of Information Quality on Behavioral Intention of Knowledge Management System. J. Qual. 2010, 17, 297–309. [Google Scholar]
- Jackson, C.M.; Chow, S.; Leitch, R.A. Toward an Understanding of the Behavioral Intention to Use an Information System. Decis. Sci. 1997, 28, 357–389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Saadé, R.; Bahli, B. The Impact of Cognitive Absorption on Perceived Usefulness and Perceived Ease of Use in on-Line Learning: An Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model. Inf. Manag. 2005, 42, 317–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Szopinski, T.; Bachnik, K. Student Evaluation of Online Learning during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2022, 174, 121203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sukendro, S.; Habibi, A.; Khaeruddin, K.; Indrayana, B.; Syahruddin, S.; Makadada, F.A.; Hakim, H. Using an Extended Technology Acceptance Model to Understand Students’ Use of E-Learning During COVID-19: Indonesian Sport Science Education Context. Heliyon 2020, 6, e05410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lazim, C.S.L.M.; Ismail, N.D.B.; Tazilah, M.D.A.K. Application of Technology Acceptance Model (Tam) towards Online Learning During COVID-19 Pandemic: Accounting Students Perspective. Int. J. Bus. Econ. Law 2021, 24, 13–20. [Google Scholar]
- Habes, M.; Elareshi, M.; Youssef, E.; Ali, S.; Qudah, M. Social Impact of Videos at New Media Platforms on the Elearning Acceptance During the COVID-19. Inf. Sci. Lett. 2022, 11, 913–925. [Google Scholar]
- Chung, J.E.; Park, N.; Wang, H.; Fulk, J.; McLaughlin, M. Age Differences in Perceptions of Online Community Participation among Non-Users: An Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2010, 26, 1674–1684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, E. Digital Diaspora on the Web: The Formation and Role of an Online Community of Female Korean Im/Migrants in the U.S. 2012. Available online: https://rucore.libraries.rutgers.edu/rutgers-lib/36617/PDF/1/play/ (accessed on 10 May 2022).
- Kwok, K.W. Globalization and Singaporean Transmigration: Re-imagining and Negotiating National Identity. Political Geogr. 1999, 18, 563–589. [Google Scholar]
- Gottlieb, B.H.; Bergen, A.E. Social Support Concepts and Measures. J. Psychosom. Res. 2010, 69, 511–520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wu, J.J.; Chen, Y.H.; Chung, Y.S. Trust Factors Influencing Virtual Community Members: A Study of Transaction Communities. J. Bus. Res. 2010, 63, 1025–1032. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- White, M.; Dorman, S.M. Receiving Social Support Online: Implicationns for Health Education. Health Educ. Res. Theory Pract. 2001, 16, 693–707. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Meurer, M.M.; Waldkirch, M.; Schou, P.K.; Bucher, E.L.; Burmeister-Lamp, K. Digital Affordances: How Entrepreneurs Access Support in Online Communities during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Small Bus. Econ. 2022, 58, 637–663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coulson, N.S.; Heather, A.; Aimee, A. Social Support in Cyberspace: A Content Analysis of Communication within a Huntington’s Disease Online Support Group. Patient Educ. Couns. 2007, 68, 173–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Coulson, N.S. Receiving Social Support Online: An Analysis of A Computer-Mediated Support Group for Individuals Living with Irritable Bowel Syndrome. CyberPsychol. Behav. 2005, 8, 580–584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, S.l.; Bantum, E.O.; Owen, J. Bakken, S.; Elhadad, N. Online Cancer Communities as Informatics Intervention for Social Support: Conceptualization, Characterization, and Impact. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2017, 24, 451–459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ragnedda, M.; Ruiu, M.I.; Addeo, F. Measuring Digital Capital: An Empirical Investigation. New Media Soc. 2019, 22, 793–816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ragnedda, M.; Ruiu, M.I. Digital Capital. A Bourdieusian Perspective on the Digital Divide; Emerald Publishing Limited: Bingley, UK, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Wilson, C.K.; Thomas, J.; Barraket, J. Measuring Digital Inequality in Australia: The Australian Digital Inclusion Index. J. Telecommun. Gitial Econ. 2019, 7, 102–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alghaith, W. Applying the Technology Acceptance Model to Understand Social Networking Sites (Sns) Usage: Impact of Perceived Social Capital. Int. J. Comput. Sci. Inf. Technol. 2015, 7, 105–117. [Google Scholar]
- Yong, L.; Sachau, D.; Lassiter, A.L. Developing a Measure of Virtual Community Citizenship Behavior. Knowl. Manag. E-Learn. Int. J. 2011, 3, 682–696. [Google Scholar]
- Abfalter, D.; Zaglia, M.E.; Mueller, J. Sense of Virtual Community: A Follow up on Its Measurement. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2012, 28, 400–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liang, T.P.; Ho, Y.T.; Li, Y.W.; Turban, E. What Drives Social Commerce: The Role of Social Support and Relationship Quality. Int. J. Electron. Commer. 2011, 16, 69–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Algharabat, R.S.; Rana, N.P. Social Commerce in Emerging Markets and Its Impact on Online Community Engagement. Inf. Syst. Front. 2021, 23, 1499–1520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bagozzi, R.P.; Yi, Y. On Evaluation of Structural Equation Models. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 1988, 16, 74–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chin, W.W. The Partial Least Squares Approach to Structural Equation Modeling. In Modern Methods for Business Research; Marcoulides, G.A., Ed.; Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.: Mahwah, NJ, USA, 1988. [Google Scholar]
- Fornell, C.; Larcker, D.F. Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. J. Mark. Res. 1981, 18, 39–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sarstedt, M.; Ringle, C.M.; Hair, J.F. Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling. In Handbook of Market Research; Homburg, C., Klarmann, M., Vomberg, A.E., Eds.; Springer: Cham, The Switzerland, 2021. [Google Scholar]
- Baki, R.; Birgoren, B.; Aktepe, A. A Meta Analysis of Factors Affecting Perceived Usefulness and Perceived Ease of Use in the Adoption of E-Learning Systems. Turk. Online J. Distance Educ. 2018, 19, 4–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baron, R.M.; Kenny, D.A. The Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1986, 51, 1173–1182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gonzales, A.L. Disadvantaged Minorities’ Use of the Internet to Expand Their Social Networks. Commun. Res. 2015, 44, 467–486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mesch, G.S. Minority Status and the Use of Computer-Mediated Communication: A Test of the Social Diversification Hypothesis. Commun. Res. 2011, 39, 317–337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Liu, I.F.; Chen, M.C.; Sun, Y.S.; Wible, D.; Kuo, C.H. Extending the Tam Model to Explore the Factors that Affect Intention to Use an Online Learning Community. Comput. Educ. 2010, 54, 600–610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, H.Y.; Ahn, H.; Kim, H.K.; Lee, J. Comparative Analysis of Trust in Online Communities. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2014, 31, 1140–1149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Variable | Count | % | |
---|---|---|---|
Age | 18–23 | 33 | 21.7 |
24–29 | 76 | 50.0 | |
30–34 | 25 | 16.4 | |
35–39 | 15 | 9.9 | |
40< | 3 | 2.0 | |
Gender | Male | 54 | 35.5 |
Female | 98 | 64.5 | |
Devices for accessing the Internet | Mobile phone or smartphone | 126 | 82.9 |
Laptop | 16 | 10.5 | |
Tablet | 2 | 1.3 | |
Desktop computer | 2 | 1.3 | |
Most of the devices mentioned | 6 | 4.0 | |
Places for accessing the Internet | At home | 93 | 61.2 |
At school/university | 36 | 23.7 | |
At work | 5 | 3.3 | |
Wherever free Wi-Fi is available | 15 | 9.9 | |
Most of the places mentioned | 3 | 1.9 | |
Educational level | High school graduate | 35 | 23.0 |
Some college credit, no degree | 5 | 3.3 | |
Bachelor’s degree | 70 | 46.1 | |
Master’s degree | 40 | 26.3 | |
Doctorate degree | 2 | 1.3 | |
Internet training experience | Yes | 47 | 30.9 |
No | 105 | 69.1 | |
Purpose of stay | Studies | 121 | 79.6 |
Work | 19 | 12.5 | |
Marriage | 5 | 3.3 | |
Others | 7 | 4.6 | |
Duration of stay | Settled before COVID-19 | 42 | 27.6 |
Settled after COVID-19 | 110 | 72.4 | |
TOTAL | 152 | 100% |
Measure | Mean | SD | Loading | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Digital capital (alpha = 0.683, CR = 0.807, AVE = 0.511) | ||||
I usually access the Internet daily. | 6.947 | 0.299 | 0.696 | |
I usually access the Internet using my personal computer, tablet, or mobile phone. | 6.895 | 0.432 | 0.679 | |
I am able to use digital technologies, e.g., applications, devices, software, or e-services (non-technical) without any problem. | 6.237 | 0.930 | 0.728 | |
I have confidence in searching, browsing, and filtering data, information, and digital content. | 6.388 | 0.835 | 0.753 | |
PU of online communities (alpha = 0.756, CR = 0.845, AVE = 0.581) | ||||
Participating in online communities is more convenient than participating in offline communities. | 4.138 | 1.614 | 0.547 | |
Online communities make it easier to find information and people. | 5.809 | 1.087 | 0.752 | |
Online communities help me find information more quickly. | 6.237 | 0.923 | 0.851 | |
I think that online communities are useful. | 6.026 | 1.000 | 0.852 | |
PEOU of online communities (alpha = 0.726, CR = 0.830, AVE = 0.554) | ||||
Learning to participate in online communities is easy for me. | 5.375 | 1.371 | 0.814 | |
My interaction with online communities is clear and understandable. | 5.296 | 1.158 | 0.843 | |
Interacting with online communities does not require a lot of my mental effort. | 5.099 | 1.332 | 0.682 | |
The English or Korean language is not a barrier when I use online communities. | 5.428 | 1.440 | 0.613 | |
Online community participation after COVID-19 (alpha = 0.906, CR = 0.934, AVE = 0.779) | ||||
I actively participate in activities organized by online communities after COVID-19. | 5.533 | 1.404 | 0.824 | |
I keep myself updated with online community announcements, posts, and so on after COVID-19. | 5.454 | 1.477 | 0.851 | |
It is important to me to be a part of online communities after COVID-19. | 5.184 | 1.484 | 0.697 | |
I am with other online community members a lot and enjoy being with them after COVID-19. | 5.007 | 1.440 | 0.680 | |
Social support of online community (alpha = 0.893, CR = 0.924, AVE = 0.754) | ||||
Some online community members offer suggestions when I need help. | 5.572 | 1.151 | 0.864 | |
Some online community members give me information to help me solve my problems. | 5.579 | 1.091 | 0.870 | |
I feel that online community members listened to me. | 5.138 | 1.230 | 0.882 | |
I feel that online community members are with me. | 4.974 | 1.313 | 0.861 |
Hypotheses | StandardizedCoefficient | Hypothesis Accepted? |
---|---|---|
H1. Digital capital → PU of online communities | 0.428 *** | Yes |
H2. Digital capital → PEOU of online communities | 0.399 *** | Yes |
H3. PU of online communities → Online community participation after COVID-19 | 0.303 *** | Yes |
H4. PEOU of online communities → Online community participation after COVID-19 | 0.267 ** | Yes |
H5. Online community participation after COVID-19 → Social support of online communities | 0.450 *** | Yes |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Shin, J.; Seo, M.; Lew, Y.K. Sustainability of Digital Capital and Social Support during COVID-19: Indonesian Muslim Diaspora’s Case in South Korea. Sustainability 2022, 14, 7457. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127457
Shin J, Seo M, Lew YK. Sustainability of Digital Capital and Social Support during COVID-19: Indonesian Muslim Diaspora’s Case in South Korea. Sustainability. 2022; 14(12):7457. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127457
Chicago/Turabian StyleShin, Jiwon, Myengkyo Seo, and Yong Kyu Lew. 2022. "Sustainability of Digital Capital and Social Support during COVID-19: Indonesian Muslim Diaspora’s Case in South Korea" Sustainability 14, no. 12: 7457. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127457
APA StyleShin, J., Seo, M., & Lew, Y. K. (2022). Sustainability of Digital Capital and Social Support during COVID-19: Indonesian Muslim Diaspora’s Case in South Korea. Sustainability, 14(12), 7457. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127457