Understanding Gen Z Preferences for Features of Online Learning Platforms through Conjoint Analysis

Emmanuel Joseph Sumatra

doi:10.55927/eajmr.v4i4.120

Authors

Emmanuel Joseph Sumatra Ateneo de Davao University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55927/eajmr.v4i4.120

Keywords:

Generation Z, Online Learning Platforms, Student Preferences, Digital Learning, Conjoint Analysis

Abstract

This study explores the online learning platform preferences of Generation Z college students in the Philippines using Conjoint Analysis with the PAPRIKA method, grounded in Multi-Attribute Utility Theory (MAUT) and the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). Analyzing key attributes—content delivery format, course scheduling, accessibility, user interface, assessments, and support—based on 744 valid responses, it reveals that Flexibility in Course Schedule and Multi-device Accessibility are the most valued features. The study identifies Platform 144 as the most preferred, offering a combination of text-based materials, mixed scheduling, multi-device synchronization, and community support. Findings highlight the need for platforms to balance autonomy with engagement, emphasizing flexibility, user-friendly interfaces, and collaborative features to enhance learning outcomes and meet the unique needs of Gen Z learners.

References

Agarwal, H. (2021). Breaking the Mould & Rewiring Management Education. International Journal of Management and Development Studies. https://doi.org/10.53983/ijmds.v10n11.003

Barman, D., & Kumar Roy, S. (2023). The Transition from Offline to Online: Unveiling the Challenges and Opportunities. International Journal For Multidisciplinary Research. https://doi.org/10.36948/ijfmr.2023.v05i04.4444

Cano, J.S. (2023). A Conjoint Study and Segmentation on the Preferred Online Learning Attributes of Senior High School Learners. International Journal on Open and Distance e-Learning. https://doi.org/10.58887/ijodel.v9i1.108

Chen, S., Li, S., & Li, C. (2012). RECENT RELATED RESEARCH IN TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE MODEL: A LITERATURE REVIEW. Australian Journal of Business and Management Research. https://doi.org/10.52283/nswrca.ajbmr.20110109a14

Chunta, K.S., Shellenbarger, T., & Chicca, J. (2020). Generation Z Students in the Online Environment: Strategies for Nurse Educators. Nurse Educator. https://doi.org/10.1097/NNE.0000000000000872

Cilliers, E.J. (2017). THE CHALLENGE OF TEACHING GENERATION Z. PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences, 3, 188-198. https://doi.org/10.20319/PIJSS.2017.31.188198

Dahlquist, S., & Garver, M.S. (2022). Effects of Product and Product Company Information on Generation Zs’ Purchasing Preferences. American Business Review. https://doi.org/10.37625/abr.25.1.209-220

Davis, F. D. (1986). A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: Theory and results (Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology).

Dimitrovski, T., Ketikidis, P.H., Lazuras, L., Bath, P.A., & Court, R. (2013). Adoption of Electronic Health Records (EHRs): A Review of Technology Acceptance Studies.

Ding, M., Grewal, R., & Liechty, J.C. (2005). Incentive-Aligned Conjoint Analysis. Journal of Marketing Research, 42, 67 - 82. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.42.1.67.56890

Feubli, P., MacKevett, D., & Schwarz, J. (2023). Hybrid teaching and learning: A conjoint analysis of student preferences in online and onsite scenarios. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 40(2), 761–774. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12913

Garai-Fodor, M., & Csercsa, K. (2022). Perceptions of the digital generation and the millennials on online education during the pandemic. 2022 IEEE 20th Jubilee World Symposium on Applied Machine Intelligence and Informatics (SAMI), 000187-000192. https://doi.org/10.1109/SAMI54271.2022.9780720

Garmabaki, A.H.S., Ahmadi, A., Ahmadi, M. (2016). Maintenance Optimization Using Multi-attribute Utility Theory. In: Kumar, U., Ahmadi, A., Verma, A., Varde, P. (eds) Current Trends in Reliability, Availability, Maintainability and Safety. Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-23597-4_2

Giessmann, A., & Stanoevska-Slabeva, K. (2012). Platform as a Service - A Conjoint Study on Consumers' Preferences. International Conference on Interaction Sciences.

Green, P. E., & Srinivasan, V. (1990). Conjoint Analysis in Marketing: New Developments with Implications for Research and Practice. Journal of Marketing, 54(4), 3–19. https://doi.org/10.2307/1251756

Gumasing, M.J., Ong, A.K., & Bare, M.A. (2022). User Preference Analysis of a Sustainable Workstation Design for Online Classes: A Conjoint Analysis Approach. Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141912346

Hansen, P., & Ombler, F. (2008). A new method for scoring multi-attribute value models using pairwise rankings of alternatives. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 15(3-4), 87-107. https://doi.org/10.1002/mcda.428

Holden, R. J., & Karsh, B.-T. (2010). The technology acceptance model: Its past and its future in healthcare. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 43(1), 159–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2009.07.002

Jushermi, J., Turnip, Y. D., & Musfar, T. F. (2024). Acceptance model for utilizing e-marketplace Tokopedia with technology acceptance model among Pekanbaru city communities. West Science Business and Management, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.58812/wsbm.v2i01.562

Keeney, R. L., & Raiffa, H. (1993). Decisions with multiple objectives: Preferences and value tradeoffs. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139174084

Kowitlawakul, Y. (2011). The Technology Acceptance Model: Predicting Nurses' Intention to Use Telemedicine Technology (eICU). CIN: Computers, Informatics, Nursing, 29, 411-418. https://doi.org/10.1097/NCN.0b013e3181f9dd4a

Kuzmanović, M., Andjelković-Labrović, J., & Nikodijević, A. (2019). Designing e-learning environment based on student preferences: Conjoint analysis approach. International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science Engineering and Education. https://doi.org/10.5937/ijcrsee1903037k

Lee, S.H. (2018). Guest preferences for service recovery procedures: conjoint analysis. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Insights. https://doi.org/10.1108/JHTI-01-2018-0008

Licas, P.Z., & Torres, G.C. (2024). Feedback preferences of generation Z nursing students: A conjoint analysis. Teaching and Learning in Nursing. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.teln.2024.01.012

Malak, R. J., Aughenbaugh, J. M., & Paredis, C. J. J. (2009). Multi-attribute utility analysis in set-based conceptual design. Computer-Aided Design, 41(3), 214–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cad.2008.06.004

Malhotra, Y., & Galletta, D.F. (1999). Extending the technology acceptance model to account for social influence: theoretical bases and empirical validation. Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences. 1999. HICSS-32. Abstracts and CD-ROM of Full Papers, Track1, 14 pp.-. https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.1999.772658

Mellman, L., Williams, M.K., & Slykhuis, D.A. (2021). Using Generation Z's Learning Approaches to Create Meaningful Online Learning. Handbook of Research on Transforming Teachers’ Online Pedagogical Reasoning for Engaging K-12 Students in Virtual Learning. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-7222-1.ch008

Moslem, S., Ghorbanzadeh, O., Blaschke, T., & Duleba, S. (2019). Analysing stakeholder consensus for a sustainable transport development decision by the fuzzy AHP and interval AHP. Sustainability, 11(12), 3271. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11123271

Naim, M.F. (2021). Exploring Learning Preferences of Gen Z Employees. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-6440-0.CH001

Nebeker, C., Leavy, V., Roitmann, E., & Steinhubl, S. S. (2020). Ethical considerations when creating evidence from real world digital health data. medRxiv. https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.01.16.20017806

Oliver, P. (2003). The student’s guide to research ethics. Open University Press.

Ong, A. K. S., Prasetyo, Y. T., Young, M. N., Diaz, J. F. T., Chuenyindee, T., Kusonwattana, P., Yuduang, N., Nadlifatin, R., & Redi, A. A. N. P. (2021). Students’ Preference Analysis on Online Learning Attributes in Industrial Engineering Education during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Conjoint Analysis Approach for Sustainable Industrial Engineers. Sustainability, 13(15), 8339. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13158339

Postolov, K., Sopova, M.M., & Iliev, A.J. (2017). E-Learning In The Hands Of Generation Y And Z. https://doi.org/10.22598/PI-BE/2017.11.2.107

Prion, S., & Haerling, K. A. (2014). Making sense of methods and measurement: Spearman-rho ranked-order correlation coefficient. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 10(10), 535-536.

Rulinawaty, Cakranegara, P. A., Juharsah, J., Toding, A., Nugraha, M. T., & Rahim, R. (2022). Multi-attribute utility theory algorithm for selection of two-wheeled vehicles: Educational review process. Webology, 19(1), 5611–5620. https://doi.org/10.14704/WEB/V19I1/WEB19379

Strudwick, G. (2015). Predicting Nurses’ Use of Healthcare Technology Using the Technology Acceptance Model: An Integrative Review. CIN: Computers, Informatics, Nursing, 33, 189–198. https://doi.org/10.1097/CIN.0000000000000142

Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F.D. (2000). A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies. Management Science, 46, 186-204. https://doi.org/10.1287/MNSC.46.2.186.11926

Wallenius, J., Dyer, J. S., Fishburn, P. C., Steuer, R. E., Zionts, S., & Deb, K. (2008). Multiple criteria decision making, multiattribute utility theory: Recent accomplishments and what lies ahead. Management Science, 54(7), 1336–1349. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1070.0838

Yandug, J.S., Costales, E.M., & Ong, A.K. (2023). A Conjoint Analysis Approach, Implications, and Mitigation Plans in Analyzing Students’ Preferences for Online Learning Delivery Types during the COVID-19 Pandemic for Engineering Students: A Case Study in the Philippines. Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15065513

Yu, E. (2020). Student-Inspired Optimal Design of Online Learning for Generation Z. Journal of Educators Online, 17.

Zietsman, J., Rilett, L. R., & Kim, S. J. (2006). Transportation corridor decision-making with multi-attribute utility theory. International Journal of Management and Decision Making, 7(2-3), 254–266. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMDM.2006.009147