Joosten-ten Brinke, D., van Bruggen, J., Hermans, H., Burgers, J., Giesbers, B., Koper, R. and Latour, I. (2007) Modeling Assessment for Re-Use of Traditional and New Types of Assessment. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 2721-2741. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2006.08.009
 Siozos, P., Palaigeorgiou, G., Triantafyllakos, G. and Despotakis, T. (2009) Computer Based Testing Using “Digital Ink”: Participatory Design of a Tablet PC Based Assessment Application for Secondary Education. Computers & Education, 52, 811-819. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.12.006
 Moridis, C.N. and Economides, A.A. (2009) Mood Recognition during Online Self-Assessment Test. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 2, 50-61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2009.12
 Terzis, V. and Economides, A.A. (2011) The Acceptance and Use of Computer Based Assessment. Computers & Education, 56, 1032-1044. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.11.017
 Maqableh, M. (2012) Analysis and Design Security Primitives Based on Chaotic Systems for eCommerce. Durham University.
 Karajeh, H., Maqableh, M. and Masa’deh, R. (2014) A Review on Stereoscopic 3D: Home Entertainment for the Twenty First Century. 3D Research-Springer, 5, 1-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13319-014-0026-3
 Deutsch, T., Herrmann, K., Frese, T. and Sandholzer, H. (2012) Implementing Computer-Based Assessment—A Web-Based Mock Examination Changes Attitudes. Computers and Education, 58, 1068-1075. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.11.013
 Masa’deh, R. (2013) A Structural Equation Modeling Approach for Determining Antecedents and Outcomes of Students’ Attitude toward Mobile Commerce Adoption. Life Science Journal, 10, 2321-2333.
 Sieber, V. and Young, D. (2008) Factors Associated with the Successful Introduction of On-Line Diagnostic, Formative and Summative Assessment in the Medical Sciences Division University of Oxford, 267-278. http://caaconference.co.uk/pastConferences/2008/proceedings/Seiber_V_Young_D_final_formatted_
 Ko, C.C. and Cheng, C.D. (2008) Flexible and Secure Computer-Based Assessment Using a Single Zip Disk. Computers and Education, 50, 915-926. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2006.09.010
 Davis, F.D. (1989) Perceived Usefulness Perceived Ease of Use and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, 13, 319-340. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/249008
 Venkatesh, V. and Davis, F.D. (1996) A Model of the Antecedents of Perceived Ease of Use: Development and Test. Decision Science, 27, 451-481. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1996.tb01822.x
 Kreiter, C.D., Ferguson, K. and Gruppen, L.D. (1999) Evaluating the Usefulness of Computerized Adaptive Testing for Medical In-Course Assessment. Academic Medicine: Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, 74, 1125-1128. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00001888-199910000-00016
 Terzis, V., Moridis, C.N. and Economides, A.A. (2012) How Student’s Personality Traits Affect Computer Based Assessment Acceptance: Integrating BFI with CBAAM. Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 1985-1996.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.05.019
 Terzis, V., Moridis, C.N. and Economides, A.A. (2013) Continuance Acceptance of Computer Based Assessment through the Integration of User’s Expectations and Perceptions. Computers and Education, 62, 50-61.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.018
 Thelwall, M. (2000) Computer-Based Assessment: A Versatile Educational Tool. Computers & Education, 34, 37-49.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0360-1315(99)00037-8
 Jantz, C., Anderson, J. and Gould, S.M. (2002) Using Computer-Based Assessments to Evaluate Interactive Multimedia Nutrition Education among Low-Income Predominantly Hispanic Participants. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 34, 252-260. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1499-4046(06)60103-6
 He, L. and Brandt, P. (2007) WEAS: A Web-Based Educational Assessment System. Proceedings of the 45th Annual Southeast Regional Conference, ACM, New York, 126-131. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1233341.1233365
 JImoh, R.G., Yussuff, M.A., Akanmu, M.A., Enikuomehin, A.O. and Salman, I.R. (2011) Acceptability of Computer Based Testing (CBT) Mode for Undergraduate Courses in Computer Science. Journal of Science, Technology, Mathematics and Education (JOSTMED), 7, 11-20.
 Saleem, H., Beaudry, A. and Croteau, A.M. (2011) Antecedents of Computer Self-Efficacy: A Study of the Role of Personality Traits and Gender. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 1922-1936.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.04.017
 Alquraan, M.F. (2012) Methods of Assessing Students’ Learning in Higher Education: An Analysis of Jordanian College and Grading System. Education, Business and Society: Contemporary Middle Eastern Issues, 5, 124-133.http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17537981211251160
 Jimoh, R.G., Shittu, A.K. and Kawu, Y.K. (2012) Students’ Perception of Computer Based Test (CBT) for Examining Undergraduate Chemistry Courses. Journal of Emerging Trends in Computing and Information Sciences, 3, 125-134.
 Van Der Kleij, F.M., Eggen, T.J.H.M., Timmers, C.F. and Veldkamp, B.P. (2012) Effects of Feedback in a Computer-Based Assessment for Learning. Computers and Education, 58, 263-272.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.07.020
 Quellmalz, E. (2014) Computer-Based Assessment. In: Gunston, R., Ed., Encyclopedia of Science Education SE-44-2, Springer, Dordrecht, 1-6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6165-0_44-2
 Terzis, V., Moridis, C.N., Economides, A.A. and Mendez, G.R. (2013) Computer Based Assessment Acceptance: A Cross-Cultural Study in Greece and Mexico. Educational Technology and Society, 16, 411-424.
 Abduh, H.Y., Hussin, R., Bin, C. and Dahlan, H.M. (2014) Technology Acceptance for CBT in Secondary Schools of Saudi Arabia, 3-6.
 Huff, K.C. (2015) The Comparison of Mobile Devices to Computers for Web-Based Assessments. Computers in Human Behavior, 49, 208-212. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.03.008
 Timmers, C.F., Walraven, A. and Veldkamp, B.P. (2015) The Effect of Regulation Feedback in a Computer-Based Formative Assessment on Information Problem Solving. Computers & Education, 87, 1-9.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.03.012
 Landry, B.J.L., Griffeth, R. and Hartman, S. (2006) Measuring Student Perceptions of Blackboard Using the Technology Acceptance Model. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 4, 87-99.http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4609.2006.00103.x
 Terzis, V., Moridis, C.N. and Economides, A.A. (2011) The Extension of the Computer Based Assessment Acceptance Model with Perceived Importance. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Interactive Computer-Aided Blended Learning, Antigua Guatemala, 2-4 November 2011.
 Liao, H.L. and Lu, H.P. (2008) The Role of Experience and Innovation Characteristics in the Adoption and Continued Use of E-Learning Websites. Computers and Education, 51, 1405-1416.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2007.11.006
 Teo, T. (2009) Modeling Technology Acceptance in Education: A Study of Pre-Service Teachers. Computers & Education, 52, 302-312. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.08.006
 Mayer, R.E. (2002) A Taxonomy for Computer-Based Assessment of Problem Solving. Computers in Human Behavior, 18, 623-632. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0747-5632(02)00020-1
 Gikandi, J.W., Morrow, D. and Davis, N.E. (2011) Online Formative Assessment in Higher Education: A Review of the Literature. Computers and Education, 57, 2333-2351. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.06.004
 Terzis, V. and Economides, A.A. (2011) Computer Based Assessment: Gender Differences in Perceptions and Acceptance. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 2108-2122. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.06.005
 Nirmalakhandan, N. (2013) Improving Problem-Solving Skills of Undergraduates through Computerized Dynamic Assessment. Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences, 83, 615-621. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.06.117
 Pilli, O. and Aksu, M. (2013) The Effects of Computer-Assisted Instruction on the Achievement, Attitudes and Retention of Fourth Grade Mathematics Students in North Cyprus. Computers and Education, 62, 62-71.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.010
 Moon, J.W. and Kim, Y.G. (2001) Extending the TAM for a World-Wide-Web Context. Information and Management, 38, 217-230. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7206(00)00061-6
 Malone, T.W. (1981) Toward a Theory of Intrinsically Motivating Instruction. Cognitive Science: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 5, 333-369. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0504_2
 Lee, Y.C. (2008) The Role of Perceived Resources in Online Learning Adoption. Computers and Education, 50, 1423-1438. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2007.01.001
 Ong, C.S. and Lai, J.Y. (2006) Gender Differences in Perceptions and Relationships among Dominants of E-Learning Acceptance. Computers in Human Behavior, 22, 816-829. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2004.03.006
 Van Raaij, E.M. and Schepers, J.J.L. (2008) The Acceptance and Use of a Virtual Learning Environment in China. Computers & Education, 50, 838-852. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2006.09.001
 Agarwal, R. and Prasad, J. (1999) Are Individual Differences Germane to the Acceptance of New Information Technologies? Decision Sciences, 30, 361-391. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1999.tb01614.x
 Agarwal, R., Sambamurthy, V. and Stair, R.M. (2000) Research Report: The Evolving Relationship between General and Specific Computer Self-Efficacy? An Empirical Assessment. Information Systems Research, 11, 418-430.http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/isre.11.4.418.11876
 Garrido-Moreno, A., Padilla-Mele, A. and Del Aguila-Obra, A.R. (2008) Factors Affecting E-Collaboration Technology Use among Management Students. Computers & Education, 51, 609-623.
 Karahanna, E. and Straub, D.W. (1999) The Psychological Origins of Perceived Usefulness and Ease-of-Use. Information & Management, 35, 237-250. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7206(98)00096-2
 Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, G.B. and Davis, F.D. (2003) User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View. MIS Quarterly, 27, 425-478.
 Wang, Y.-S., Cheng, M. and Wang, H.-Y. (2008) Investigating the Determinants and Age and Gender Differences in the Acceptance of Mobile Learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40, 92-118.
 Smith, P.J., Smith, P.J., Murphy, K.L., Murphy, K.L., Mahoney, S.E. and Mahoney, S.E. (2003) Towards Identifying Factors Underlying Readiness for Online Learning: An Exploratory Study. Distance Education, 24, 57-67.http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01587910303043
 Yi, M.Y. and Hwang, Y. (2003) Predicting the Use of Web-Based Information Systems: Self-Efficacy, Enjoyment, Learning Goal Orientation, and the Technology Acceptance Model. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 59, 431-449. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1071-5819(03)00114-9
 Shih, H.P. (2008) Using a Cognition-Motivation-Control View to Assess the Adoption Intention for Web-Based Learning. Computers and Education, 50, 327-337. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2006.06.001
 Vroom, V.H. (1964) Work and Motivation. 14th Edition, Wiley, New York.
 Cahill, S.E. and Bandura, A. (1987) Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Contemporary Sociology, 16, 12. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2071177
 Ong, C.S., Lai, J.Y. and Wang, Y.S. (2004) Factors Affecting Engineers’ Acceptance of Asynchronous E-Learning Systems in High-Tech Companies. Information and Management, 41, 795-804.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2003.08.012
 Weinerth, K., Koenig, V., Brunner, M. and Martin, R. (2014) Concept Maps: A Useful and Usable Tool for Computer-Based Knowledge Assessment? A Literature Review with a Focus on Usability. Computers and Education, 78, 201-209. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.06.002
 Byrne, B.M. (2001) Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS: Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Mahwah.
 Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., Anderson, R., Tatham, R. and Black, W. (2010) Multivariate Data Analysis. 7th edition, Prentice-Hall International Inc., Upper Saddle River.
 Kline, R.B. (2005) Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. 2nd Edition, The Guilford Press, New York.
 Kline, R.B. (2010) Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. The Guilford Press, New York.
 Krejcie, R.V. and Morgan, D.W. (1970) Determining Sample Size for Research Activities. Education and Psychological Measurement, 30, 607-610.
 Pallant, J. (2005) SPSS Survival Guide—A Step by Step Guide to Data Analysis Using SPSS for Windows. Open University Press, Chicago.
 Newkirk, H.E., Newkirk, H.E., Lederer, A.L. and Lederer, A.L. (2006) The Effectiveness of Strategic Information Systems Planning under Environmental Uncertainty. Information & Management, 43, 481-501.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2005.12.001
 Arbuckle, J.L. (2009) Amos 18 User’s Guide, 635.
 Chou, T.C., Chang, P.L., Cheng, Y.P. and Tsai, C.T. (2007) A Path Model Linking Organizational Knowledge Attributes, Information Processing Capabilities, and Perceived Usability. Information and Management, 44, 408-417.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2007.03.003
 Bagozzi, R. and Yi, Y. (1988) On the Evaluation of Structural Equation Models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16, 74-94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02723327
 Holmes-Smith, P. (2001) Introduction to Structural Equation Modeling Using LISREL. ACSPRI Winter Training Program, Perth.
 Creswell, J.W. (2014) Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches. Sage, Los Angeles.
 Sekaran, U. (2003) Research Methods for Business: A Skill-Building Approach. 4th Edition, John Wiley and Sons, New York.
 Sekaran, U. and Roger, B. (2013) Research Methods for Business: A Skill-Building Approach. 6th Edition, John Wiley & Sons, West Sussex.
 Blumberg, B., Cooper, D.R. and Schindler, P.S. (2005) Business Research Methods. McGraw Hill, Berkshire, 770.
 Gefen, D., Straub, D.W. and Boudreau, M.B. (2000) Structural Equation Modeling and Regression: Guidelines for Research Practice. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 4, 1-76.http://www.cis.gsu.edu/~dstraub/Papers/Resume/Gefenetal2000.pdf
 Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981) Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research (JMR), 18, 39-50.