Digital Media are massively being used in educational institutions and society, and this leads a transforming way of learning and studying not only inside but also outside educational institutions. When the so-called “Web 2.0” technologies are increasingly becoming popular among students’ daily life. Learning with digital media is becoming a central part of student’s daily life as a form of informal learning (Selwyn, 2010). Informal learning process and structure is self-directed and characterized by intentional interest (rather than curriculum-based), non-assessment-driven and non-qualification-oriented.  Current research suggests that students have a great diversity of technology use and types of technologies adopted into formal learning (Corrin, Bennett, & Lockyer, 2010), but the understanding of learning with digital media from informal learning is still limited. University students’ lives nowadays are saturated with digital media, they develop their experience and knowledge of digital media in out-of-school settings, the way of their learning is clearly different from how they use digital media in school. The present study aims to determine factors influencing university students’ learning with digital media in informal learning contexts. The results provide support for the importance of an intrinsic and extrinsic motivation construct to explain influence on students' digital informal learning behavior.

The theoretical basis used in this study is based on the Decomposed Theory of Planned Behavior (Taylor & Todd, 1995). The model was adapted to match with the specificity of digital learning processes. First , we replaced the self-efficacy latent variable as digital competence variable since digital competence is students’ ability to achieve with digital technology (Hatlevik & Christophersen, 2013), which is more related to students perceived competence to digital media. Informal learning is a learner’s control process, which including the control over the process and the goals(Naismith, Sharples, Vavoula, & Lonsdale, 2004), intrinsic motivation is often higher than in formal settings where goals are pre-set(A. C. Jones, Scanlon, & Clough, 2013). Therefore, we replaced the perceived ease of use variable of use as perceived enjoyment which is more intrinsic related. And also which positively influence attitude to technologies in previous study.

 In addition, we remained other latent variables based on the theory background, developed new items to specific digital informal learning: 1, Attitude variable (Taylor & Todd, 1995), in this study, attitude refers to the students’ feelings about using digital technologies for informal learning. 2, Compatibility, which describes the degree to which technology adoption fits the task, values, and needs of the user (Roger, 2003). 3, Perceived Usefulness, which defined as the subjective probability that using a digital media will increase his or her job performance. 4, Subjective norms, which describes a person’s perceptions of whether other people believe s/he should or should not perform a particular behavior (Ajzen, 1991). 5, Facilitating Conditions, which describes the necessary resources to engage in a behavior (Ajzen, 1991; Taylor & Todd, 1995). 6, Perceived Behavioral Control, which reflects the level of control individuals feel they have over their own behavior. 7, Behavior Intension, in this study, which is concerned with motivational factors related to students’ intentions to use digital media in informal learning. 8. Actual Behavior, which describes the extent that actual use of digital media in informal learning.

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. Chin, W., Marcolin, B. L., & Newsted, P. R. (2003). A partial least squares latent variable modeling approach for measuring interaction effects: Results from a Monte Carlo simulation study and an electronic-mail emotion / adoption study. Information Systems Research, 14, 189–217. doi:10.1287/isre.14.2.189.16018 Corrin, L., Bennett, S., & Lockyer, L. (2010). Digital natives : Everyday life versus academic study. In 7th International Conference on Networked Learning (pp. 643–650). Lai, C., Wang, Q., & Lei, J. (2012). What factors predict undergraduate students’ use of technology for learning? A case from Hong Kong. Computers & Education, 59(2), 569–579. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.03.006 Lai, K., Khaddage, F., & Knezek, G. (2013). Blending student technology experiences in formal and informal learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(5), 414–425. Meyers, E. M., Erickson, I., & Small, R. V. (2013). Digital literacy and informal learning environments: an introduction. Learning, Media and Technology, 38(4), 355–367. doi:10.1080/17439884.2013.783597 Selwyn, N. (2010). Web 2.0 applications as alternative environments for Informal Learning - a Critical Review. Paper for OECDKERIS Expert Meeting Session 6 Alternative Learning Environments in Practice Using ICT to Change Impact and Outcomes, 1–10. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/32/3/39458556.pdf Taylor, S., & Todd, P. (1995). Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing models. Information Systems Research, 6, 144–176. Thompson, P. (2013). The digital natives as learners: Technology use patterns and approaches to learning. Computers & Education, 65(0), 12–33. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.12.022