## 3 Results
### Tam  
Figure 3 presents graphically the results of the TAM questionnaire prepared for this study. As presented above, it was used Likert scale from 1 to 5.  
Firstly, it measured the reliability test of the questionnaire using [PERSON]'s alpha coefficient \(Ca\), the composite reliability value \(CR\), and the Average Variance Extracted (AVE). To this end, it was used JASP and the reduction factor from SPSS (for CR and AVE values). The results of the tests demonstrated scores for all the items over the classic criterion (0.5) as shown in Table 4. The [PERSON]'s alpha coefficient for 10 items is 0.911 and the independent factors were also validated, therefore the constructs in this questionnaire show sufficient reliability. Individually, PU and PEoU present reliable values, and ATT a slightly low value (0.68); however, given the overall results and values used by the Science Education community [38] which consider reasonable this value, we will continue these constructs.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline  & **Average** & **Exception (1)** & **Exception (2)** \\ \hline Mean & 180.73 MB & 4.33 GB & 149 kB \\ \hline Mode & 5.27 MB & - & 140 kB \\ \hline Median & 149 MB & 1.66 GB & 149 kB \\ \hline Standard Deviation & 167.63 MB & 4.55 GB & 0 kB \\ \hline Minimum & 4.83 MB & 1.07 & 149 kB \\ \hline Maximum & 679 MB & 11.1 & 149 kB \\ \hline Sum & 25,121.81 MB & 25.96 GB & 447 kB \\ \hline Count & 139 & 6 & 3 \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 3: Cindy Space Consumption.  
This study proposes to perform the structural model fit testing attending the significance of the coefficients. Using the AMOS tool, it is obtained the estimated value of the coefficient, the standard error (SE), critical ratio value (CR), the probability (P) (showing *** means <0.001) for each coefficient. The relationship between factors is significant when it is obtained at the 95% confidence level. Thus, the critical ratio value (CR) is \(\geq\)1.96, and then the correlation is significant on the level \(\leq\)0.05 [39]. Table 5 presents our results where all the CRs are bigger than 1.96 and \(p\) values are under 0.05, therefore, the hypotheses formulated are accepted.  
The perceived usefulness presents a significant effect on perceived ease of use. Attitude towards technology and perceived usefulness has a strong effect on each other and perceived ease of use and attitude towards technology has also a strong effect. Table 5 presents the results of confirmatory factor analysis developed in AMOS. These values validate that our constructs variables can be reduced into three factors.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l l c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Factor** & **Estimate** & **Cronbach’s \(\mathbf{\alpha}\)** & **AIC** & **Mean** & **sd** & **CR** & **AVE** \\ \hline Overall & Point estimate & 0.911 & 0.513 & 3.883 & 0.287 & & \\ \hline PU & Point estimate & 0.890 & 0.746 & 3.650 & 0.185 & 0.860 & 0.672 \\ PEoU & Point estimate & 0.889 & 0.674 & 4.067 & 0.307 & 0.893 & 0.678 \\ ATT & Point estimate & 0.681 & 0.420 & 3.870 & 0.214 & 0.832 & 0.633 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 4: Frequentist Scale Reliability Statistics. PU: Perceived Usability, PEoU: Perceived Ease of Use, ATT: Attitude Towards Technology, AIC: Average Inter-item Correlation.  
Figure 3: TAM questionnaire answers in percentage.  
These three factors--perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and attitude towards technology--have exhibited a stronger effect on user's attitudes and behavioral intention to use CINDY. This implies that perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use are two crucial factors to guarantee SUFFER adoption in the course.