## 4 Results  
### Reliability and Validity Analyses  
Utilizing SPSS 28.0, this study employed Cronbach's alpha to assess the internal consistency of the scale. Generally, a Cronbach's alpha above 0.7 signifies strong consistency within the scale ([PERSON] et al., 2020). The data analysis results in Table 1 reveal that the Cronbach's alpha values for each construct--system quality, information quality, socialized interaction, perceived autonomy, perceived competence, intrinsic motivation, perceived usefulness, satisfaction, and continuance intention--as well as for the overall questionnaire, are 0.892, 0.907, 0.877, 0.878, 0.847, 0.826, 0.888, 0.887, 0.878, and 0.988, respectively. Therefore, with each construct and the entire questionnaire exceeding a [PERSON]'s alpha of 0.8, it can be inferred that the scale utilized in this research exhibits high reliability.  
Before performing factor analysis, it is essential to evaluate its suitability using the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure and [PERSON]'s test of sphericity. Typically, a KMO value greater than 0.9 indicates a high suitability for factor analysis; values between 0.8 and 0.9 suggest that factor analysis is appropriate; values between 0.7 and 0.8 indicate moderate suitability ([PERSON] et al., 2020). Additionally, [PERSON]'s test of sphericity assesses the validity of the factor analysis. A significance value (Sig.) less than 0.05 indicates correlations among the variables and thus supports the factor analysis. In this study, after conducting the factor analysis (Table 1), it was found that the KMO values demonstrate good structural validity, confirming the appropriateness of factor analysis for the variables. Furthermore, the questionnaire's passage of the validity test indicates correlations among the variables, as shown by [PERSON]'s test of sphericity with a significance value below 0.05. In conclusion, based on the factor analysis results, the questionnaire successfully p  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{3}{*}{**Construct**} & **Cronbach’s Alpha** & **Standardized** & \multirow{3}{*}{**KMO**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Barlett Sphericity Test**} & \multirow{3}{*}{**Structural Validity**} \\ \cline{3-3} \cline{5-7}  & & & & & **Chi-Square** & & **Degree of Freedom** & **Cleveland** \\ \hline SQ & 0.892 & 0.892 & 0.840 & 874.089 & 6 & 0.000 & Favorable \\ IQ & 0.907 & 0.907 & 0.889 & 1181.136 & 10 & 0.000 & Favorable \\ SI & 0.877 & 0.877 & 0.826 & 776.124 & 6 & 0.000 & Favorable \\ PA & 0.878 & 0.878 & 0.838 & 774.598 & 6 & 0.000 & Favorable \\ PC & 0.847 & 0.847 & 0.731 & 483.200 & 3 & 0.000 & Favorable \\ IM & 0.826 & 0.826 & 0.716 & 428.650 & 3 & 0.000 & Favorable \\ PU & 0.888 & 0.888 & 0.837 & 851.590 & 6 & 0.000 & Favorable \\ SA & 0.887 & 0.887 & 0.831 & 843.397 & 6 & 0.000 & Favorable \\ CI & 0.878 & 0.878 & 0.835 & 783.863 & 6 & 0.000 & Favorable \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 1: Results of confidence analysis and validity analysis.  
We further assessed the reliability of the questionnaire using Amos 26.0 software, focusing on two indicators: the Composite Reliability (CR) and Average Variance Extracted (AVE). Generally, a CR value exceeding 0.7 and an AVE value above 0.5 indicate an acceptable consistency among the measurement variables [61]. Following the data analysis, it was observed that both the CR and AVE values surpass the recommended thresholds of 0.7 and 0.5, respectively (see Table 2). This finding suggests that the internal consistency of the questionnaire items is high, thereby demonstrating acceptable reliability.