Artificial Intelligence Attitudes Inventory (AIAI): development and validation using Rasch methodology
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
With the rapid advancements in artificial intelligence (AI), it is vital to develop psychometrically sound measures of public attitudes toward this technology. The present study aimed to refine a pool of candidate items to create a concise yet robust inventory for assessing attitudes toward AI. A total of 96 items—drawn from reworded robot-related scales and newly developed items to reflect AI-specific themes—were administered to a sample of 604 adults from the general population of the United States (age range: 18–89 years; 48% male). Iterative Rasch analysis was used to reduce the number of items while ensuring psychometric robustness, applying multiple criteria for item selection including fit residuals, differential item functioning (DIF), and conceptual clarity. The resulting scale, named the Artificial Intelligence Attitudes Inventory (AIAI), consists of two 8-item subscales measuring positive and negative attitudes toward AI. Analyses revealed that these subscales are distinct constructs rather than opposites on a single continuum, and they are only weakly related to psychological distress. The AIAI provides a concise yet comprehensive measure of positive and negative attitudes toward AI that can be efficiently administered alongside other measures. The findings underscore the multifaceted nature of public perceptions of AI and highlight the need for further research into the profiles and determinants of these attitudes. As AI continues to shape our world, the AIAI offers a valuable tool for understanding and monitoring public sentiment toward this transformative technology.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Negative statements can exhibit different psychometric properties and influence scale reliability.
“Research suggests that negative statements can exhibit different psychometric properties and influence scale reliability (Krägeloh et al., 2025).”
From Development of the Artificial Intelligence Perception and Attitude Scale (AIPAS) (2025) · cites this paper as Krägeloh et al., 2025
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
A Rasch model for partial credit scoring
Masters, G. N. (1982) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02296272 · Cited by 3,782 · see citing works
Depression Anxiety Stress Scales
Lovibond, S. H., & Lovibond, P. F. (2011) · PsycTESTS Dataset · doi:10.1037/t01004-000 · Cited by 2,416 · see citing works
Cacioppo, J. T., & Berntson, G. G. (1994) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.115.3.401 · Cited by 1,782 · see citing works
Mechanisms of attentional biases towards threat in anxiety disorders: An integrative review
Cisler, J. M., & Koster, E. H. W. (2010) · Clinical Psychology Review · doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2009.11.003 · Cited by 1,753 · see citing works
Tennant, A., & Conaghan, P. G. (2007) · Arthritis Care & Research · doi:10.1002/art.23108 · Cited by 1,654 · see citing works
The Media and Technology Usage and Attitudes Scale: An empirical investigation
Rosen, L. D., Whaling, K., Carrier, L. M., Cheever, N. A., & Rokkum, J. (2013) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2013.06.006 · Cited by 788 · see citing works
Initial validation of the general attitudes towards Artificial Intelligence Scale
Schepman, A., & Rodway, P. (2020) · Computers in Human Behavior Reports · doi:10.1016/j.chbr.2020.100014 · Cited by 785 · see citing works
Christensen, K. B., Makransky, G., & Horton, M. (2016) · Applied Psychological Measurement · doi:10.1177/0146621616677520 · Cited by 702 · see citing works
Item Clusters and Computerized Adaptive Testing: A Case for Testlets
Wainer, H., & Kiely, G. L. (1987) · Journal of Educational Measurement · doi:10.1111/j.1745-3984.1987.tb00274.x · Cited by 634 · see citing works
Schepman, A., & Rodway, P. (2023) · International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2022.2085400 · Cited by 503 · see citing works
“What Can ChatGPT Do?” Analyzing Early Reactions to the Innovative AI Chatbot on Twitter
Taecharungroj, V. (2023) · Big Data and Cognitive Computing · doi:10.3390/bdcc7010035 · Cited by 489 · see citing works
Measurement of negative attitudes toward robots
Nomura, T., Suzuki, T., Kanda, T., & Kato, K. (2006) · Interaction Studies Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial Systems · doi:10.1075/is.7.3.14nom · Cited by 487 · see citing works
Making Sense of Life: The Existential Self Trying to Deal with Personal Uncertainty
van den Bos, K. (2009) · Psychological Inquiry · doi:10.1080/10478400903333411 · Cited by 395 · see citing works
Affective Arousal as Information: How Affective Arousal Influences Judgments, Learning, and Memory
Storbeck, J., & Clore, G. L. (2008) · Social and Personality Psychology Compass · doi:10.1111/j.1751-9004.2008.00138.x · Cited by 382 · see citing works
Sindermann, C., Sha, P., Zhou, M., Wernicke, J., Schmitt, H. S., Li, M., Sariyska, R., Stavrou, M., Becker, B., & Montag, C. (2021) · KI - Künstliche Intelligenz · doi:10.1007/s13218-020-00689-0 · Cited by 343 · see citing works
Attitudes towards AI: measurement and associations with personality
Stein, J.-P., Messingschlager, T., Gnambs, T., Hutmacher, F., & Appel, M. (2024) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-024-53335-2 · Cited by 309 · cited 6× · see citing works
“Lastly, the ATTARI-12 (Stein et al., 2024 ) integrates affective, behavioral, and cognitive aspects into a single measure.”
InfluentialFive-factor model personality traits as predictors of perceived and actual usage of technology
Barnett, T., Pearson, A. W., Pearson, R., & Kellermanns, F. W. (2015) · European Journal of Information Systems · doi:10.1057/ejis.2014.10 · Cited by 281 · see citing works
Forgas, J. P. (2008) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1745-6916.2008.00067.x · Cited by 277 · see citing works
Park, J., & Woo, S. E. (2022) · The Journal of Psychology · doi:10.1080/00223980.2021.2012109 · Cited by 243 · see citing works
Lundgren‐Nilsson, Å., Jónsdóttir, I. H., Ahlborg, G., & Tennant, A. (2013) · Health and Quality of Life Outcomes · doi:10.1186/1477-7525-11-2 · Cited by 150 · see citing works
Attitudes towards artificial intelligence at work: Scale development and validation
Park, J., Woo, S. E., & Kim, J. (2024) · Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology · doi:10.1111/joop.12502 · Cited by 150 · see citing works
Measuring Mindfulness: Applying Generalizability Theory to Distinguish between State and Trait
Medvedev, O. N., Krägeloh, C. U., Narayanan, A., & Siegert, R. J. (2017) · Mindfulness · doi:10.1007/s12671-017-0679-0 · Cited by 127 · see citing works
Self-citationThe acceptability of social robots: A scoping review of the recent literature
David, D., Thérouanne, P., & Milhabet, I. (2022) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2022.107419 · Cited by 113 · see citing works
Bravo, A. J., Boothe, L. G., & Pearson, M. R. (2015) · Mindfulness · doi:10.1007/s12671-015-0459-7 · Cited by 111 · see citing works
A framework of attitudes towards technology in theory and practice
Kerschner, C., & Ehlers, M. (2016) · Ecological Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.02.010 · Cited by 103 · see citing works
Questionnaires to Measure Acceptability of Social Robots: A Critical Review
Krägeloh, C. U., Bharatharaj, J., Kutty, S. K. S., Nirmala, P. R., & Huang, L. (2019) · Robotics · doi:10.3390/robotics8040088 · Cited by 89 · see citing works
Self-citationPittinsky, T. L., Rosenthal, S. A., & Montoya, R. M. (2011) · Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0023806 · Cited by 85 · see citing works
Nomura, T., Sugimoto, K., Syrdal, D. S., & Dautenhahn, K. (2012) · IEEE-RAS International Conference on Humanoid Robots (Humanoids) · doi:10.1109/humanoids.2012.6651527 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
Medvedev, O. N., & Krägeloh, C. U. (2022) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-77644-2_4-1 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
Self-citationA Brief Analysis of “ChatGPT” – A Revolutionary Tool Designed by OpenAI
Haque, M. A. (2023) · EAI Endorsed Transactions on AI and Robotics · doi:10.4108/airo.v1i1.2983 · Cited by 53 · see citing works
We Mostly Think Alike: Individual Differences in Attitude Towards AI in Sweden and Japan
Persson, A., Laaksoharju, M., & Koga, H. (2021) · The Review of Socionetwork Strategies · doi:10.1007/s12626-021-00071-y · Cited by 51 · see citing works
Hadlington, L., Binder, J. F., Gardner, S. E., Karanika‐Murray, M., & Knight, S. (2023) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1164810 · Cited by 39 · see citing works
Automation and the Individual: Comprehensive and Comparative Views
Parsons, H. M. (1985) · Human Factors The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1177/001872088502700109 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
Chalmers, R. A., Cervin, M., & Medvedev, O. N. (2022) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-77644-2_70-1 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Self-citationThe Anxiety Attitude and Belief Scale‐2: Development, Measurement Model, and Initial Validity
Brown, G. P., Hawkes, N., Cooper, A. J., Jónsdóttir, S., & Tata, P. R. (2014) · Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy · doi:10.1002/cpp.1928 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
The time is ripe for robopsychology
Krägeloh, C. U., Bharatharaj, J., Albó-Canals, J., Hannon, D., & Heerink, M. (2022) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.968382 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Self-citationBharatharaj, J., Kutty, S. K. S., Munisamy, A., & Krägeloh, C. U. (2022) · International Journal of Social Robotics · doi:10.1007/s12369-022-00921-x · Cited by 5 · see citing works
Self-citationAI in Questionnaire Creation: Guidelines Illustrated in AI Acceptability Instrument Development
Krägeloh, C. U., Alyami, M. M., & Medvedev, O. N. (2023) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-89738-3_62-1 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
Self-citationAttitudes: Attitude measurement.
Schwarz, N. (2000) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1037/10516-109 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
1 of the 40 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- Asimov, I. (2004). I, robot (Vol. 1). Spectra.
- Hadlington, L., Binder, J., Gardner, S., Karanika-Murray, M., & Knight, S. (2023). The use of artificial intelligence in a mili- tary context: Development of the attitudes toward AI in defense (AAID) scale. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1164810. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r / 1 0 . 3 3 8 9 / f p s y g . 2 0 2 3 . 1 1 6 4 8 1 · DOI
- Linacre, J. M. (1994). Sample size and item calibration [or person measure stability. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 7(4), 328.
- Lovibond, S. H., & Lovibond, P. F. (1995). Manual for the depres- sion anxiety stress scales (2nd ed.). Psychology Foundation of Australia.
- y Tennant, A., & Pallant, J. F. (2006). Unidimensionality matters! (a Tale of two Smiths?). Rasch Measurement Transactions, 20, 1048-1051. · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Being just used or truely understood: A measure of users’ collaboration intensity with Chatbots
Zabel, S., Spannbauer, C., Neef, N. E., & Otto, S. (2025) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2025.103587 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Artificial intelligence scoring attitudes: scale development and validation
BODUROĞLU, E., & YİĞİTER, M. S. (2025) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-025-13836-7 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Anxiety in the Age of AI: Constructing a Tool to Assess Public Perceptions
Hatos, A. (2025) · BRAIN BROAD RESEARCH IN ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND NEUROSCIENCE · doi:10.70594/brain/16.s1/32 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Donahue, W. (2025) · Dibon Journal of Education · doi:10.64169/dje.121 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Katsiroumpa, A., Konstantakopoulou, O., Moisoglou, I., Gallos, P., Galani, O., Lialiou, P., Tsiachri, M., & Galanis, P. (2025) · Healthcare · doi:10.3390/healthcare13243269 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Development of the Artificial Intelligence Perception and Attitude Scale (AIPAS)
Dinler, H. (2025) · Bartın University Journal of Faculty of Education · doi:10.14686/buefad.1602673 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Jekri, A., Han, C. G. K., & Shaafi, N. F. (2026) · Muallim Journal of Social Science and Humanities · doi:10.33306/mjssh/402
Teknolojik Spor Ürünleri Bağımlılığı ve Yapay Zeka Tutumu: Spor Bilimleri Öğrencilerinden Kanıtlar
Kusan, M., & Atasoy, F. S. (2026) · Yalova Üniversitesi spor bilimleri dergisi. · doi:10.70007/yalovaspor.1862727
Impacts of AI systems on occupational health and well-being: a mixed methods systematic review
Teles, J. P., & Monteiro, S. (2026) · Behaviour & Information Technology · doi:10.1080/0144929x.2026.2716291
Omnichannel AI experience and engagement intentions: validation of a multidimensional scale
Wu, H.-C., Hameed, W., Chen, Y.-C., Hapsari, R., & Hussein, A. (2026) · Current Psychology · doi:10.1007/s12144-026-10069-w
الكعبي, ع. ف., & Qutran, Y. A. (2026) · Discover Education · doi:10.1007/s44217-026-02204-3
Porwol, P., Peters, T. M., & Scharlau, I. (2026) · Computers in Human Behavior Reports · doi:10.1016/j.chbr.2026.101351
Liu, X., Zhang, Y., & Wang, H. (2026) · Journal of Sustainable Tourism · doi:10.1080/09669582.2026.2743207
- Authors
- Krägeloh, C. U., Melekhov, V., Alyami, M. M., & Medvedev, O. N.
- Affiliations
- Auckland University of Technology (NZ)
- University of Auckland (NZ)
- University of Ha'il (SA)
- University of Waikato (NZ)
- Corresponding author
- Krägeloh, Christian U.
- Venue
- Current Psychology
- Published
- 2025-06
- Volume
- 44
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 12315-12327
- ISSN
- 1046-1310 (ISSN-L)
- 1936-4733
- OpenAlex
- W4411190054
- Cited by
- 13
- References
- 40
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 6
- FWCI
- 10.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Locations
- Current Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Research Square (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
- Tuwhera (Auckland University of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Research Commons (University of Waikato) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- Auckland University of Technology
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender and Technology in Education
- Keywords
- attitudes toward AI, public attitudes toward AI, scale development, positive and negative attitudes, differential item functioning, item selection, psychological distress, technology acceptance, psychometric validation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
