The DOI matches its Crossref record, with a small difference in title or year; 61 of the 62 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 1 are not checked yet.
What Explains Teachers’ Trust in AI in Education Across Six Countries?
Open accessAbstract
With growing expectations to use AI-based educational technology (AI-EdTech) to improve students’ learning outcomes and enrich teaching practice, teachers play a central role in the adoption of AI-EdTech in classrooms. Teachers’ willingness to accept vulnerability by integrating technology into their everyday teaching practice, that is, their trust in AI-EdTech, will depend on how much they expect it to benefit them versus how many concerns it raises for them. In this study, we surveyed 508 K-12 teachers across six countries on four continents to understand which teacher characteristics shape teachers’ trust in AI-EdTech, and its proposed antecedents, perceived benefits and concerns about AI-EdTech. We examined a comprehensive set of characteristics including demographic and professional characteristics (age, gender, subject, years of experience, etc.), cultural values (Hofstede’s cultural dimensions), geographic locations (Brazil, Israel, Japan, Norway, Sweden, USA), and psychological factors (self-efficacy and understanding). Using multiple regression analysis, we found that teachers with higher AI-EdTech self-efficacy and AI understanding perceive more benefits, fewer concerns, and report more trust in AI-EdTech. We also found geographic and cultural differences in teachers’ trust in AI-EdTech, but no demographic differences emerged based on their age, gender, or level of education. The findings provide a comprehensive, international account of factors associated with teachers’ trust in AI-EdTech. Efforts to raise teachers’ understanding of, and trust in AI-EdTech, while considering their cultural values are encouraged to support its adoption in K-12 education.
Overview
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
Verification
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Existing research on teachers' trust in GenAI-based educational tools largely centers on K-12 education [13, 82, 83, 94, 114].”
From Understanding the Practices, Perceptions, and (Dis)Trust of Generative AI among Instructors: A Mixed-methods Study in the U.S. Higher Education (2025) · cites this paper as [114]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
mice: Multivariate Imputation by Chained Equations in R
Buuren, S. V., & Groothuis-Oudshoorn, K. (2011) · Journal of Statistical Software · doi:10.18637/jss.v045.i03 · Cited by 13,870
An integrative model of organizational trust
Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258792 · Cited by 10,736
Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change
Bandura, A. (1978) · Advances in Behaviour Research and Therapy · doi:10.1016/0146-6402(78)90002-4 · Cited by 10,586
Moore, G. C., & Benbasat, I. (1991) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.2.3.192 · Cited by 9,150
Zawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M., & Gouverneur, F. (2019) · International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education · doi:10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0 · Cited by 7,242 · cited 1×
“Over the last decade, artificial intelligence-based educational technology (AI-EdTech) has been increasingly used in K-12 (kindergarten, primary and secondary) education across many countries (Holmes et al., 2022; UNESCO, 2023; Zawacki-Richter et al., 2019).”
On the Dangers of Stochastic Parrots: Can Language Models Be Too Big? 🦜
Bender, E. M., Gebru, T., McMillan-Major, A., & Shmitchell, S. (2021) · Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency · doi:10.1145/3442188.3445922 · Cited by 6,988 · cited 1×
“Given the inherent challenges in uncertainty avoidance with these technologies (Bender et al., 2021), their integration into AI-EdTech requires careful investigation.”
(2010) · Cited by 3,924
Algorithm aversion: People erroneously avoid algorithms after seeing them err.
Dietvorst, B. J., Simmons, J. P., & Massey, C. (2015) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: General · doi:10.1037/xge0000033 · Cited by 3,232 · cited 1×
“Concerns about AI have also been framed more broadly as algorithm aversion in AI-adoption research in other domains (Dietvorst et al., 2015).”
Human trust in artificial intelligence: Review of empirical research
Glikson, E., & Woolley, A. W. (2020) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/annals.2018.0057 · Cited by 2,921
TRUST: THE CONNECTING LINK BETWEEN ORGANIZATIONAL THEORY AND PHILOSOPHICAL ETHICS
Hosmer, L. T. (1995) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1995.9507312923 · Cited by 2,323
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Slovic, 1993, Perceived risk, trust, and democracy, Risk Analysis, 13, 675, 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1993.tb01329.x · DOI
- Wang, 2021, Factors affecting the adoption of ai-based applications in higher education, Educational Technology & Society, 24, 116
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Feldman-Maggor, Y., Cukurova, M., Kent, C., & Alexandron, G. (2025) · International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education · doi:10.1007/s40593-025-00486-6 · Cited by 97
Self-citationLyu, W., Zhang, S., Chung, T., Sun, Y., & Zhang, Y. (2025) · Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100383 · Cited by 68
Harvey, E., Koenecke, A., & Kizilcec, R. F. (2025) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3706598.3713210 · Cited by 57
Self-citationLelescu, A., Sava, S., Grosseck, G., & Maliţa, L. (2025) · Humanities and Social Sciences Communications · doi:10.1057/s41599-025-06253-1 · Cited by 43
Alqurni, J. S. (2026) · Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.3389/frai.2026.1738774 · Cited by 41
Metadata
- Authors
- Viberg, O., Cukurova, M., Feldman-Maggor, Y., Alexandron, G., Shirai, S., Kanemune, S., Wasson, B., Tømte, C., Spikol, D., Milrad, M., Coelho, R., & Kizilcec, R. F.
- Affiliations
- Digital Futures (SE)
- University College London (GB)
- Weizmann Institute of Science (IL)
- The University of Osaka (JP)
- Osaka Electro-Communication University (JP)
- University of Bergen (NO)
- University of Agder (NO)
- University of Copenhagen (DK)
- Linnaeus University (SE)
- Cornell University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Viberg, Olga
- Kizilcec, René F.
- ORCID
- Venue
- International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2025-09
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 1288-1316
- ISSN
- 1560-4292 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4403422104
- Cited by
- 179
- References
- 62
- Citations by year
- 2026: 115 · 2025: 60
- FWCI
- 67.30
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Diva portal (Dalarna University Library) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- Trond Mohn Research Foundation, Norway (Artificial Intelligence in Education: Layers of Trust (EduTrust AI))
- National Science Foundation, US (award no. 2237593)
- Royal Institute of Technology
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Artificial Intelligence in Education
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
- Social Sciences › Education › Education and Technology Integration
- Keywords
- K-12 teachers, technology acceptance, self-efficacy, AI understanding, cultural values, Hofstede cultural dimensions, cross-national comparison, teacher characteristics, technology adoption in classrooms
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
