The DOI matches its Crossref record; 59 of the 62 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 2 are not checked yet.
RETRACTED: Factors influencing pre-service special education teachers’ intention toward AI in education: Digital literacy, teacher self-efficacy, perceived ease of use, and perceived usefulness
Open accessAbstract
The use of artificial intelligence in education (AIEd) has become increasingly significant globally. In China, there is a lack of research examining the behavioral intention toward AIEd among pre-service special education (SPED) teachers in terms of digital literacy and teacher self-efficacy. Building on the technology acceptance model, our study evaluated the aspects influencing pre-service special education teachers' intention toward AI in education. Data was gathered from 274 pre-service SPED teachers studying at a Chinese public normal university of special education and analyzed using structural equation modeling (SEM). The results show that digital literacy is associated with the perceived usefulness and ease of use of AIEd, which influences SPED teachers' intention to use AIEd. Additionally, digital literacy significantly impacts the self-efficacy of SPED teachers. Given these results, AI designers in special education should comprehend the effectiveness and usability of AIEd for fostering behavioral intention formation. Simultaneously, special educational programs that identify key content and activities for digital literacy training should be developed, and educators should attempt to execute the relevant pre-service training to enhance the intention of pre-service SPED teachers toward AIEd.
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
Figures
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
“Studies also indicate that digitally literate teachers are more inclined to participate in AI-related training (Yao & Wang, 2020)”
From Integrating artificial intelligence into preservice teacher education: enhancing AI literacy and digital material design competency (2026) · cites this paper as Yao & Wang, 2020
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
Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224378101800104 · Cited by 109,190
Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology
Davis, F. D. (1989) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/249008 · Cited by 68,483
User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward A Unified View1
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/30036540 · Cited by 45,035
A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies
Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926 · Cited by 23,066
Bandura, A. (1977) · Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · doi:10.5281/zenodo.15521699 · Cited by 7,585
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×
“The application of AI technology in educational settings, known as AI in education (AIEd), has been widely regarded as one of the most significant advancements in this century [2,3].”
BackgroundTeacher efficacy: capturing an elusive construct
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, A. W. (2001) · Teaching and Teacher Education · doi:10.1016/s0742-051x(01)00036-1 · Cited by 6,839 · cited 1×
“Tschannen-Moran and Woolfolk Hoy [53] specifically defined teacher self-efficacy as belief concerning one ’ s ability to teach, to establish and enforce classroom regulations, as well as to inspire students ’ learning motivation.”
BackgroundA Beginner's Guide to Structural Equation Modeling
Finkelstein, D. (2005) · Technometrics · doi:10.1198/tech.2005.s328 · Cited by 6,087
Duan, Y., Edwards, J. S., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2019) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.01.021 · Cited by 2,628 · cited 1×
“Similarly, the rapid progress of information processing technology and computer technology (e. g., advanced algorithms, Big Data) has significantly expedited the advancement and implementation of AI, which has increased in contemporary times [38].”
BackgroundVision, challenges, roles and research issues of Artificial Intelligence in Education
Hwang, G.-J., Xie, H., Wah, B. W., & Gašević, D. (2020) · Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2020.100001 · Cited by 1,435
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- Exploring the Relationships between Reading Behavior Patterns and Learning Outcomes Based on Log Data from E-Books: A Human Factor Approach: Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact.: Vol 35, No 4–5 - Get Access’. Accessed: July. 1, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10447318.2018.1543077. · DOI
- Quaicoe, 2020, Teachers' digital literacy and digital activity as digital divide components among basic schools in Ghana, Educ. Inf. Technol., 25, 4077, 10.1007/s10639-020-10158-8 · DOI · Paper page
- Riina, 2022, DigComp 2.2: The Digital Competence Framework for Citizens - With new examples of knowledge, skills and attitudes, JRC Research Reports, 1
- Quaicoe, 2020, Teachers' digital literacy and digital activity as digital divide components among basic schools in Ghana, Educ. Inf. Technol., 25, 4077, 10.1007/s10639-020-10158-8 · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Zhang, Q., Nie, H., Fan, J., & Liu, H. (2025) · Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.3390/bs15040523 · Cited by 154
Pan, Z., & Wang, Y. (2025) · European Journal of Education · doi:10.1111/ejed.70020 · Cited by 143
Schmidt, D. A., Alboloushi, B., Thomas, A., & Magalhães, R. (2025) · Computers and Education Open · doi:10.1016/j.caeo.2025.100274 · Cited by 171
Runge, I., Hebibi, F., & Lazarides, R. (2025) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci15020167 · Cited by 85
Ocen, S., Elasu, J., Aarakit, S. M., & Olupot, C. (2025) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2025.1530247 · Cited by 157
Metadata
- Authors
- Yao, N., & Wang, Q.
- Affiliations
- Nanjing Normal University of Special Education (CN)
- Corresponding author
- Yao, Ni
- ORCID
- Yao, Ni
- Venue
- Heliyon
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2024-07
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 14
- Pages
- e34894
- ISSN
- 2405-8440 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC11325385
- OpenAlex
- W4400768008
- Cited by
- 150
- References
- 62
- Citations by year
- 2026: 62 · 2025: 84 · 2024: 4
- FWCI
- 56.40
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Status
- Retracted
- Update notices
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Heliyon (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Government of Jiangsu Province
- Nanjing Normal University
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Artificial Intelligence in Education
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
- Social Sciences › Education › Digital literacy in education
- Keywords
- artificial intelligence in education, pre-service special education teachers, digital literacy, teacher self-efficacy, perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, technology acceptance model, special education teacher training, retracted article
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
