CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 296Technology Adoption and User BehaviourArtificial Intelligence in EducationGender and Technology in Education

Factors Influencing Attitudes of University Students towards ChatGPT and its Usage: A Multi-National Study Validating the TAME-ChatGPT Survey Instrument

Open access
Abdaljaleel, Maram, Barakat, Muna, Alsanafi, Mariam, Salim, Nesreen A., Abazid, Husam, Malaeb, Diana, Mohammed, Ali Haider, Hassan, Bassam Abdul Rasool +13 more·2023·Scientific Reports
DOI 10.20944/preprints202309.1541.v1PMC PMC10806219

Preprint — published as 10.1038/s41598-024-52549-8

Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI)-based models hold the potential to transform higher education if adopted properly and ethically. A prime example is ChatGPT with earlier studies indicating its widespread adoption in academia and by university students. The current study aimed to identify the factors influencing the attitude towards ChatGPT and its usage among university students in Arab countries. A previous survey instrument termed Technology Acceptance Model Edited to Assess ChatGPT Adoption (TAME-ChatGPT) was administered online using a convenience-based approach among the contacts of the authors. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) for the survey constructs was done using root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), standardized root mean square residual (SRMR), comparative fit index (CFI), and Tucker-Lewis index (TLI). The final study sample comprised a total of 2240 participant divided as follows: Iraq (n=736, 32.9%), Kuwait (n=582, 26.0%), Egypt (n=417, 18.6%), Lebanon (n=263, 11.7%), and Jordan (n=242, 10.8%). A total of 1048 respondents heard of ChatGPT before the study (46.8%), of which 551 used ChatGPT (52.6%). The mean scores of TAME-ChatGPT constructs showed that the ease of ChatGPT use, positive attitude towards technology and social influence, higher perceived usefulness, the influence of behavioral/cognitive factors, low perceived risks and low anxiety were the determinants of positive attitude to ChatGPT and its use. For both the attitude and usage scales of TAME-ChatGPT, CFA collectively yielded satisfactory fit indices as indicated by low RMSEA and SRMR together with high CFI and TLI. Multivariate analysis showed that attitude to ChatGPT use was significantly influenced by country of residence, age, university type, and the latest grade point average of the students. The current study confirmed the validity of TAME-ChatGPT as a survey instrument to assess the possible determinants of ChatGPT use among university students in Arab countries. The study findings highlighted that successful adoption of ChatGPT in higher education could be dependent on perceived ease of use, usefulness, positive attitudes to technology, social influence, behavioral/cognitive factors, lower anxiety, and minimal perceived risks. The utility of ChatGPT in higher education requires policies that should be tailored for various settings, considering the differences observed in attitude towards ChatGPT among participating students in this study.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.20944/preprints202309.1541.v1

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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 adoption of new technologies is shaped by user perceptions and usage patterns as well as student characteristics and experiences.

    “The adoption of new technologies is shaped by user perceptions and usage patterns (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008) as well as student characteristics and experiences (Abdaljaleel et al., 2023; Tiwari et al., 2024).”

    From “ChatGPT seems too good to be true”: College students’ use and perceptions of generative AI (2024) · cites this paper as Abdaljaleel et al., 2023

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 92

  1. Sallam, M. ChatGPT utility in healthcare education, research, and practice: Systematic review on the promising perspectives and valid concerns. Healthcare (Basel) 11, 887. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ healt hcare 11060 887 (2023). · DOI · Paper page
  2. Crompton, H. & Burke, D. Artificial intelligence in higher education: The state of the field. Int. J. Educ. Technol. High. Educ. 20, 22. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1186/ s41239-023-00392-8 (2023). · DOI · Paper page
  3. Chen, L., Chen, P. & Lin, Z. Artificial intelligence in education: A review. IEEE Access 8, 75264-75278. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1109/ ACCESS. 2020. 29885 10 (2020). · DOI · Paper page
  4. George, B. & Wooden, O. Managing the strategic transformation of higher education through artificial intelligence. Admin. Sci. 13, 196. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ admsc i1309 0196 (2023). · DOI
  5. Grassini, S. Shaping the future of education: Exploring the potential and consequences of AI and ChatGPT in educational set- tings. Educ. Sci. 13, 692 (2023).
  6. Schleiss, J. et al. AI course design planning framework: Developing domain-specific AI education courses. Educ. Sci. 13, 954. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ educs ci130 90954 (2023). · DOI
  7. Ilieva, G. et al. Effects of generative chatbots in higher education. Information 14, 492. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ info1 40904 92 (2023). · DOI
  8. Thurzo, A. et al. Impact of artificial intelligence on dental education: A review and guide for curriculum update. Educ. Sci. 13, 150. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ educs ci130 20150 (2023). · DOI
  9. Sallam, M. et al. ChatGPT output regarding compulsory vaccination and COVID-19 vaccine conspiracy: A descriptive study at the outset of a paradigm shift in online search for information. Cureus 15, e35029. https:// doi. org/ 10. 7759/ cureus. 35029 (2023). · DOI · Paper page
  10. Giansanti, D. Precision Medicine 2.0: How digital health and AI are changing the game. J. Pers. Med. 13, 1057. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ jpm13 071057 (2023). · DOI
  11. Lo, C. K. What is the impact of ChatGPT on education? A rapid review of the literature. Educ. Sci. 13, 410. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ educs ci130 40410 (2023). · DOI · Paper page
  12. Rawas, S. ChatGPT: Empowering lifelong learning in the digital age of higher education. Educ. Inf. Technol. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s10639-023-12114-8 (2023). · DOI · Paper page
  13. Giansanti, D. The chatbots are invading us: A map point on the evolution, applications, opportunities, and emerging problems in the health domain. Life 13, 1130. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ life1 30511 30 (2023). · DOI
  14. Seo, K. et al. The impact of artificial intelligence on learner-instructor interaction in online learning. Int. J. Educ. Technol. High. Educ. 18, 54. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1186/ s41239-021-00292-9 (2021). · DOI · Paper page
  15. Sallam, M. et al. ChatGPT applications in medical, dental, pharmacy, and public health education: A descriptive study highlight- ing the advantages and limitations. Narra J. 3, e103. https:// doi. org/ 10. 52225/ narra. v3i1. 103 (2023). · DOI · Paper page
  16. Borji, A. A categorical archive of ChatGPT failures. Res. Square (Preprint) https:// doi. org/ 10. 21203/ rs.3. rs-28957 92/ v1 (2023). · DOI · Paper page
  17. Aver, B., Fošner, A. & Alfirević, N. Higher education challenges: Developing skills to address contemporary economic and sustainability issues. Sustainability 13, 12567. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ su132 212567 (2021). · DOI
  18. Akour, M. & Alenezi, M. Higher education future in the era of digital transformation. Educ. Sci. 12, 784. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ educs ci121 10784 (2022). · DOI · Paper page
  19. Guilbault, M. Students as customers in higher education: The (controversial) debate needs to end. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 40, 295-298. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. jretc onser. 2017. 03. 006 (2018). · DOI
  20. Al-Kumaim, N. H. et al. Exploring the inescapable suffering among postgraduate researchers: Information overload perceptions and implications for future research. Int. J. Inf. Commun. Technol. Educ. (IJICTE) 17, 19-41. https:// doi. org/ 10. 4018/ IJICTE. 20210 10102 (2021). · DOI
  21. Breier, M. From 'financial considerations' to 'poverty': Towards a reconceptualisation of the role of finances in higher education student drop out. High. Educ. 60, 657-670. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s10734-010-9343-5 (2010). · DOI
  22. Javaid, M. et al. Unlocking the opportunities through ChatGPT Tool towards ameliorating the education system. BenchCouncil Trans. Benchmarks Stand. Eval. 3, 100115. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. tbench. 2023. 100115 (2023). · DOI · Paper page
  23. Montenegro-Rueda, M. et al. Impact of the implementation of ChatGPT in education: A systematic review. Computers 12, 153. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ compu ters1 20801 53 (2023). · DOI · Paper page
  24. Ng, D. T. K. et al. Conceptualizing AI literacy: An exploratory review. Comput. Educ. Artif. Intell. 2, 100041. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. caeai. 2021. 100041 (2021). · DOI · Paper page
  25. Hornberger, M., Bewersdorff, A. & Nerdel, C. What do university students know about Artificial Intelligence? Development and validation of an AI literacy test. Comput. Educ. Artif. Intell. 5, 100165. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. caeai. 2023. 100165 (2023). · DOI · Paper page
  26. Sallam, M. Bibliometric top ten healthcare related ChatGPT publications in Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar in the first ChatGPT anniversary. JMIR Preprints https:// doi. org/ 10. 2196/ prepr ints. 55085 (2023). · DOI
  27. Ray, P. P. ChatGPT: A comprehensive review on background, applications, key challenges, bias, ethics, limitations and future scope. Internet Things Cyber-Physical Syst. 3, 121-154. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. iotcps. 2023. 04. 003 (2023). · DOI · Paper page
  28. Farrokhnia, M. et al. A SWOT analysis of ChatGPT: Implications for educational practice and research. Innov. Educ. Teach. Int. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 14703 297. 2023. 21958 46 (2023). · DOI · Paper page
  29. Guerra-Carrillo, B., Katovich, K. & Bunge, S. A. Does higher education hone cognitive functioning and learning efficacy? Find- ings from a large and diverse sample. PLoS One 12, e0182276. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1371/ journ al. pone. 01822 76 (2017). · DOI
  30. Sunday, O. J., Adesope, O. O. & Maarhuis, P. L. The effects of smartphone addiction on learning: A meta-analysis. Comput. Hum. Behav. Rep. 4, 100114. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. chbr. 2021. 100114 (2021). · DOI
  31. Yu, Y., Zhuang, Y., Zhang, J. et al. Large Language Model as Attributed Training Data Generator: A Tale of Diversity and Bias. arXiv preprint arXiv: 2306. 15895, https:// doi. org/ 10. 48550/ arXiv. 2306. 15895 (2023). · DOI
  32. Zajko, M. Artificial intelligence, algorithms, and social inequality: Sociological contributions to contemporary debates. Sociol. Compass 16, e12962. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/ soc4. 12962 (2022). · DOI
  33. Imran, A. Why addressing digital inequality should be a priority. Electron. J. Inf. Syst. Dev. Cries. 89, e12255. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1002/ isd2. 12255 (2023). · DOI · Paper page
  34. Hill, C. & Lawton, W. Universities, the digital divide and global inequality. J. High. Educ. Policy Manag. 40, 598-610. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 13600 80X. 2018. 15312 11 (2018). · DOI
  35. Tlili, A. et al. What if the devil is my guardian angel: ChatGPT as a case study of using chatbots in education. Smart Learn. Environ. 10, 15. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1186/ s40561-023-00237-x (2023). · DOI · Paper page
  36. Ng, D. T. K. et al. Teachers' AI digital competencies and twenty-first century skills in the post-pandemic world. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 71, 137-161. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s11423-023-10203-6 (2023). · DOI
  37. Ofosu-Ampong, K. et al. Acceptance of artificial intelligence (ChatGPT) in education: Trust, innovativeness and psychological need of students. J. Inf. Knowl. Manag. 13, 37-47. https:// doi. org/ 10. 7176/ IKM/ 13-4-03 (2023). · DOI
  38. Jamal, A. et al. Integrating ChatGPT in medical education: Adapting curricula to cultivate competent physicians for the AI era. Cureus 15, e43036. https:// doi. org/ 10. 7759/ cureus. 43036 (2023). · DOI
  39. Kooli, C. Chatbots in education and research: A critical examination of ethical implications and solutions. Sustainability 15, 5614. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ su150 75614 (2023). · DOI · Paper page
  40. Kazi, T. et al. Impact of ChatGPT on academic performance among Bangladeshi undergraduate students. Int. J. Res. Sci. Eng. https:// doi. org/ 10. 55529/ ijrise. 35. 18. 28 (2023). · DOI
  41. Yang, J. et al. A systematic literature review of information security in chatbots. Appl. Sci. 13, 6355 (2023).
  42. Alshahrani, A. The impact of ChatGPT on blended learning: Current trends and future research directions. Int. J. Data Netw. Sci. 7, 2029-2040. https:// doi. org/ 10. 5267/j. ijdns. 2023.6. 010 (2023). · DOI
  43. Alyoussef, I. Y. Factors influencing students' acceptance of M-Learning in higher education: An application and extension of the UTAUT model. Electronics 10, 3171. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ elect ronic s1024 3171 (2021). · DOI
  44. Holden, H. & Rada, R. Understanding the influence of perceived usability and technology self-efficacy on teachers' technology acceptance. J. Res. Technol. Educ. 43, 343-367. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 15391 523. 2011. 10782 576 (2011). · DOI · Paper page
  45. Kamalov, F., Santandreu Calonge, D. & Gurrib, I. New era of artificial intelligence in education: Towards a sustainable multifac- eted revolution. Sustainability 15, 12451. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ su151 612451 (2023). · DOI · Paper page
  46. Tiwari, C. K. et al. What drives students toward ChatGPT? An investigation of the factors influencing adoption and usage of ChatGPT. Interact. Technol. Smart Educ. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1108/ ITSE-04-2023-0061 (2023). · DOI · Paper page
  47. Gil-Cordero, E. et al. Analysis of factors affecting the effectiveness of face-to-face marketing learning via TikTok, YouTube and video conferencing. Heliyon 9, e17195. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. heliy on. 2023. e17195 (2023). · DOI
  48. Hyun Baek, T. & Kim, M. Is ChatGPT scary good? How user motivations affect creepiness and trust in generative artificial intelligence. Telematics Informatics 83, 102030. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. tele. 2023. 102030 (2023). · DOI · Paper page
  49. Marangunić, N. & Granić, A. Technology acceptance model: A literature review from 1986 to 2013. Univers. Access Inf. Soc. 14, 81-95. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s10209-014-0348-1 (2015). · DOI · Paper page
  50. Jianning, L. et al. ChatGPT in healthcare: A taxonomy and systematic review. medRxiv https:// doi. org/ 10. 1101/ 2023. 03. 30. 23287 899 (2023). · DOI
  51. Tsang, R. Practical applications of ChatGPT in undergraduate medical education. J. Med. Educ. Curric. Dev. 10, 23821205231178449. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 23821 20523 11784 49 (2023). · DOI
  52. Ibrahim, H. et al. Perception, performance, and detectability of conversational artificial intelligence across 32 university courses. Sci. Rep. 13, 12187. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1038/ s41598-023-38964-3 (2023). · DOI · Paper page
  53. Strzelecki, A. Students' acceptance of ChatGPT in higher education: An extended unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. Innov. High. Educ. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s10755-023-09686-1 (2023). · DOI · Paper page
  54. Farhi, F. et al. Analyzing the students' views, concerns, and perceived ethics about chat GPT usage. Comput. Educ. Artif. Intell. 5, 100180. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. caeai. 2023. 100180 (2023). · DOI · Paper page
  55. Meyer, J. G. et al. ChatGPT and large language models in academia: Opportunities and challenges. BioData Min. 16, 20. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1186/ s13040-023-00339-9 (2023). · DOI · Paper page
  56. Rodríguez, J. M. R. et al. Use of ChatGPT at university as a tool for complex thinking: Students' perceived usefulness. NAER J. New Approach. Educ. Res. 12, 323-339. https:// doi. org/ 10. 7821/ naer. 2023.7. 1458 (2023). · DOI · Paper page
  57. Zhang, P. & Kamel Boulos, M. N. Generative AI in medicine and healthcare: Promises, opportunities and challenges. Future Internet 15, 286. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ fi150 90286 (2023). · DOI · Paper page
  58. Newton, P. M. & Xiromeriti, M. ChatGPT performance on MCQ exams in higher education. A pragmatic scoping review. EdArXiv https:// doi. org/ 10. 35542/ osf. io/ sytu3 (2023). · DOI
  59. Alfertshofer, M. et al. Sailing the seven seas: A multinational comparison of ChatGPT's performance on medical licensing examinations. Ann. Biomed. Eng. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s10439-023-03338-3 (2023). · DOI
  60. Sallam, M. & Al-Salahat, K. Below average ChatGPT performance in medical microbiology exam compared to university stu- dents. Front. Educ. 8, 1333415. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3389/ feduc. 2023. 13334 15 (2023). · DOI · Paper page
  61. Sallam, M. et al. Human versus artificial intelligence: ChatGPT-4 outperforming Bing, Bard, ChatGPT-3.5, and humans in clinical chemistry multiple-choice questions. medRxiv https:// doi. org/ 10. 1101/ 2024. 01. 08. 24300 995 (2024). · DOI
  62. Jeyaraman, M., Jeyaraman, N., Nallakumarasamy, A., Yadav, S. & Bondili, S. K. ChatGPT in medical education and research: A boon or a bane?. Cureus 15, e44316. https:// doi. org/ 10. 7759/ cureus. 44316 (2023). · DOI · Paper page
  63. Roos, J. et al. Artificial intelligence in medical education: Comparative analysis of ChatGPT, Bing, and medical students in Germany. JMIR Med. Educ. 9, e46482. https:// doi. org/ 10. 2196/ 46482 (2023). · DOI · Paper page
  64. Lee, H. Using ChatGPT as a learning tool in acupuncture education: Comparative study. JMIR Med. Educ. 9, e47427. https:// doi. org/ 10. 2196/ 47427 (2023). · DOI
  65. Totlis, T. et al. The potential role of ChatGPT and artificial intelligence in anatomy education: A conversation with ChatGPT. Surg. Radiol. Anat. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s00276-023-03229-1 (2023). · DOI
  66. Karabacak, M. et al. The advent of generative language models in medical education. JMIR Med. Educ. 9, e48163. https:// doi. org/ 10. 2196/ 48163 (2023). · DOI · Paper page
  67. Safranek, C. W. et al. The role of large language models in medical education: Applications and implications. JMIR Med. Educ. 9, e50945. https:// doi. org/ 10. 2196/ 50945 (2023). · DOI · Paper page
  68. Singh, H., Tayarani-Najaran, M.-H. & Yaqoob, M. Exploring computer science students' perception of ChatGPT in higher education: A descriptive and correlation study. Educ. Sci. 13, 924. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ educs ci130 90924 (2023). · DOI · Paper page
  69. Seyyed-Kalantari, L. et al. Underdiagnosis bias of artificial intelligence algorithms applied to chest radiographs in under-served patient populations. Nat. Med. 27, 2176-2182. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1038/ s41591-021-01595-0 (2021). · DOI · Paper page
  70. Srivastav, S. et al. ChatGPT in radiology: The advantages and limitations of artificial intelligence for medical imaging diagnosis. Cureus 15, e41435. https:// doi. org/ 10. 7759/ cureus. 41435 (2023). · DOI
  71. Sallam, M., Al-Salahat, K. & Al-Ajlouni, E. ChatGPT performance in diagnostic clinical microbiology laboratory-oriented case scenarios. Cureus 15, e50629. https:// doi. org/ 10. 7759/ cureus. 50629 (2023). · DOI
  72. Dwivedi, Y. K. et al. Opinion Paper: "So what if ChatGPT wrote it?" Multidisciplinary perspectives on opportunities, challenges and implications of generative conversational AI for research, practice and policy. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 71, 102642. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. ijinf omgt. 2023. 102642 (2023). · DOI · Paper page
  73. Roumeliotis, K. I. & Tselikas, N. D. ChatGPT and open-AI models: A preliminary review. Future Internet 15, 192. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ fi150 60192 (2023). · DOI
  74. Akiba, D. & Fraboni, M. C. AI-supported academic advising: Exploring ChatGPT's current state and future potential toward student empowerment. Educ. Sci. 13, 885. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ educs ci130 90885 (2023). · DOI · Paper page
  75. Ajlouni, A. O., Abd-Alkareem Wahba, F. & Salem Almahaireh, A. Students' attitudes towards using ChatGPT as a learning tool: The case of the University of Jordan. Int. J. Interact. Mob. Technol. (iJIM) 17, 99-117. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3991/ ijim. v17i18. 41753 (2023). · DOI · Paper page
  76. Haleem, A., Javaid, M. & Singh, R. P. An era of ChatGPT as a significant futuristic support tool: A study on features, abilities, and challenges. BenchCouncil Trans. Benchmarks Stand. Eval. 2, 100089. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. tbench. 2023. 100089 (2022). · DOI · Paper page
  77. Imran, M. & Almusharraf, N. Analyzing the role of ChatGPT as a writing assistant at higher education level: A systematic review of the literature. Contemp. Educ. Technol. 15, ep464. https:// doi. org/ 10. 30935/ cedte ch/ 13605 (2023). · DOI · Paper page
  78. Foroughi, B. et al. Determinants of intention to use ChatGPT for educational purposes: Findings from PLS-SEM and fsQCA. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 10447 318. 2023. 22264 95 (2023). · DOI
  79. Hooda, A. et al. The effects of trust on behavioral intention and use behavior within e-government contexts. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 67, 102553. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. ijinf omgt. 2022. 102553 (2022). · DOI
  80. Bin-Hady, W. R. A. et al. Exploring the dimensions of ChatGPT in English language learning: A global perspective. Library Hi Tech https:// doi. org/ 10. 1108/ LHT-05-2023-0200 (2023). · DOI
  81. Adriansen, H. K. et al. Emplacing English as lingua franca in international higher education: A spatial perspective on linguistic diversity. Popul. Space Place 29, e2619. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1002/ psp. 2619 (2023). · DOI
  82. Dhanvijay, A. K. D. et al. Performance of large language models (ChatGPT, Bing Search, and Google Bard) in solving case vignettes in physiology. Cureus 15, e42972. https:// doi. org/ 10. 7759/ cureus. 42972 (2023). · DOI · Paper page
  83. Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. L. & Xu, X. Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Q. 36, 157-178. https:// doi. org/ 10. 2307/ 41410 412 (2012). · DOI · Paper page
  84. Hubert, M. et al. The influence of acceptance and adoption drivers on smart home usage. Eur. J. Mark. 53, 1073-1098. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1108/ EJM-12-2016-0794 (2019). · DOI
  85. Blut, M. & Wang, C. Technology readiness: A meta-analysis of conceptualizations of the construct and its impact on technology usage. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 48, 649-669. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s11747-019-00680-8 (2020). · DOI
  86. Markauskaite, L. et al. Rethinking the entwinement between artificial intelligence and human learning: What capabilities do learners need for a world with AI?. Comput. Educ. Artif. Intell. 3, 100056. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. caeai. 2022. 100056 (2022). · DOI · Paper page
  87. Bond, M. et al. Digital transformation in German higher education: Student and teacher perceptions and usage of digital media. Int. J. Educ. Technol. High. Educ. 15, 48. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1186/ s41239-018-0130-1 (2018). · DOI · Paper page
  88. Shahsavar, Y. & Choudhury, A. User intentions to use ChatGPT for self-diagnosis and health-related purposes: Cross-sectional survey study. JMIR Hum. Factors 10, e47564. https:// doi. org/ 10. 2196/ 47564 (2023). · DOI · Paper page
  89. Wang, J., Xu, C. & Liu, W. Understanding the adoption of mobile social payment: From the cognitive behavioural perspective. Int. J. Mob. Commun. 20, 483-506. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1504/ IJMC. 2022. 123794 (2022). · DOI
  90. Mijwil, M. et al. ChatGPT and the future of academic integrity in the artificial intelligence era: A new frontier. Al-Salam J. Eng. Technol. 2, 116-127. https:// doi. org/ 10. 55145/ ajest. 2023. 02. 02. 015 (2023). 100. · DOI
  91. Mijwil, M., Mohammad, A. & Ahmed Hussein, A. ChatGPT: Exploring the role of cybersecurity in the protection of medical information. Mesop. J. CyberSecur. 2023, 18-21. https:// doi. org/ 10. 58496/ MJCS/ 2023/ 004 (2023). 101. · DOI · Paper page
  92. Jager, J., Putnick, D. L. & Bornstein, M. H. More than just convenient: The scientific merits of homogeneous convenience samples. Monogr. Soc. Res. Child Dev. 82, 13-30. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/ mono. 12296 (2017). 102. Kyriazos, T. A. Applied psychometrics: Sample size and sample power considerations in factor analysis (EFA, CFA) and SEM in general. Psychology 9, 2207-2230. https:// doi. org/ 10. 4236/ psych. 2018. 98126 (2018). 103. Mundfrom, D. J., Shaw, D. G. & Ke, T. L. Minimum sample size recommendations for conducting factor analyses. Int. J. Test. 5, 159-168. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1207/ s1532 7574i jt0502_4 (2005). · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Abdaljaleel, M., Barakat, M., Alsanafi, M., Salim, N. A., Abazid, H., Malaeb, D., Mohammed, A. H., Hassan, B. A. R., Wayyes, A. M., Farhan, S. S., El Khatib, S., Rahal, M., Sahban, A., Abdelaziz, D. H., Mansour, N. O., AlZayer, R., Khalil, R., Fekih-Romdhane, F., Hallit, R., Hallit, S., & Sallam, M.
Affiliations
  • University of Jordan (JO)
  • Applied Science Private University (JO)
  • Public Authority for Applied Education and Training (KW)
  • Gulf Medical University (AE)
  • Monash University Malaysia (MY)
  • Alrafidain University College (IQ)
  • Lebanese International University (LB)
  • Future University in Egypt (EG)
  • Mansoura University (EG)
  • Mohammed Almana College for Medical Sciences (SA)
  • Holy Spirit University of Kaslik (LB)
Corresponding author
Sallam, Malik
ORCID
Venue
Scientific Reports
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2023-09-22
Volume
14
Issue
1
Pages
1983-1983
ISSN
2045-2322 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.20944/preprints202309.1541.v1
PMC
PMC10806219
OpenAlex
W4391137578
Cited by
296
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 85 · 2025: 123 · 2024: 86 · 2023: 2
FWCI
110.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Scientific Reports (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Preprints.org (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research Square (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Greater South Information System
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender and Technology in Education
Keywords
ChatGPT, university students, technology acceptance, perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, social influence, risk perception, technology anxiety, Arab world, higher education, AI adoption in education
MeSH terms
Academic Performance, Anxiety, Artificial Intelligence, Humans, Students, Universities

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