CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 113Artificial Intelligence in EducationTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourAI in Service Interactions

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 55 of the 56 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A longitudinal study on artificial intelligence adoption: understanding the drivers of ChatGPT usage behavior change in higher education

Open access
Polyportis, Athanasios·2024·Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence
DOI 10.3389/frai.2023.1324398PMC PMC10797058
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

As the field of artificial intelligence (AI) continues to progress, the use of AI-powered chatbots, such as ChatGPT, in higher education settings has gained significant attention. This paper addresses a well-defined problem pertaining to the critical need for a comprehensive examination of students' ChatGPT adoption in higher education. To examine such adoption, it is imperative to focus on measuring actual user behavior. While measuring students' ChatGPT usage behavior at a specific point in time can be valuable, a more holistic approach is necessary to understand the temporal dynamics of AI adoption. To address this need, a longitudinal survey was conducted, examining how students' ChatGPT usage behavior changes over time among students, and unveiling the drivers of such behavior change. The empirical examination of 222 Dutch higher education students revealed a significant decline in students' ChatGPT usage behavior over an 8 month period. This period was defined by two distinct data collection phases: the initial phase (T1) and a follow-up phase conducted 8 months later (T2). Furthermore, the results demonstrate that changes in trust, emotional creepiness, and Perceived Behavioral Control significantly predicted the observed change in usage behavior. The findings of this research carry significant academic and managerial implications, as they advance our comprehension of the temporal aspects of AI adoption in higher education. The findings also provide actionable guidance for AI developers and educational institutions seeking to optimize student engagement with AI technologies.

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/frai.2023.1324398

Cites

55 of 55 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 Antecedents of students' ChatGPT usage behavior change. *p < 0.05, ***p < 0.001.
Figure 1 Antecedents of students' ChatGPT usage behavior change. *p < 0.05, ***p < 0.001.CC BY · PubMed Central

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.

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?

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

Show all 56 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Polyportis, Navigating the perils of artificial intelligence: a focused review on ChatGPT responsible research innovation, Hum. Soc. Sci. Commun.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Polyportis, A.
Affiliations
Delft University of Technology (NL)
Corresponding author
Polyportis, Athanasios
ORCID
Polyportis, Athanasios
Venue
Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence
Publisher
Frontiers Media SA
Published
2024-01-05
Volume
6
Pages
1324398-1324398
ISSN
2624-8212 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3389/frai.2023.1324398
PMC
PMC10797058
OpenAlex
W4390610074
Cited by
111
References
56
Citations by year
2026: 58 · 2025: 36 · 2024: 17
FWCI
41.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Research Repository (Delft University of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Artificial Intelligence in Education
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › AI in Service Interactions
Keywords
ChatGPT, artificial intelligence adoption, university students, trust in AI, perceived behavioral control, student engagement with AI

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