CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 84

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 13 of the 13 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Understanding the Adoption Dynamics of ChatGPT among Generation Z: Insights from a Modified UTAUT2 Model

Biloš, Antun, Budimir, Bruno·2024·Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research
DOI 10.3390/jtaer19020045
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This research delves into the factors influencing the adoption of ChatGPT, a sophisticated AI-based chatbot, among Generation Z members in Croatia. Employing an extended UTAUT2 model, the impact of various factors on the behavioral intention to use ChatGPT is explored. The study included 694 Generation Z participants, and data were collected through an online survey featuring self-reporting questions. The analysis utilized statistical software packages for performing both confirmatory and exploratory factor analyses, in addition to hierarchical linear regression. Key findings reveal that performance expectancy, social influence, hedonic motivation, habit, and personal innovativeness significantly influence the behavioral intention to use ChatGPT. However, effort expectancy, facilitating conditions, and price value do not exhibit a significant impact. Notably, the study excludes the use behavior factor due to multicollinearity issues with behavioral intention. While the research does not focus on moderating factors, it reports that the adapted UTAUT2 model explains 65% of the variance in the adoption of ChatGPT by Generation Z users.

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 · 10.3390/jtaer19020045

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 The initial version of the modified UTATU2 model. Source: based on Venkatesh Gansser & Reich [31]. Figure 1. The initial version of the modified UTATU2 model. Source: based on Venkatesh et al. [28]; Gansser & Reich [31].
Figure 1 The initial version of the modified UTATU2 model. Source: based on Venkatesh Gansser & Reich [31]. Figure 1. The initial version of the modified UTATU2 model. Source: based on Venkatesh et al. [28]; Gansser & Reich [31].CC-BY · From the PDF
Image 2
CC-BY · From the PDF

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 13 references

Research works printed but not linked: 55

  1. Paul, 2023, ChatGPT and consumers: Benefits, pitfalls and future research agenda, Int. J. Consum. Stud., 47, 1213, 10.1111/ijcs.12928 · DOI · Paper page
  2. Vaswani, A., Shazzer, N., Parmar, N., Uszkoreit, J., Jones, L., Gomez, A.N., and Polosukhin, I. (2017, January 4–9). Attention is all you need. Proceedings of the Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, Long Beach, CA, USA.
  3. Aljanabi, 2023, ChatGpt: Open Possibilities, Iraqi J. Comput. Sci. Math., 4, 62
  4. Abdullah, M., Madain, A., and Jararweh, Y. (December, January 29). ChatGPT: Fundamentals, applications and social impacts. Proceedings of the 2022 Ninth International Conference on Social Networks Analysis, Management and Security (SNAMS), Milan, Italy. · DOI · Paper page
  5. Mich, 2023, ChatGPT for e-Tourism: A technological perspective, Inf. Technol. Tour., 25, 1, 10.1007/s40558-023-00248-x · DOI
  6. Peres, 2023, On ChatGPT and beyond: How generative artificial intelligence may affect research, teaching, and practice, Int. J. Res. Mark., 40, 269, 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2023.03.001 · DOI · Paper page
  7. Kotler, P., Kartajaya, H., and Setiawan, I. (2021). Marketing 5.0: Technology for Humanity, John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
  8. 2010, Digitalni domoroci i digitalni imigranti, Dijete Društvo Časopis Promic. Prava Djeteta, 12, 83
  9. Venkatesh, 1996, A model of the antecedents of perceived ease of use: Development and test, Decis. Sci., 27, 451, 10.1111/j.1540-5915.1996.tb01822.x · DOI · Paper page
  10. Venkatesh, 2000, A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies, Manag. Sci., 46, 186, 10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926 · DOI · Paper page
  11. Venkatesh, 2003, User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view, MIS Q., 27, 425, 10.2307/30036540 · DOI · Paper page
  12. Lai, 2017, The literature review of technology adoption models and theories for the novelty technology, JISTEM-J. Inf. Syst. Technol. Manag., 14, 21
  13. Raeisi, 2016, Factors influencing to m-commerce adoption in China, Int. J. Bus. Manag., 4, 372
  14. Venkatesh, 2012, Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology, MIS Q., 36, 157, 10.2307/41410412 · DOI · Paper page
  15. Frank, 2018, Evaluation of electronic programme guide adoption using UTAUT2 based model, Teh. Vjesn., 25, 884
  16. Gansser, 2021, A new acceptance model for artificial intelligence with extensions to UTAUT2: An empirical study in three segments of application, Technol. Soc., 65, 101535, 10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101535 · DOI
  17. Sharma, 2024, Why do retail customers adopt artificial intelligence (ai) based autonomous decision-making systems?, IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag., 71, 1846, 10.1109/TEM.2022.3157976 · DOI
  18. Venkatesh, 2021, Adoption and use of AI tools: A research agenda grounded in UTAUT, Ann. Oper. Res., 308, 641, 10.1007/s10479-020-03918-9 · DOI
  19. Ghazi, K.M., Kattara, H., Salem, I.E., and Shaaban, M.N. (2023). Benefit-triggered or trust-guided? investigation of customers’ perceptions towards AI-adopting hotels amid and post COVID-19 pandemic. Tour. Hosp. Res., 14673584231184161. · DOI
  20. Rahim, N.I.M., Iahad, N.A., Yusof, A.F., and Al-Sharafi, M.A. (2022). AI-Based chatbots adoption model for higher-education institutions: A hybrid PLS-SEM-Neural network modelling approach. Sustainability, 14. · DOI
  21. Tran, 2021, Determinants of intention to use artificial intelligence-based diagnosis support system among prospective physicians, Front. Public Health, 9, 755644, 10.3389/fpubh.2021.755644 · DOI · Paper page
  22. Das, 2024, Application of UTAUT2 on adopting artificial intelligence powered lead management system (AI-LMS) in passenger car sales, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang., 201, 123241, 10.1016/j.techfore.2024.123241 · DOI
  23. Ding, 2023, Investigating behavioural intention toward adopting artificial intelligence service robots technology in hospitality in china, Environ.-Behav. Proc. J., 8, 389, 10.21834/e-bpj.v8i26.4990 · DOI
  24. Vinerean, S., Budac, C., Baltador, L., and Dabija, D. (2022). Assessing the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on M-commerce adoption: An adapted UTAUT2 approach. Electronics, 11. · DOI
  25. Behl, 2021, The role of organizational culture and voluntariness in the adoption of artificial intelligence for disaster relief operations, Int. J. Manpow., 43, 569, 10.1108/IJM-03-2021-0178 · DOI
  26. 2021, Determinants of the adoption of AI wearables—Practical implications for marketing, Hum. Technol., 17, 294, 10.14254/1795-6889.2021.17-3.6 · DOI
  27. Wang, 2023, What may impact trustworthiness of ai in digital healthcare: Discussion from patients’ viewpoint, Proc. Int. Symp. Hum. Factors Ergon. Health Care, 12, 5, 10.1177/2327857923121001 · DOI
  28. Thakkar, 2023, Medical specialists’ perception about adoption of artificial intelligence in the healthcare sector, Cardiometry, 25, 426, 10.18137/cardiometry.2022.25.426434 · DOI
  29. Schmitz, 2022, Modifying UTAUT2 for a cross-country comparison of telemedicine adoption, Comput. Hum. Behav., 130, 107183, 10.1016/j.chb.2022.107183 · DOI
  30. Antonovica, 2022, Application and extension of the UTAUT2 model for determining behavioral intention factors in use of the artificial intelligence virtual assistants, Front. Psychol., 13, 993935, 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.993935 · DOI
  31. Nikolopoulou, 2020, Acceptance of mobile phone by university students for their studies: An investigation applying UTAUT2 model, Educ. Inf. Technol., 25, 4139, 10.1007/s10639-020-10157-9 · DOI · Paper page
  32. Venkatesh, 2016, Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology: A Synthesis and the Road Ahead, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst., 17, 328
  33. Venkatesh, 2010, Unified theory of acceptance and use of technology: US vs, China. J. Glob. Inf. Technol. Manag., 13, 5
  34. Shaikh, 2021, Identifying relevant segments of AI applications adopters–Expanding the UTAUT2’s variables, Telemat. Inform., 58, 101529, 10.1016/j.tele.2020.101529 · DOI · Paper page
  35. Xian, 2021, Psychological Factors in Consumer Acceptance of Artificial Intelligence in Leisure Economy: A Structural Equation Model, J. Internet Technol., 22, 697
  36. Sugumar, 2021, Do I desire chatbots to be like humans? Exploring factors for adoption of chatbots for financial services, J. Int. Technol. Inf. Manag., 30, 38
  37. McLean, 2019, Hey Alexa… examine the variables influencing the use of artificial intelligent in-home voice assistants, Comput. Hum. Behav., 99, 28, 10.1016/j.chb.2019.05.009 · DOI · Paper page
  38. Fridin, 2014, Acceptance of socially assistive humanoid robot by preschool and elementary school teachers, Comput. Hum. Behav., 33, 23, 10.1016/j.chb.2013.12.016 · DOI
  39. Alalwan, 2017, Factors influencing adoption of mobile banking by Jordanian bank customers: Extending UTAUT2 with trust, Int. J. Inf. Manag., 37, 99, 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2017.01.002 · DOI
  40. Canziani, 2021, Consumer acceptance of voice-activated smart home devices for product information seeking and online ordering, Comput. Hum. Behav., 119, 106714, 10.1016/j.chb.2021.106714 · DOI
  41. Crabbe, 2009, An adoption model for mobile banking in Ghana, Int. J. Mob. Commun., 7, 515, 10.1504/IJMC.2009.024391 · DOI
  42. Hew, 2015, What catalyses mobile apps usage intention: An empirical analysis, Ind. Manag. Data Syst., 115, 1269, 10.1108/IMDS-01-2015-0028 · DOI · Paper page
  43. Tamilmani, 2019, The battle of Brain vs. Heart: A literature review and meta-analysis of “hedonic motivation” use in UTAUT2, Int. J. Inf. Manag., 46, 222, 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.01.008 · DOI
  44. Shaw, 2019, The non-monetary benefits of mobile commerce: Extending UTAUT2 with perceived value, Int. J. Inf. Manag., 45, 44, 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2018.10.024 · DOI
  45. Cintrón, J.J.V. (2022). Factors Influencing IT Managers’ Acceptance of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Digital Transformation. [Ph.D. Thesis, Capella University].
  46. Limayem, 2007, How habit limits the predictive power of intention: The case of information systems continuance, MIS Q., 31, 705, 10.2307/25148817 · DOI
  47. 2019, Analysing the acceptation of online games in mobile devices: An application of UTAUT2, J. Retail. Consum. Serv., 50, 85, 10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.04.018 · DOI
  48. Merhi, 2019, A cross-cultural study of the intention to use mobile banking between Lebanese and British consumers: Extending UTAUT2 with security, privacy and trust, Technol. Soc., 59, 101151, 10.1016/j.techsoc.2019.101151 · DOI · Paper page
  49. Imani, 2020, Factors Influencing Customers Acceptance of Using the QR Code Feature in Offline Merchants for Generation Z in Bandung (Extended UTAUT2), KnE Soc. Sci., 2020, 1174
  50. Bosson, 1999, Self-liking, self-competence, and the quest for self-verification, Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull., 25, 1230, 10.1177/0146167299258005 · DOI
  51. Kessler, S.K., and Martin, M. (2017). How Do Potential Users Perceive the Adoption of New Technologies within the Field of Artificial Intelligence and Internet-of-Things?—A Revision of the UTAUT 2 Model Using Voice Assistants. [Master’s Thesis, Lund University].
  52. Tantra, T., and Ariyanti, M. (2017, January 22–23). The Use of Modified Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology 2 (UTAUT2) to predict Student Behavioral Intention in the use of Integrated Academic Information System (iGracias) Mobile Application at Telkom University. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Transformation in Communications 2017 (IcoTiC 2017), Bandung, Indonesia.
  53. Baudier, 2020, Smart home: Highly-educated students’ acceptance, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang., 153, 119355, 10.1016/j.techfore.2018.06.043 · DOI
  54. Chu, 2022, Developing an Extended Theory of UTAUT 2 Model to Explore Factors Influencing Taiwanese Consumer Adoption of Intelligent Elevators, Sage Open, 12, 21582440221142209, 10.1177/21582440221142209 · DOI
  55. Meet, 2022, Exploring factors affecting the adoption of MOOC in Generation Z using extended UTAUT2 model, Educ. Inf. Technol., 27, 10261, 10.1007/s10639-022-11052-1 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Biloš, A., & Budimir, B.
Affiliations
Faculty of Economics and Business in Osijek, Josip Juraj Strossmayer University of Osijek, 31000 Osijek, Croatia
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2024-04-13
Volume
19
Issue
2
Pages
863-879
ISSN
0718-1876
DOI
10.3390/jtaer19020045
Cited by
84
References
13
Language
en
Licence
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (vor)

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