Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39336060›Full record

ArticleBehavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2024

ChatGPT in Learning: Assessing Students' Use Intentions through the Lens of Perceived Value and the Influence of AI Literacy.

Ahlam Mohammed Al-Abdullatif, Merfat Ayesh Alsubaie

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Ahlam Mohammed Al-AbdullatifDepartment of Curriculum and Instruction, King Faisal University (KFU), Al-Hasa P.O. Box 400, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0003-2815-1137
Merfat Ayesh AlsubaieDepartment of Curriculum and Instruction, King Faisal University (KFU), Al-Hasa P.O. Box 400, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0002-8830-3254

Funding

King Faisal University GrantA083
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study sought to understand students' intentions regarding the use of ChatGPT in learning from the perspective of perceived value, exploring the influence of artificial intelligent (AI) literacy. Drawing on a sample of 676 university students from diverse academic backgrounds, we employed a structured survey questionnaire to measure their perceptions of ChatGPT as a learning tool. The collected data were then analyzed using structural equation modeling (SEM) via SmartPLS 4 software. The findings showed a strong effect of the students' perceived value of ChatGPT on their intention to use it. Our findings suggest that perceived usefulness, perceived enjoyment and perceived fees had a significant influence on students' perceived value of ChatGPT, while perceived risk showed no effect. Moreover, the role of AI literacy emerged as pivotal in shaping these perceptions. Students with higher AI literacy demonstrated an enhanced ability to discern the value of ChatGPT. AI literacy proved to be a strong predictor of students' perception of usefulness, enjoyment, and fees for using ChatGPT in learning. However, AI literacy did not have an impact on students' perceptions of using ChatGPT in learning. This study underscores the growing importance of integrating AI literacy into educational curricula to optimize the reception and utilization of innovative AI tools in academic scenarios. Future interventions aiming to boost the adoption of such tools should consider incorporating AI literacy components to maximize perceived value and, subsequently, use intention.

Indexed as

AIAI literacyChatGPThigher educationperceived value

Identifiers

PMID39336060
PMCPMC11428673

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.