Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39787112›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

Adoption of AI writing tools among academic researchers: A Theory of Reasoned Action approach.

Mohammed A Al-Bukhrani, Yasser Mohammed Hamid Alrefaee, Mohammed Tawfik

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Mohammed A Al-BukhraniDepartment of Accounting, Faculty of Administrative Sciences, Albaydha University, Albaydha, Yemen.ORCID 0000-0002-9695-2879
Yasser Mohammed Hamid AlrefaeeEnglish Department, Faculty of Education, Albaydha University, Albaydha, Yemen.ORCID 0000-0001-9817-222X
Mohammed TawfikFaculty of Computer and Information Technology, Sana'a University, Sana'a, Yemen.ORCID 0000-0002-1227-387X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This research explores the determinants affecting academic researchers' acceptance of AI writing tools using the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA). The impact of attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived barriers on researchers' intentions to adopt these technologies is examined through a cross-sectional survey of 150 researchers. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) is employed to evaluate the measurement and structural models. Findings confirm the positive influence of favorable attitudes and subjective norms on intentions to use AI writing tools. Interestingly, perceived barriers did not significantly impact attitudes or intentions, suggesting that in the academic context, potential benefits may outweigh perceived obstacles to AI writing tool adoption. Contrarily, perceived barriers do not significantly affect attitudes and intentions directly. The TRA model demonstrates considerable explanatory and predictive capabilities, indicating its effectiveness in understanding AI writing tool adoption among researchers. The study's diverse sample across various disciplines and career stages provides insights that may be generalizable to similar academic contexts, though further research with larger samples is needed to confirm broader applicability. Results offer practical guidance for tool developers, academic institutions, and publishers aiming to foster responsible and efficient AI writing tool use in academia. Findings suggest strategies such as demonstrating clear productivity gains, establishing AI Writing Tool programs, and developing comprehensive training initiatives could promote responsible adoption. Strategies focusing on cultivating positive attitudes, leveraging social influence, and addressing perceived barriers could be particularly effective in promoting adoption. This pioneering study investigates researchers' acceptance of AI writing tools using a technology acceptance model, contributing to the understanding of technology adoption in professional contexts and highlighting the importance of field-specific factors in examining adoption intentions and behaviors.

Indexed as

Research PersonnelWritingAdultArtificial IntelligenceAttitudeCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansIntentionMaleSurveys and QuestionnairesTheory of Planned Behavior

Identifiers

PMID39787112
PMCPMC11717249

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.