ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025
Research on the influencing factors of generative artificial intelligence usage intent in post-secondary education: an empirical analysis based on the AIDUA extended model.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond Positive Response Rates: Capturing Information Richness in Workplace AI Acceptance Using Belief Structure TOPSIS.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Factors influencing user adoption of AI painting tools based on the AIDUA model.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Factors influencing single young adults' intentions to accept AI virtual companion apps based on the theory of emotional design.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Examining the impact of generative AI on student motivation and engagement: the mediating role of autonomy-support and autonomous motivation in education.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Impact of multimodal AI literacy, critical thinking, and resilience on academic performance in early childhood education: a multiple chain mediation analysis of multimodal AI self-efficacy and cognitive engagement.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Factors influencing learners learning interest when using AI chatbots-assisted math leaning in higher education.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Generative Artificial Intelligence (AIGC) presents a profound dialectic in higher education: its transformative potential is challenged by deep-seated psychological and ethical barriers. Traditional adoption models fail to capture this complexity. To bridge this gap, this study develops and tests an integrated cognitive-behavioral framework. We posit that AIGC acceptance is a three-stage cognitive appraisal process. By embedding an extended AIDUA model-a framework specifically tailored to the unique challenges of AI adoption-within Cognitive Appraisal Theory, we investigate how novel antecedent dimensions (Socio-Ethical: ethical risk, explainability; Techno-Performance: generation quality, context-awareness) and classical factors (social influence, hedonic motivation, anthropomorphism) shape core technological beliefs (Performance & Effort Expectancy), which in turn mediate the path to acceptance intention via emotion. Furthermore, the moderating roles of gender, academic background, ethnicity, and political affiliation are systematically examined to test the model's boundary conditions. Methods: The model was empirically validated using Structural Equation Modeling and multi-group analysis on survey data from 462 university students across 15 diverse institutions in China. Results: The findings reveal that the cognitive appraisal of AIGC is primarily driven by its perceived capabilities and safety. Techno-Performance (generation quality, Discussion: This study makes a critical theoretical contribution by demonstrating how core technological expectancies are formed through a multi-stage appraisal of utility, ethics, and experience, moving beyond mere identification of influential factors. The findings dismantle the myth of a universal "student user," revealing that AIGC adoption is a culturally and contextually embedded process. Practically, the results provide an evidence-based roadmap for university policymakers and AIGC developers, emphasizing that fostering trust and adoption requires a dual focus: maximizing technological prowess while actively mitigating perceived ethical and cognitive costs through enhanced transparency and user-centric design.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.