Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42332107›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2026

AI self-efficacy and anxiety among university teachers.

Houyu Wu, Eng Hoe Wee

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Houyu WuSchool of Artificial Intelligence, Neijiang Normal University, Hongqiao Road, Neijiang, 64100, Sichuan, China. why2714why@gmail.com.ORCID 0009-0005-5854-0266
Eng Hoe WeeFaculty of Education, Languages, Psychology and Music, SEGi University, Kota Damansara, Selangor, 47810, Malaysia. weeenghoe@segi.edu.my.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With the rapid integration of AI into higher education, teachers' psychological responses are critical for technology adoption. This study examines AI self-efficacy and AI anxiety among university teachers in a Chinese university. It investigates the relationship between these two constructs and explores differences based on gender, age and academic major. A quantitative survey was administered to 350 teachers selected through stratified random sampling based on major. Results showed that both AI self-efficacy and AI anxiety were significantly above the neutral midpoint (M = 4.48, SD = 0.76; M = 4.35, SD = 0.85). AI self-efficacy was strongly and negatively associated with AI anxiety (r = - 0.59, p <0.01) and remained a significant negative predictor after controlling for gender, age, and major (β = - 0.112, p = .026). Female teachers reported higher anxiety and lower self-efficacy than male teachers, whereas computer science teachers reported the highest self-efficacy and the lowest anxiety. These findings suggest that university teachers may feel simultaneously capable of using AI and apprehensive about its broader implications. The study provides evidence from Chinese higher education and highlights the value of differentiated institutional support that addresses both teachers' confidence in using AI and their professional concerns.

Indexed as

AnxietyArtificial IntelligenceFacultySelf EfficacyAdultChinaFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesUniversitiesAI anxietyAI Self-efficacyArtificial intelligenceTechnology adoptionUniversity teachers

Identifiers

PMID42332107
PMCPMC13434712

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.