ArticleFrontiers in artificial intelligence2026
What drives preservice teachers' use of generative AI as instructional media? A structural and configurational analysis.
Article in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The accelerating diffusion of Generative AI (GenAI) in education has sparked interest in understanding how preservice teachers adopt it as instructional media. Drawing on the "Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology 2 (UTAUT2)" as a guided framework, this study examined cognitive, motivational, and contextual drivers of Generative AI use among preservice teachers in Ghana. Methods: The descriptive cross-sectional survey design was used and data were collected from 783 preservice teachers using validated questionnaires. The study used the "Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM) and Fuzzy Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA)" to analyse the data. Results and discussion: The structural model revealed that behavioural intention strongly predicted GenAI use. Performance expectancy, perceived learning opportunity, perceived trust, and social impact significantly influenced intended behaviour. However, the conditions for facilitation, perceived learning opportunity, and perceived trust directly predicted actual use. Together, the model was able to explain 64.7% of the variance in behavioural intention and 68.8% in GenAI use, both using strong predictive relevance. FsQCA results revealed multiple sufficient configurations leading to high behavioural intention and GenAI use. This emphasises that diverse combinations of cognitive, institutional, and affective factors can drive adoption. The findings further highlight that perceived trust and learning opportunities are central to preservice teachers' engagement with GenAI. Also, behavioural intention and structural support remain necessary for sustained use. The study offers both theoretical and practical contributions for embedding GenAI literacy and innovative teaching techniques into teacher education programmes.
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.