Factors Affecting The Adoption and Use of ChatGPT

International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education
Volume 20 • Issue 1
Factors Affecting the Adoption and

Use of ChatGPT in Higher Education
Sultan Hammad Alshammari, Department of Educational Technology, Faculty of Education, University of Ha’il, Saudi Arabia*
Mohammed Habib Alshammari, Department of Educational Technology, Faculty of Education, University of Ha’il, Saudi Arabia
ABSTRACT
The current study aims at assessing the factors which could affect students’ use of ChatGPT. The study proposed
a theoretical model that included five factors. Data were collected from 136 students using a questionnaire. The
data were analyzed using two steps: CFA for measuring the model and SEM for analyzing the relationships
and testing hypothesis. The findings revealed that both performance expectancy and facilitating conditions
significantly influenced students’ intentions to use ChatGPT. Contrary to expectations, both social influence
and effort expectancy had insignificant effects. By elucidating the core factors influencing the utilization of
ChatGPT, this study can provide valuable insights for policymakers. Furthermore, this study contributes to
the existing literature and lays the foundation for future research seeking a deeper understanding of the factors
influencing the use of other AI technologies in teaching and learning.
Keywords
AMOS, Artificial Intelligence, ChatGPT, Open AI, SEM, UTAUT
INTRODUCTION
Artificial intelligence (AI) has played a big role in increasing digitalization of societies. AI has the
capability for automating duties or tasks, processing large amounts of data, and providing predictive
insights that revolutionize many aspects in daily life (Yang, 2022). AI was identified as a technology
that can mimic humans in its responses, producing responses that can be interpreted as signs of
intentionality and judgment (Shubhendu & Vijay, 2013). The advancement of technology, for instance,
neural networks and machine learning, has led to deeper discussions about the definition of artificial
intelligence (Wang, 2019). The difficulties lay in the artificiality of parameters and approaches in
which computers are not like the intelligence of humans: they are considered to be less intelligent
than humans overall but can deal with calculating large numbers faster.
In addition, discussions regarding the expected potential effects of AI have begun to gain
prominence. For example, there is a concern about job loss due to the implementation of AI (Pavlik,
2023). Furthermore, the discussion and consideration of AI in education is still in its early stages.
According to Celik (2023), educators have not yet recognised its potential for learning and teaching.
DOI: 10.4018/IJICTE.339557 *Corresponding Author

This article published as an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and production in any medium,
provided the author of the original work and original publication source are properly credited.
1
Despite calls for the further implementation of AI, some educators resist utilising software which
collects students’ data or remain sceptical of IT companies which show technology to be a solution
for all concerns in education (Stockman & Nottingham, 2022).
Currently, the world seems to be paying attention to a new technology named ChatGPT. ChatGPT
is a chatbot which uses AI power and was developed by OpenAI. It has been supplied with a large
body of language, which allows it to generate texts in response to users’ prompts. ChatGPT was
established in November 2022 and then was available for free to users with an OpenAI account
(OpenAI, 2023). It produces and generates texts that simulate human language (OpenAI, 2023).
ChatGPT relies on machine learning and algorithms for processing large contents of text, such as
websites, books, Wikipedia, and news articles (Scharth, 2022). By analysing and processing data
terabytes, its models learn the structure and patterns of language, which enables ChatGPT to provide
users with meaningful and relevant content based on their requests.
However, the rise of ChatGPT brings concerns regarding its potential effect on universities. Some
have proposed that universities should, instead of using applications for assessment, reconsider the role
of assessment in enhancing learning. Others have suggested that ChatGPT could be utilised to enhance
students’ critical thinking, writing, and other skills. In this way, ChatGPT can be considered an essential
and valuable technological tool to innovate learning, teaching, and assessment, transforming the human
relationship to knowledge. When comparing ChatGPT with other emerging technologies, ChatGPT
provides resources and materials for several types of learners’ levels, supporting learners with disabilities,
assisting in advanced training sessions, and enhancing teaching, such as in lessons planning, personalised
learning, evaluation and assessment, etc. (Kasneci et al., 2023). Furthermore, ChatGPT provides
personalised assistance to support students’ learning to help enhance their learning, engagement, and
outcome (Alshahrani, 2023). Thus, several educational institutions and universities started implementing
ChatGPT to gain all of its benefits in supporting their academic courses and enhancing students’ learning.
Universities are concerned about how ChatGPT could impact the role of learning and teaching
in the future, as its power is game-changing and wide (Lim et al., 2023). As they account for the
potential effects of ChatGPT, some researchers and academics have begun to examine its advantages
and challenges, considering various topics, such as creating faking citations and resources (Cooper,
2023), writing assignments, essays and enhancing the writing process (Sullivan et al., 2023). Most
discussion has paid attention to its uses for medical majors (Gilson et al., 2023). Furthermore, others
conducted interviews about ChatGPT’s potential effects in education (Lund & Wang, 2023), while
some focused on its power in publishing, research, and other related issues (Perkins, 2023). Utilising
ChatGPT in academia is new and still under exploration. In addition, most studies have focused on
academics’ views of ChatGPT and its future uses (Howell & Potgieter, 2023; Lund et al., 2023;
Jeon & Lee, 2023; Tsigaris & da Silva, 2023), while students and factors affecting their intention
toward using ChatGPT have received little attention (Tiwari et al., 2023). Moreover, there is a lack
of knowledge regarding how students accept and use ChatGPT and the factors affecting them toward
using it (Tiwari et al., 2023; Abdaljaleel et al., 2023; Raman et al., 2023). Understanding the factors
which can affect students’ intention to utilize ChatGPT is essential, especially if the aim is to enhance
its adoption and use among them (Tiwari et al., 2023), Thus, this current study will cover this gap and
propose a theoretical model for assessing the factors which could affect students’ use of ChatGPT.
The purpose of this study is to investigate the factors influencing the use of ChatGPT and contribute
to policy formulation and educational strategies for the effective use of ChatGPT.
LITERATURE REVIEW
ChatGPT
The current literature review highlights the important role of ChatGPT in supporting the educational
field and enhancing students’ learning activities. ChatGPT can provide the educational field with
2
several supported services, such as in terms of students’ assignments, tests and reducing other repetitive
works and generating creative content (Firaina & Sulisworo, 2023). Repetitive works refer to the
regular work in instructors’ roles, such as lesson planning, grading, and conducting assignments.
Furthermore, ChatGPT could contribute significantly to enhance students’ productivity and assist
students’ improvement of their language skills and motivation. These types of support could enable
students to continue using ChatGPT (Fauzi et al., 2023). Additionally, ChatGPT integrates a variety
of teaching methods. For example, it can facilitate project-based learning and enhance students’
interaction, satisfaction, and willingness to use ChatGPT (Topsakal & Topsakal, 2022).
Additionally, the utilization of ChatGPT has gained more interest among students due to its
potential in enriching their learning experiences. It could assist in providing them with personalised
and quick feedback. ChatGPT has the ability to address students’ needs, offer instant feedback, and
facilitate the comprehension of complicated concepts. Thus, it has become a promising application
which assists in promoting students’ cognitive advancement and participation by supporting their
learning pace and providing a continuous sort which enhances the process of knowledge acquisition
(Sánchez, 2023). Furthermore, students could use ChatGPT for receiving grammatical suggestions
and corrections to gain improvement and detailed feedback of their writing (Osorio, 2023).
Reviewing the literature reveals that the ChatGPT uses in the fields of education remain in the
early stages and are being investigated. Most studies have paid attention to its uses for medical majors
(Gilson et al., 2023). Moreover, some have focused on its effects on education in general (Lund &
Wang, 2023), while others have examined specific areas, such as writing and authorship (Perkins,
2023). Most studies considered the use of ChatGPT by academics, as well as their views on its
future, while its use among students has received little attention. Because ChatGPT was developed
lately, there is a lack of knowledge about how students intend to utilise it. Thus, this current study
will propose a model to examine some factors of these intentions using the well-established unified
theory of the acceptance and use of technology model (UTAUT).
The UTAUT has been adopted for examining the use of different technologies, for instance,
in mobility (Almaiah et al., 2019; Hoi, 2020), blended learning (Chen, 2011; Dakduk et al., 2018),
platforms of e-learning (Zacharis & Nikolopoulou, 2022), and systems of learning management
(Zwain, 2019). Understanding factors which may influence students’ use of any technology is essential
if the aim is to attract them (Adzharuddin & Ling, 2013). To the best of our knowledge, the UTAUT
model has not previously been used for examining students’ intentions to utilize ChatGPT in an
Arab context. Thus, the current study aims at filling that gap and enhancing the current literature
by proposing a theoretical model based on UTAUT for examining factors that could affect students’
utilization of ChatGPT.
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
This study employs UTAUT which was established by Venkatesh et al. (2003). This model is chosen
because it is considered a robust, widely used model for analysing technology adoption in many
different fields, including education (Alshammari, 2021; Ibrahim & Jaafar, 2011; Wong et al., 2013).
This UTAUT contains four main constructs (performance expectancy [PE], effort expectancy [EE],
social influence [SI], and facilitating conditions [FC]) that affect the behaviour intention [BI].
PE refers to users’ beliefs that they will benefit from using a piece of technology. EE concerns the
ease with which they can use it. SI refers to the important people in the users’ life who think that they
must or must not utilize a specific technology. FC refers to the users’ beliefs about the infrastructure
and technical assistance available for utilising a specific technology.
The UTAUT was used for examining various technologies, for example, mobile phones (Hoi,
2020), blended learning (Dakduk et al., 2018), and virtual classrooms (Alshammari, 2021). However,
due to the recent advent of ChatGPT and its role in education, it has not yet been utilised to examine
3
this program, particularly in the Arab context. Thus, the study aims at proposing a model and examining
factors which may affect students’ intentions to utilize ChatGPT.
Research Questions
This study aims at answering the following questions:
What factors affect the students’ intention to utilize ChatGPT for their learning?
Research Hypotheses
PE refers to how much users expect using a specific technology will enhance their performance or
help them complete a targeted task (Venkatesh et al., 2003). It plays a significant role in whether
technology is adopted in an academic setting (El-Masri & Tarhini, 2017). This finding is in line with
some studies, which showed the significant effect of PE on the users’ intentions to adopt various
technologies: for instance, classroom technology (Kumar & Bervell, 2019), mobile learning (Arain
et al., 2019), and learning management systems (Raman & Don, 2013). Thus, we have developed
the following hypothesis:
H1: PE will have a positive effect on the students’ intentions to use ChatGPT.
EE refers to the amount of work users expect it will take to use a specific technology (Venkatesh et
al., 2003). Recent studies have shown its significant effect on the users’ intentions to utilize technology,
for instance, mobile learning (Raza et al., 2022) and Google Classroom (Jakkaew & Hemrungrote,
2017). Thus, we have developed the below hypothesis:
H2: EE will have a positive effect on the students’ intentions to use ChatGPT.
SI refers to the users’ perceptions regarding people who are important to them and think
that they should utilize a specific technology (Venkatesh et al., 2003). Many studies reported
that SI is essential in affecting the users’ intentions to adopt and use different technologies,
such as mobility (Nikolopoulou et al., 2020), e-learning applications (Samsudeen & Mohamed,
2019) and systems of learning management (Ain et al., 2016). Thus, we have developed the
below hypothesis:
H3: SI will have a positive effect on the students’ intentions to use ChatGPT.
FC refers to the level of users who believe that the technical and organizational assistance
exists and supports their use of a particular technology (Venkatesh et al., 2003). FC has been
reported to be a critical factor that affects the users’ intentions to use different education
technologies, such as e-learning applications (Osei et al., 2022), mobility (Kang et al., 2015),
and augmented reality in higher education (Faqih & Jaradat, 2021). Thus, we have developed
the below hypothesis:
H4: FC will have a positive effect on the students’ intentions to use ChatGPT.
The proposed research model is illustrated in Figure 1.
4
Figure 1. Proposed Research Model
METHODOLOGY
Scale
The research instrument used for collecting data was a 5-point Likert scale. All items that measured
constructs in the proposed model were adapted from Venkatesh et al.’s (2003) study. Some
modifications, such as “using ChatGPT”, were added. The construct of PE was addressed by four items,
while EE was addressed by four items, SI was addressed by three items, and FC was addressed by
four items. There were a total of 15 items. All items of the questionnaires are attached in Appendix 1.
Sampling and Data Processing

Two steps in the Analysis of Moment Structures (AMOSs) were conducted for running confirmatory
factor analysis (CFA) and analysing the relationships among the constructs. For analysis using
structural equation modeling (SEM) in AMOS, the minimum suggested sample size is 100 to 200
participants (Kock, 2018). The questionnaires were designed using Google Forms and distributed
to a population of students at the University of Ha’il during their third semester of 2022–2023. One
hundred thirty-six students participated and responded to the surveys. Thus, the number of participants
was appropriate and met the suggestions of prior researchers (Kock, 2018). Then, the received data
were analysed. SPSS was applied to analyse the descriptive information of respondents, while SEM
utilising AMOS was conducted to perform CFA, analyse the relationships, and test the hypotheses.
The following section discusses the results of these analyses.
RESULTS
Part 1: Analysis of Respondents’ Information

One hundred thirty-six students responded and participated in the questionnaires. Table 1 presents the
respondents’ demographic information: gender, academic program, and college. In terms of gender,
most respondents were female (78; 57.4%) and fewer were male (58; 42.6%). Most students were
enrolled in a bachelor’s program (109; 80.1%), followed by students enrolled in a master’s program
5
(19; 14.0%), and those pursuing a higher degree (8; 5.9%). Furthermore, the respondents were enrolled
in different colleges: the majority were enrolled in the education college (50; 36.8%), followed by the
college of art (28; 20.6%), the college of computer science (25; 18.4%), and the college of science
(19; 14.0%). The college of health informatics had the fewest respondents (2; 1.5%). Table 1 shows
demographic information.
Part 2: Confirmatory Factor Analysis “CFA”

CFA is an analysis technique used for developing and validating measurement models, which
can handle multiple correlations, measurement errors, and many constructs at once. Construct,
discriminant, and convergent validity have to be considered before applying SEM analysis and testing
the relationships among constructs (Awang, 2015).
Construct validity is met once all model fit indices meet the values recommended in the literature
(Awang, 2015). CFA was run. The values for these indices and the construct correlations are shown
in Figure 2.
As shown in Figure 2, the model fit indices achieved the recommended level. Thus, construct
validity was met. These values are shown in Table 2.
Then, convergent validity had to be checked. Convergent validity is met when values for composite
reliability (CR) and average value extracted (AVE) are above 0.60 and 0.5 (Hair et al., 2010). The
output showed that CR and AVE were greater than the suggested values, meaning that convergent
validity was attained. Table 3 shows the CR and AVE values.
Discriminant validity was then assessed for ensuring that each construct in the model was distinct
from the others. Table 4 shows the correlations between the constructs. Values in bold refers to the square
roots of AVE. Discriminant validity is attained once these values are greater than the others (Awang,
2015). Thus, the results which are presented in Table 4 confirm the achieved discriminant validity.
Table 1. Demographic Information
Demographic Information of Respondents Frequency Percent

Sex
Male 58 42.6
Female 78 57.4
Academic program
Bachelor 109 80.1
Master 19 14.0
Higher diploma 8 5.9
Colleges
Education 50 36.8
Computer science 25 18.4
Business management 4 2.9
Art 28 20.6
Health informatics 2 1.5
Science 19 14.0
Applied college 8 5.9
Total 136 100.0
6
Figure 2. CFA Output
Table 2. Model Fit Indices
“Name of
“Name of Category” “Index” “Acceptance Value” “Results”
Index”
Achieved (MacCallum et al.,
“Absolute fit” RMSEA 0.107 <0.15
1996)
CFI 0.921 <0.90 Achieved (Awang, 2015)
“Incremental fit” TLI 0.904 <0.90 Achieved (Awang, 2015)
IFI 0.922 <0.90 Achieved (Awang, 2015)
“Parsimonious fit” Chisq/df 2.533 <3.0 Achieved (Awang, 2015)
Table 3. Values of CR and AVE
CR AVE
SI 0.943 0.846
PE 0.907 0.711
EE 0.951 0.831
FC 0.901 0.696
BI 0.916 0.785
Standardised Estimate
SEM has two main categories of outputs: standardised and unstandardised estimates. The standardised
estimate is essential for assessing the coefficient beta, R2, and factor loading, while the unstandardised
estimate is used for computing the critical ratio and testing hypotheses. The standardised estimate
was run first and is presented in Figure 3.
7
Table 4. Discriminant Validity Index
SI PE EE FC BI
SI 0.920
PE 0.541 0.843
EE 0.442 0.463 0.911
FC 0.531 0.465 0.822 0.834
BI 0.550 0.729 0.539 0.623 0.886
Figure 3. Standardised Estimate
The value of R2 shown for the BI construct was 0.64, meaning that 64% of the students’ intentions
to use ChatGPT could be explained by these factors: EE, PE, FC, and SI. This result demonstrates
that the model has a high explanatory power. Cohen (1988) states that R2 values of 0.12 or less mean
that a model has a low explanatory power, whereas values ranging between 0.13 and 0.25 mean a
medium explanatory power, and values above 0.26 indicate a high explanatory power. Thus, the R2
of 0.64 for the dependent construct in this model confirms that it has a high explanatory power in
relation to students’ intentions to use ChatGPT.
Unstandardised Estimate
The regression beta weight and critical ratio are calculated through the unstandardised estimate to
test the hypotheses. The unstandardised estimate was run, and its output is shown in Figure 4.
Hypothesis Testing Results

PE refers to how much the users expect using a specific technology will enhance their performance
or help them complete a targeted task, while EE refers to the amount of work users expect it will
take to use a specific technology. Furthermore, SI refers to the users’ perceptions regarding people
8
Figure 4. Unstandardised Estimate
who are important to them to think that they should utilize a specific technology, whereas FC refers
to the environmental factors necessary for using ChatGPT. The results confirmed that the factors of
PE and FC had a significant positive effect on the students’ intentions to use ChatGPT (β = 0.542, p
< .05; β = 0.353, p < .05). Thus, H1 and H4 were supported. Surprisingly, EE and SI did not have a
significant effect (β = 0.060, p > .05; β = 0.074, p > .05). This finding is in contrast with the original
model of UTAUT conducted by Venkatesh et al. (2003), who found significant effects of both EE and
SI on user behaviour. Thus, H2 and H3 were not supported. Table 5 presents hypothesis testing results.
DISCUSSION
The study aims at proposing a theoretical model and assessing factors which may affect students’
intentions to utilize ChatGPT. The results were interesting: PE and FC had a significant positive
effect on these intentions, while the constructs of EE and SI were insignificant.
PE was a vital construct that significantly affected the students’ intentions to utilize ChatGPT.
This is in line with some prior studies (e.g., Yifan et al., 2023; Hoi, 2020; Min et., 2008; Wu & Chen,
2017; Yuan et al., 2015). The findings imply that once the students perceived using ChatGPT as
useful, then that would build a positive intention toward using it, and then they would use it during
Table 5. Hypothesis Testing Results
Estimate S.E. C.R. P Results

BI <--- PE .542 .085 6.375 *** Supported
BI <--- EE –.060 .150 –.397 .691 Not supported
BI <--- SI .074 .067 1.105 .269 Not supported
BI <--- FC .353 .128 2.763 .006 Supported
9
their learning activities. Furthermore, the findings revealed that PE was an important factor that
determines and predicts the use of ChatGPT. ChatGPT has the ability to provide a personalised and
adaptive learning experience, which might play a vital role in those positive relationships. It could
respond and understand effectively to students’ learning styles and needs by utilising advanced
language algorithm processing. Hence, learners perceive personalised and customised support and
feedback, which would lead to aiding them to overcome the challenges and achieving the learning
objectives. That personalised experience would likely improve students’ performance expectancy
and engage them with using ChatGPT more effectively and frequently. Accordingly, the developers
and designers of ChatGPT must focus on enhancing the quality and usefulness of the software, such
as the benefits students can gain using ChatGPT, to encourage them to perceive it as useful, which
then would affect their intention toward using it.
However, the construction of EE did not affect the students’ intentions. This is in line with
some previous studies (e.g., Ayaz & Yanartas, 2020; Handayani & Sudiana, 2015; Sa’idah, 2017)
but contrasts with studies conducted by Fauz et al., (2018), Marto et al. (2019), and Sultana (2020).
It may imply that the students do not perceive that there are any difficulties with using ChatGPT.
Therefore, effort does not affect their intentions. Furthermore, most students live in the digital age,
where they have daily access to many different technologies and smart devices. Thus, they might not
find using ChatGPT as difficult. Thus, it does not play any role in affecting their intention toward
using it. Another possible explanation might be that most students find ChatGPT as less complex
nowadays and more convenient, especially with the current emerging advanced technologies with
greater sophistication in products of information technology. Nowadays, several user-friendly and
modern technologies consider the important role of user attributes with their designing. Thus, students
might not find any difficulties with using a particular technology. Hence, that might not affect their
intention toward using it.
SI had an insignificant effect on the students’ intentions to utilise ChatGPT. This is consistent with
the findings of studies conducted by Handayani and Sudiana (2015), Sa’idah (2017), Sultana (2020),
and Wong et al. (2013), but contrasts with other studies by Marto et al. (2019), Sultana (2020), and
Sallam et al. (2023). The results imply that when the students use ChatGPT, they do not expect any
assistance or support from their social connections, including friends, teachers, and family. Another
possible explanation is that the sense of need does not increase with age. Thus, SI may have less
effect on university students than younger students; they could be less likely affected by other people’s
opinions regarding a technology (Wong et al., 2013). Furthermore, Venkatesh et al. (2003) highlighted
that PE significantly affected users’ behaviour intention toward using a technology, which is the case
in this study, SI could be revealed to be insignificant. The other explanation of these findings is that
few items, only three, were used for measuring the SI construct. Thus, that might affect the current
finding. Future studies with more items that measure the SI construct are needed. Moreover, it might
be that students nowadays pay less attention to other opinions regarding the use of ChatGPT, as they
found using it as useful (performance), which affected their intention toward using it.
The results also showed that FC significantly affected the students’ intentions to utilize ChatGPT.
This finding matches some previous studies (Ismarmiaty & Etmy, 2018) but contrasts with others
(e.g., Sa’idah, 2017; Sultana, 2020). It implies that the students who have access to the necessary
resources and technical support will use ChatGPT. Therefore, they should be provided with access
to experts and technical assistance if they have any difficulties using ChatGPT. This will make
them more likely to use the program. Furthermore, the findings revealed that administrators and
policymakers at universities should provide students with the appropriate facilities such as Wi-Fi,
computers, supporting resources, and rapid access to the internet in order to build a positive intention
among students regarding the use of ChatGPT, which will lead to positively affect their intention
toward using it.
10
Theoretical Implications
First of all, to the best of our knowledge, no previous studies have used a UTAUT model to consider
AI applications, such as ChatGPT, specifically in an Arab context, and this study is the first to use
it to analyse ChatGPT, thus enriching the literature. Furthermore, the proposed research model was
found to have a high explanatory power (64%), demonstrating that it has identified factors which
affect the students’ intentions to utilize ChatGPT. Furthermore, the study yielded findings that were
consistent with some previous studies and inconsistent with others, making the study interesting in
terms of understanding the phenomenon of the students’ use of ChatGPT.
Practical Implications
The findings provide a deep explanation regarding the factors which could affect students’ intentions
to use ChatGPT. They should be interesting to educational experts, instructors, and the developers of
ChatGPT. For instance, PE significantly affected the students’ intentions to use ChatGPT. This implies
that when students understand the benefits of ChatGPT for their learning, it affects their intentions
and leads to a positive attitude toward the program. Thus, academics and lecturers should explain
these benefits to students and encourage them to use the program effectively to assist them in their
learning. Furthermore, FC also affected the students’ intentions significantly. Thus, institutes and
universities could increase students’ use of ChatGPT by providing them with the essential forms of
assistance, such as technical support, knowledge, and free access to the internet and computer labs.
This would make students more likely to use ChatGPT.
LIMITATIONS AND CONCLUSION
This study included some limitations. For instance, although the sample size was appropriate for
SEM AMOS analysis, it might have affected the generalizability. Further studies could use a larger
sample to lead to a more representative result. In addition, this study focused on examining the original
factors in the UTAUT model and yielded interesting results. Future studies may focus on extending
that model by examining additional factors, such as system quality or students’ satisfaction with
ChatGPT. Moreover, since this study was conducted on the students who used ChatGPT in a university
in Saudi Arabia, it is necessary to conduct studies on students from various universities and grades
to increase the generalizability of research results. Also, additional studies are needed to understand
more deeply about factors influencing the use of ChatGPT. For example, studies considering personal
or social factors influencing the use of ChatGPT are needed. This current study has examined the
factors which affect the students’ intentions to utilize ChatGPT through applying the UTAUT model.
Out of the four hypotheses, two hypotheses were supported, and the other two were rejected. PE and
FC significantly affected the students’ use of ChatGPT, while EE and SI did not. Furthermore, the
proposed research model had a high explanatory power (64%), demonstrating that it has the power
for explaining the factors which affect students’ utilization of ChatGPT.
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
The author of this publication declares there is no conflict of interest.
FUNDING STATEMENT
This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-
for-profit sectors. Funding for this research was covered by the author(s) of the article.
11
REFERENCES
Adzharuddin, N. A., & Ling, L. H. (2013). Learning management system (LMS) among university students:
Does it work. International Journal of e-Education, e-Business, e- Management Learning, 3(3), 248–252. https://
www.ijeeee.org/Papers/233-ET1026.pdf
Ain, N., Kaur, K., & Waheed, M. (2016). The influence of learning value on learning management system use:
An extension of UTAUT2. Information Development, 32(5), 1306–1321. doi:10.1177/0266666915597546
Almaiah, M. A., Alamri, M. M., & Al-Rahmi, W. (2019). Applying the UTAUT model to explain the students’
acceptance of mobile learning system in higher education. IEEE Access : Practical Innovations, Open Solutions,
7, 174673–174686. doi:10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2957206
Alshahrani, A. (2023). The impact of ChatGPT on blended learning: Current trends and future research directions.
International Journal of Data and Network Science, 7(4), 2029–2040. doi:10.5267/j.ijdns.2023.6.010
Alshammari, S. (2021). Determining the factors that affect the use of virtual classrooms: A modification of the
UTAUT Model. Journal of Information Technology Education, 20, 117–135. doi:10.28945/4709
Arain, A. A., Hussain, Z., Rizvi, W. H., & Vighio, M. S. (2019). Extending UTAUT2 toward acceptance of
mobile learning in the context of higher education. Universal Access in the Information Society, 18(3), 659–673.
doi:10.1007/s10209-019-00685-8
Awang, Z. (2015). SEM made simple: A gentle approach to learning structural equation modeling. MPWS Rich
Publication. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/SEM-Made-Simple%3A-A-Gentle-Approach-to-Learning-
Awang/22fc1f1e889665e413ddef4d9830dcf4bce5576f
Ayaz, A., & Yanartaş, M. (2020). An analysis on the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology theory
(UTAUT): Acceptance of electronic document management system (EDMS). Computers in Human Behavior
Reports, 2, 100032. doi:10.1016/j.chbr.2020.100032
Celik, I. (2023). Towards Intelligent-TPACK: An empirical study on teachers’ professional knowledge to ethically
integrate artificial intelligence (AI)-based tools into education. Computers in Human Behavior, 138, 107468.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2022.107468
Chen, J. L. (2011). The effects of education compatibility and technological expectancy on e-learning acceptance.
Computers & Education, 57(2), 1501–1511. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.02.009
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,
Publishers.
Cooper, G. (2023). Examining science education in ChatGPT: An exploratory study of generative artificial
intelligence. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 32(3), 444–452. doi:10.1007/s10956-023-10039-y
Dakduk, S., Santalla-Banderali, Z., & Van Der Woude, D. (2018). Acceptance of blended learning in executive
education. SAGE Open, 8(3). doi:10.1177/2158244018800647
El-Masri, M., & Tarhini, A. (2017). Factors affecting the adoption of e-learning systems in Qatar and USA:
Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology 2 (UTAUT2). Educational Technology Research
and Development, 65(3), 743–763. doi:10.1007/s11423-016-9508-8
Faqih, K. M., & Jaradat, M. I. R. M. (2021). Integrating TTF and UTAUT2 theories to investigate the adoption
of augmented reality technology in education: Perspective from a developing country. Technology in Society,
67, 101787. doi:10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101787
Fauz, A., Widodo, T., & Djatmiko, T. (2018). Pengaruh Behavioral Intention Terhadap use Behavior Pada
Penggunaan Aplikasi Transportasi online (Studi Kasus Pada Pengguna Go-Jek Dan Grab Di Kalangan Mahasiswa
Telkom University). eProceedings of Management, 5(2). https://www.researchgate.net/publication/328216080_
Pengaruh_Behavioral_Intention_terhadap_Use_Behavior_pada_Penggunaan_Aplikasi_Transportasi_Online_
Studi_kasus_pada_pengguna_Go-jek_dan_Grab_di_Kalangan_Mahasiswa_Telkom_University
Fauzi, F., Tuhuteru, L., Sampe, F., Ausat, A. M. A., & Hatta, H. R. (2023). Analysing the role of ChatGPT in
improving student productivity in higher education. Journal of Education, 5(4), 14886–14891. doi:10.31004/
joe.v5i4.2563
12
Firaina, R., & Sulisworo, D. (2023). Exploring the usage of ChatGPT in higher education: Frequency and impact
on productivity. Buletin Edukasi Indonesia, 2(1), 39–46. doi:10.56741/bei.v2i01.310
Gilson, A., Safranek, C. W., Huang, T., Socrates, V., Chi, L., Taylor, R. A., & Chartash, D. (2023). How
does CHATGPT perform on the United States Medical Licensing Examination? The implications of large
language models for medical education and knowledge assessment. JMIR Medical Education, 9(1), e45312.
doi:10.2196/45312 PMID:36753318
Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., & Anderson, R. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Pearson. http://pi.lib.
uchicago.edu/1001/cat/bib/11290427
Handayani, T., & Sudiana, S. (2015). Analisis penerapan model UTAUT (unified theory of acceptance and use
of technology) terhadap perilaku pengguna sistem informasi (Studi kasus: Sistem informasi akademik pada
STTNAS Yogyakarta). Angkasa: Jurnal Ilmiah Bidang Teknologi, 7(2), 165–180. https://ejournals.itda.ac.id/
index.php/angkasa/article/view/159
Hoi, V. N. (2020). Understanding higher education learners’ acceptance and use of mobile devices for language
learning: A Rasch-based path modeling approach. Computers & Education, 146, 103761. doi:10.1016/j.
compedu.2019.103761
Howell, B. E., & Potgieter, P. H. (2023). What do telecommunications policy academics have to fear from GPT-
3? Telecommunications Policy, 47(7), 102576. doi:10.1016/j.telpol.2023.102576
Ibrahim, R., & Jaafar, A. (2011). User acceptance of educational games: A revised unified theory of acceptance
and use of technology (UTAUT). International Journal of Educational and Pedagogical Sciences, 5(5), 557–563.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/288606531_User_acceptance_of_educational_games_A_revised_
unified_theory_of_acceptance_and_use_of_technology_UTAUT
Ismarmiaty, I., & Etmy, D. (2018). Model pendekatan UTAUT2 modifikasi pada analisis penerimaan dan
penggunaan teknologi e-government di Nusa Tenggara Barat. MATRIK: Jurnal Manajemen, Teknik Informatika
dan Rekayasa Komputer, 18(1), 106–114. https://doi.org/10.30812/matrik.v18i1.347
Jakkaew, P., & Hemrungrote, S. (2017). The use of UTAUT2 model for understanding student perceptions using
Google classroom: A case study of introduction to information technology course [Conference session]. 2017
International Conference on Digital Arts, Media and Technology (ICDAMT), Chiang Mai, Thailand. doi:10.1109/
ICDAMT.2017.7904962
Jeon, J., & Lee, S. (2023). Large language models in education: A focus on the complementary relationship
between human teachers and ChatGPT. Education and Information Technologies, 28(12), 15873–15892.
doi:10.1007/s10639-023-11834-1
Kang, M., Liew, B. Y. T., Lim, H., Jang, J., & Lee, S. (2015). Investigating the determinants of mobile learning
acceptance in Korea using UTAUT2. In Emerging issues in smart learning, Lecture Notes in Educational
Technology (pp. 209–216). Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-662-44188-6_29
Kasneci, E., Sessler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., Gasser, U., Groh, G.,
Günnemann, S., Hüllermeier, E., Krusche, S., Kutyniok, G., Michaeli, T., Nerdel, C., Pfeffer, J., Poquet, O., Sailer,
M., Schmidt, A., Seidel, T., & Kasneci, G. et al. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges
of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103, 102274. doi:10.1016/j.
lindif.2023.102274
Kock, N. (2018). Minimum sample size estimation in PLS-SEM: An application in tourism and hospitality
research. In Applying partial least squares in tourism and hospitality research (pp. 1–16). Emerald Publishing
Limited. doi:10.1108/978-1-78756-699-620181001
Kumar, J. A., & Bervell, B. (2019). Google Classroom for mobile learning in higher education: Modelling
the initial perceptions of students. Education and Information Technologies, 24(2), 1793–1817. doi:10.1007/
s10639-018-09858-z
Lim, W. M., Gunasekara, A., Pallant, J. L., Pallant, J. I., & Pechenkina, E. (2023). Generative AI and the future
of education: Ragnarök or reformation? A paradoxical perspective from management educators. International
Journal of Management Education, 21(2), 100790. doi:10.1016/j.ijme.2023.100790
13
Lund, B. D., & Wang, T. (2023). Chatting about ChatGPT: How may AI and GPT impact academia and libraries?
Library Hi Tech News, 40(3), 26–29. doi:10.1108/LHTN-01-2023-0009
Lund, B. D., Wang, T., Mannuru, N. R., Nie, B., Shimray, S., & Wang, Z. (2023). ChatGPT and a new academic
reality: Artificial Intelligence‐written research papers and the ethics of the large language models in scholarly
publishing. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 74(5), 570–581. doi:10.1002/
asi.24750
MacCallum, R. C., Browne, M. W., & Sugawara, H. M. (1996). Power analysis and determination of sample
size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods, 1(2), 130–149. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.1.2.130
Marto, A., Gonçalves, A., Martins, J., & Bessa, M. (2019, February). Applying UTAUT Model for an Acceptance
Study Alluding the Use of Augmented Reality in Archaeological Sites. In VISIGRAPP (Vol. 2, pp. 111–120).
HUCAPP. https://www.scitepress.org/Papers/2019/73641/73641.pdf
Min, Q., Ji, S., & Qu, G. (2008). Mobile commerce user acceptance study in China: A revised UTAUT model.
Tsinghua Science and Technology, 13(3), 257–264. doi:10.1016/S1007-0214(08)70042-7
Nikolopoulou, K., Gialamas, V., & Lavidas, K. (2020). Acceptance of mobile phone by university students
for their studies: An investigation applying UTAUT2 model. Education and Information Technologies, 25(5),
4139–4155. doi:10.1007/s10639-020-10157-9
Open, A. I. (2023). ChatGPT: Optimizing language models for dialogue. https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt
Osei, H. V., Kwateng, K. O., & Boateng, K. A. (2022). Integration of personality trait, motivation and UTAUT 2
to understand e-learning adoption in the era of COVID-19 pandemic. Education and Information Technologies,
27(8), 10705–10730. doi:10.1007/s10639-022-11047-y PMID:35464109
Osorio, J. A. C. (2023). Explorando el potencial de ChatGPT en la escritura científica: Ventajas, desafíos y
precauciones. Sciences et Techniques (Paris), 28(1), 3–5. doi:10.22517/23447214.25303
Pavlik, J. V. (2023). Collaborating with ChatGPT: Considering the implications of generative artificial
intelligence for journalism and media education. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 78(1).
doi:10.1177/10776958221149577
Perkins, M. (2023). Academic integrity considerations of AI large language models in the post-pandemic era:
ChatGPT and beyond. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 20(2), 7. doi:10.53761/1.20.02.07
Raman, A., & Don, Y. (2013). Preservice teachers’ acceptance of learning management software: An application
of the UTAUT2 model. International Education Studies, 6(7), 157–164. doi:10.5539/ies.v6n7p157
Raza, S. A., Qazi, Z., Qazi, W., & Ahmed, M. (2022). E-learning in higher education during COVID-19:
Evidence from blackboard learning system. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 14(4), 1603–1622.
doi:10.1108/JARHE-02-2021-0054
Sa’idah, N. (2017). Analisis penggunaan sistem pendaftaran online (E-health) berdasarkan unified theory of
acceptance and use of technology (uTAuT). Jurnal Administrasi Kesehatan Indonesia, 5(1), 72–81. doi:10.20473/
jaki.v5i1.2017.72-81
Sallam, M., Salim, N. A., Barakat, M., Al-Mahzoum, K., Ala’a, B., Malaeb, D., Hallit, R., & Hallit, S. (2023).
Assessing health students’ attitudes and usage of ChatGPT in Jordan: Validation study. JMIR Medical Education,
9(1), e48254. doi:10.2196/48254 PMID:37578934
Samsudeen, S. N., & Mohamed, R. (2019). University students’ intention to use e-learning systems: A study
of higher educational institutions in Sri Lanka. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 16(3), 219–238.
doi:10.1108/ITSE-11-2018-0092
Sánchez, O. V. G. (2023). Uso y percepción de ChatGPT en la educación superior. Revista de Investigación en
Tecnologías de la Información, 11(23), 98–107. doi:10.36825/RITI.11.23.009
Scharth, M. (2022). The ChatGPT chatbot is blowing people away with its writing skills. Sydney: The University
of Sydney. Available online: https://www. sydney. edu. au/news-opinion/news/2022/12/08/the-chatgpt-chatbot-
isblowing-people-away-with-its-writing-skil. html
14
Shubhendu, S., & Vijay, J. (2013). Applicability of artificial intelligence in different fields of life.
International Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research, 1(1), 28–35. https://www.semanticscholar.
org/paper/Applicability-of-Artificial-Intelligence-in-Fields-Shubhendu-Vijay/2480a71ef5e5a2b1f4a9217
a0432c0c974c6c28c
Stockman, C., & Nottingham, E. (2022). Surveillance capitalism in schools: What’s the problem?’.
Digital Culture & Education, 14(1), 1–15. https://www.digitalcultureandeducation.com/volume-141-
papers/stockman-2022
Sullivan, M., Kelly, A., & McLaughlan, P. (2023). ChatGPT in higher education: Considerations for academic
integrity and student learning. Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching, 6(1). Advance online publication.
doi:10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.17
Sultana, J. (2020). Determining the factors that affect the uses of Mobile Cloud Learning (MCL) platform
Blackboard-a modification of the UTAUT model. Education and Information Technologies, 25(1), 223–238.
doi:10.1007/s10639-019-09969-1
Tiwari, C. K., Bhat, M. A., Khan, S. T., Subramaniam, R., & Khan, M. A. I. (2023). What drives students toward
ChatGPT? An investigation of the factors influencing adoption and usage of ChatGPT. Interactive Technology
and Smart Education. Advance online publication. doi:10.1108/ITSE-04-2023-0061
Topsakal, O., & Topsakal, E. (2022). Framework for a foreign language teaching software for children utilizing
AR, voicebots and ChatGPT (Large Language Models). The Journal of Cognitive Systems, 7(2), 33–38.
doi:10.52876/jcs.1227392
Tsigaris, P., & da Silva, J. A. T. (2023). The role of ChatGPT in scholarly editing and publishing. European
Science Editing, 49, e101121. doi:10.3897/ese.2023.e101121
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology:
Toward a unified view. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478. doi:10.2307/30036540
Wang, P. (2019). On defining artificial intelligence. Journal of Artificial General Intelligence, 10(2), 1–37.
doi:10.2478/jagi-2019-0002
Wong, K. T., Teo, T., & Russo, S. (2013). Interactive whiteboard acceptance: Applicability of the
UTAUT model to student teachers. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 22(1), 1–10. doi:10.1007/
s40299-012-0001-9
Wu, B., & Chen, X. (2017). Continuance intention to use MOOCs: Integrating the technology acceptance model
(TAM) and task technology fit (TTF) model. Computers in Human Behavior, 67, 221–232. doi:10.1016/j.
chb.2016.10.028
Yang, W. (2022). Artificial Intelligence education for young children: Why, what, and how in curriculum
design and implementation. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 3, 100061. doi:10.1016/j.
caeai.2022.100061
Yifan, W., Mengmeng, Y., & Omar, M. K. (2023). “A friend or a foe” Determining factors contributed to the use
of ChatGPT among university students. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education
and Development, 12(2), 2184–2201. doi:10.6007/IJARPED/v12-i2/17400
Yuan, S., Ma, W., Kanthawala, S., & Peng, W. (2015). Keep using my health apps: Discover users’ perception
of health and fitness apps with the UTAUT2 model. Telemedicine Journal and e-Health, 21(9), 735–741.
doi:10.1089/tmj.2014.0148 PMID:25919238
Zacharis, G., & Nikolopoulou, K. (2022). Factors predicting university students’ behavioral intention
to use eLearning platforms in the post-pandemic normal: An UTAUT2 approach with ‘Learning Value’.
Education and Information Technologies, 27(9), 12065–12082. doi:10.1007/s10639-022-11116-2
PMID:35645598
Zwain, A. A. A. (2019). Technological innovativeness and information quality as neoteric predictors of users’
acceptance of learning management system: An expansion of UTAUT2. Interactive Technology and Smart
Education, 16(3), 239–254. doi:10.1108/ITSE-09-2018-0065
15
Sultan Hammad Alshammari is Associate Professor in the Department of Educational Technology at University
of Ha’il, Saudi Arabia. Dr. Sultan gained his Ph.D. in Educational Technology at September, 2018 from Universiti
Teknologi Malaysia (UTM). His academic research interest areas include the use of social media in education,
Virtual reality, Learning Management Systems, IS theories and models, analyzing data using Structural Equation
Modeling SEM, Gamification and other related fields in educational technology. He has over than 15 journal
articles published in internatational indexed journals such as Scopus, Web of Science. He is a reviewer in many
educational journals.
Mohammed Habib Alshammari received his B.A in Computer in Education from University of Hail in 2009. And M.S.
in Information Technology at Western Oregon University in 2013. And received his PhD in Instructional Design and
Technology at Virginia Tech University in 2020. He is currently an assistant professor at the Educational Technology
department. He also serves as the vice dean of E-learning at University of Hail. His main research interests is AI
in learning, Gamification, and LMS utilisation.
16

Factors Affecting The Adoption and Use of ChatGPT

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Factors Affecting The Adoption and Use of ChatGPT

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Factors Affecting The Adoption and Use of ChatGPT

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education

Factors Affecting the Adoption and

DOI: 10.4018/IJICTE.339557 *Corresponding Author

The proposed research model is illustrated in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Proposed Research Model

Sampling and Data Processing

Part 1: Analysis of Respondents’ Information

Part 2: Confirmatory Factor Analysis “CFA”

Table 1. Demographic Information

Demographic Information of Respondents Frequency Percent

Figure 2. CFA Output

Table 2. Model Fit Indices

Table 3. Values of CR and AVE

Table 4. Discriminant Validity Index

Figure 3. Standardised Estimate

Hypothesis Testing Results

Figure 4. Unstandardised Estimate

Table 5. Hypothesis Testing Results

Estimate S.E. C.R. P Results

LIMITATIONS AND CONCLUSION

The author of this publication declares there is no conflict of interest.

You might also like