Volume 14 (2025) Download Cover Page

Determinants of the Intention to Use ChatGPT in the Work of University Lecturers

Article Number: e2025053  |  Available Online: February 2025  |  DOI: 10.22521/edupij.2025.14.53

Hieu Hoang Nguyen , Na Le Pham , Trang Thu Nguyen , Chau Minh Mai

Abstract

Background/purpose. The introduction of ChatGPT has rapidly transformed various aspects of life. It has raised concerns about its impact on current jobs, especially in education. The study aims to examine the factors that may influence university lecturers’ intention to adopt ChatGPT in their work.

Materials/methods. This study uses the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology 2 (UTAUT2) model and proposes new components to examine the factors. The data was collected from 460 lecturers working in various universities in Hanoi, Vietnam.

Results. The results have identified that Performance Expectancy has the most significant positive impact, followed by Personal Innovativeness, Effort Expectancy, Social Influence, and Image. On the other hand, facilitating conditions and insecurity negatively affect the intention to use, while hedonic motivation has no impact. The results also highlight the moderating effect of Information Accuracy on the relationships between some of these factors and the Intention to Use.

Conclusion. The study extends the UTAUT2 model through the integration of novel constructs and provides insights into optimizing and enhancing the use of AI in the academic environment.

Keywords: ChatGPT, information accuracy, insecurity, intention to use, lecturers

References

 A.I. Open, (2024) Chatgpt: optimizing language models for dialogue, Introducing ChatGPT. https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt/

Abbas, N., Whitfield, J., Atwell, E., Bowman, H., Pickard, T., & Walker, A. (2022). Online chat and Chatbots to enhance mature student engagement in higher education. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 41(3), 308–326.https://doi.org/10.1080/02601370.2022.2066213

Acosta-Enriquez, B. G., Agustín, M., Ballesteros, A., Jordan, O. H., Roca, C. L., & Tirado, K. S. (2024). Analysis of college students’ attitudes toward the use of ChatGPT in their academic activities: effect of intent to use, verification of information and responsible use. BMC Psychology, 12(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-024-01764-z

Acosta-Enriquez, B. G., Arbulú Ballesteros, M. A., Arbulu Perez Vargas, C. G., Orellana Ulloa, M. N., Gutiérrez Ulloa, C. R., Pizarro Romero, J. M., Gutiérrez Jaramillo, N. D., Cuenca Orellana, H. U., Ayala Anzoátegui, D. X., & López Roca, C. (2024). Knowledge, attitudes, and perceived Ethics regarding the use of ChatGPT among generation Z university students. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 20(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-024-00157-4

Agarwal, R., & Prasad, J. (1998). A conceptual and operational definition of personal innovativeness in the domain of information technology. Information Systems Research, 9(2), 204–215. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.9.2.204

Alam, M. S., Khan, T.-U.-Z., Dhar, S. S., & Munira, K. S. (2020). HR Professionals’ Intention to Adopt and Use of Artificial Intelligence in Recruiting Talents. Business Perspective Review, 2(2), 15–30. https://doi.org/10.38157/business-perspective-review.v2i2.122

Al-Azawei, A., & Alowayr, A. (2020). Predicting the intention to use and hedonic motivation for mobile learning: A comparative study in two Middle Eastern countries. Technology in Society, 62, 101325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101325

Alduraywish, Y., Patsavellas, J., & Salonitis, K. (2022). Critical success factors for improving learning management systems diffusion in KSA HEIs: An ISM approach. Education and Information Technologies, 27(1), 1105–1131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10621-0

Al-Emran, M., AlQudah, A. A., Abbasi, G. A., Al-Sharafi, M. A., & Iranmanesh, M. (2023). Determinants of using AI-based chatbots for knowledge sharing: evidence from PLS-SEM and fuzzy sets (fsQCA). IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 71, 4985-4999.https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2023.3237789

Al-kfairy, M. (2024). Factors Impacting the Adoption and Acceptance of ChatGPT in Educational Settings: A Narrative Review of Empirical Studies. Applied System Innovation, 7(6), 110. https://doi.org/10.3390/ASI7060110

Alotumi, M. (2022). Factors influencing graduate students’ behavioral intention to use Google Classroom: Case study-mixed methods research. Education and Information Technologies, 27(7), 10035–10063. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11051-2

Al-Qudah, A. A., & Shaalan, K. (2022). Extending UTAUT to understand the acceptance of queue management technology by physicians in UAE. Proceedings of International Conference on Emerging Technologies and Intelligent Systems: ICETIS 2021, 2 , 969-981. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85990-9_77

Alrishan, A. M. H. (2023). Determinants of Intention to Use ChatGPT for Professional Development among Omani EFL Pre-service Teachers. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 22(12), 187–209. https://doi.org/10.26803/IJLTER.22.12.10

Alshurideh, M., al Kurdi, B., Salloum, S. A., Arpaci, I., & Al-Emran, M. (2023). Predicting the actual use of m-learning systems: a comparative approach using PLS-SEM and machine learning algorithms. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(3), 1214–1228. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1826982

Alyoussef, I. Y. (2022). Acceptance of a flipped classroom to improve university students’ learning: An empirical study on the TAM model and the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT). Heliyon, 8(12). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e12529

Ameri, A., Khajouei, R., Ameri, A., & Jahani, Y. (2020). Acceptance of a mobile-based educational application (LabSafety) by pharmacy students: An application of the UTAUT2 model. Education and Information Technologies, 25(1), 419–435. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-09965-5

Anthony, W. L., Zhu, Y., & Nower, L. (2021). The relationship of interactive technology use for entertainment and school performance and engagement: Evidence from a longitudinal study in a nationally representative sample of middle school students in China. Computers in Human Behavior, 122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106846

Aparicio, M., Bacao, F., & Oliveira, T. (2017). Grit in the path to e-learning success. Computers in Human Behavior, 66, 388–399. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CHB.2016.10.009

Bahadur, S. G. C., Bhandari, P., Gurung, S. K., Srivastava, E., Ojha, D., & Dhungana, B. R. (2024). Examining the role of social influence, learning value and habit on students’ intention to use ChatGPT: the moderating effect of information accuracy in the UTAUT2 model. Cogent Education, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2024.2403287

Barua, B. & Urme, U. N. (2023). Assessing the online teaching readiness of faculty member. Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching and Learning, ahead-of-print(ahead-of-print). https://doi.org/10.1108/JRIT-10-2022-0070

Bower, M., DeWitt, D., & Lai, J. W. M. (2020). Reasons associated with preservice teachers’ intention to use immersive virtual reality in education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 51(6), 2215–2233. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13009

Brown, S. A., & Venkatesh, V. (2005). Model of adoption of technology in households: A baseline model test and extension incorporating household life cycle. MIS quarterly, 29(3), 399-426. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148690

Cabrera-Sánchez, J. P., & Villarejo-Ramos, Á. F. (2020). Acceptance and use of big data techniques in services companies. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.101888

Camilleri, M. A. (2024). Factors affecting performance expectancy and intentions to use ChatGPT: Using SmartPLS to advance an information technology acceptance framework. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2024.123247

Canziani, B., & MacSween, S. (2021). Consumer acceptance of voice-activated smart home devices for product information seeking and online ordering. Computers in Human Behavior, 119, 106714. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CHB.2021.106714

Chakava, M. H., Mberia, H. K., & Gatero, G. (2018). Relationship between performance expectancy and use of new media in scholarly communication by academic staff in public universities in Kenya. IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 23(6), 49–59. https://doi.org/10.9790/0837-2306044959

Chen, M., Wang, X., Wang, J., Zuo, C., Tian, J., & Cui, Y. (2021). Factors affecting college students’ continuous intention to use online course platform. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 2(2), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42979-021-00498-8

Chong, A., Blut, M., & Zheng, S. (2022). Factors Influencing the Acceptance of Healthcare Information Technologies: A Meta-Analysis. Information and Management, 59(3). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2022.103604

Chung, M., Ko, E., Joung, H., & Kim, S. J. (2020). Chatbot e-service and customer satisfaction regarding luxury brands. Journal of Business Research, 117, 587–595. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JBUSRES.2018.10.004

Cohen, J., Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410606266

Cotton, D. R. E., Cotton, P. A., & Shipway, J. R. (2024). Chatting and cheating: Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 61(2), 228–239. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2190148

Crawford, J., Cowling, M., & Allen, K. A. (2023). Leadership is needed for ethical ChatGPT: Character, assessment, and learning using artificial intelligence (AI). Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 20(3), 02. https://doi.org/10.53761/1.20.3.02

Črček, N., & Patekar, J. (2023). Writing with AI: University Students’ Use of ChatGPT. Journal of Language and Education, 9(4), 128–138. https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2023.17379

Dajani, D., & Abu Hegleh, A. S. (2019). Behavior intention of animation usage among university students. Heliyon, 5(10), e02536. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e02536

Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, 13(3), 319–339. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008

Dergaa, I., Chamari, K., Zmijewski, P., & Ben Saad, H. (2023). From human writing to artificial intelligence generated text: Examining the prospects and potential threats of ChatGPT in academic writing. Biology of Sport, 40(2), 615-622. https://doi.org/10.5114/biolsport.2023.125623

Dwivedi, Y. K., Kshetri, N., Hughes, L., Slade, E. L., Jeyaraj, A., Kar, A. K., Baabdullah, A. M., Koohang, A., Raghavan, V., Ahuja, M., Albanna, H., Albashrawi, M. A., Al-Busaidi, A. S., Balakrishnan, J., Barlette, Y., Basu, S., Bose, I., Brooks, L., Buhalis, D., ... Wright, R. (2023). So what if ChatGPT wrote it? Multidisciplinary perspectives on opportunities, challenges and implications of generative conversational AI for research, practice and policy. International Journal of Information Management, 71, 102642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102642

El-Masri, M., & Tarhini, A. (2017). Factors affecting the adoption of eLearning 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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9508-8   

Fagan, M. H. (2019). Factors Influencing Student Acceptance of Mobile Learning in Higher Education. Computers in the Schools, 36(2), 105–121. https://doi.org/10.1080/07380569.2019.1603051

Faqih, K. M. S., & 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101787

Filieri, R., & McLeay, F. (2013). E-WOM and Accommodation. Journal of Travel Research, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287513481274

Foroughi, B., Senali, M. G., Iranmanesh, M., Khanfar, A., Ghobakhloo, M., Annamalai, N., & Naghmeh-Abbaspour, B. (2024). Determinants of Intention to Use ChatGPT for Educational Purposes: Findings from PLS-SEM and fsQCA. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 40(17), 4501–4520. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2023.2226495

Graf, A., & Bernardi, R. E. (2023). ChatGPT in research: Balancing ethics, transparency and advancement. Neuroscience, 515, 71-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroscience.2023.02.008 

Greitemeyer, T., & Kastenmüller, A. (2023). HEXACO, the Dark Triad, and Chat GPT: Who is willing to commit academic cheating? Heliyon, 9(9). https://doi.org/10.1016/J.HELIYON.2023.E19909

Haenlein, M., & Kaplan, A. (2021). Artificial intelligence and robotics: Shaking up the business world and society at large. Journal of Business Research, 124, 405-407.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.10.0

Horodyski, P. (2023). Applicants’ perception of artificial intelligence in the recruitment process. Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2023.100303

Houhamdi, Z., & Athamena, B. (2019). Impacts of information quality on decision-making. Global Business and Economics Review, 21(1), 26. https://doi.org/10.1504/gber.2019.10017577

Hsu, C. L., & Lin, J. C. C. (2016). Effect of perceived value and social influences on mobile app stickiness and in-app purchase intention. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 108, 42–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TECHFORE.2016.04.012

Ifenthaler, D., & Schumacher, C. (2023). Reciprocal issues of artificial and human intelligence in education. In Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 55(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2022.2154511

Jahangir, N., & Begum, N. (2008). The role of perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, security and privacy, and customer attitude to engender customer adaptation in the context of electronic banking. African Journal of Business Management, 2(2), 032–040. https://doi.org/10.5897/AJBM.9000634

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. 2017 International Conference on Digital Arts, Media and Technology (ICDAMT), 205–209. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICDAMT.2017.7904962

Jarrah, A. M., Wardat, Y., & Fidalgo, P. (2023). Using ChatGPT in academic writing is (not) a form of plagiarism: What does the literature say? Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 13(4), e202346. https://doi.org/10.30935/ojcmt/13572

Kabra, G., Ramesh, A., Akhtar, P., & Dash, M. K. (2017). Understanding behavioural intention to use information technology: Insights from humanitarian practitioners. Telematics and Informatics, 34(7), 1250–1261. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TELE.2017.05.010

Kang, M., Liew, B. Y. T., Lim, H., Jang, J., & Lee, S. (2015). Investigating the determinants of mobile learning acceptance in korea using UTAUT2.  Lecture Notes in Educational Technology, 209–216. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-44188-6_29

Karakose, T., Demirkol, M., Aslan, N., Kose, H., & Yirci, R. (2023). A conversation with ChatGPT about the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on education: Comparative review based on human–AI collaboration. Educational Process: International Journal, 12(3), 7-25. https://doi.org/10.22521/edupij.2023.123.1

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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-09858-z

Kwak, Y., Seo, Y. H., & Ahn, J. W. (2022). Nursing students’ intent to use AI-based healthcare technology: Path analysis using the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. Nurse Education Today, 119, 105541. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.NEDT.2022.105541

Kwee-Meier, S. T., Bützler, J. E., & Schlick, C. (2016). Development and validation of a technology acceptance model for safety-enhancing, wearable locating systems. Behaviour & Information Technology, 35(5), 394–409. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2016.1141986

Lampo, A., & Silva, S. C. (2022). How Social Influence and Image Impact on the Intention to Use a Technology: A Study from the Battery Electric Vehicle Domain. ACM ICEME '22: Proceedings of the 2022 13th International Conference on E-business, Management and Economics, 142–146. https://doi.org/10.1145/3556089.3556123

Lin, C.-C., Huang, A. Y. Q., & Yang, S. J. H. (2023). A Review of AIDriven Conversational Chatbots Implementation Methodologies and Challenges (1999–2022). Sustainability, 15(5), 4012. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15054012 

Lu, J., Wang, L., & Hayes, L. A. (2012). How do technology readiness, platform functionality and trust influence C2C user satisfaction? Journal of Electronic Commerce Research: JECR, 13(1). http://www.jecr.org/node/57

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. https://doi.org/10.1108/LHTN-01-2023-0009

Menon, D., & Shilpa, K. (2023). “Chatting with ChatGPT”: Analyzing the factors influencing users’ intention to Use the Open AI’s ChatGPT using the UTAUT model. Heliyon, 9(11). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e20962

Mijwil, M., & Aljanabi, M. (2023). Towards artificial intelligence-based cybersecurity: The practices and ChatGPT generated ways to combat cybercrime. Iraqi Journal for Computer Science and Mathematics, 4(1), 65–70. https://doi.org/10.52866/ijcsm.2023.01.01.0019

Mijwil, M. M., Aljanabi, M., & Ali, A. H. (2023). ChatGPT: Exploring the Role of Cybersecurity in the Protection of Medical Information. Mesopotamian Journal of CyberSecurity, 2023, 18–21. https://doi.org/10.58496/MJCS/2023/004

Moore, G. C., & Benbasat, I. (1991). Development of an Instrument to Measure the Perceptions of Adopting an Information Technology Innovation. Information Systems Research, 2(3), 192–222. https://doi.org/10.1287/ISRE.2.3.192

Namahoot, K. S., & Laohavichien, T. (2015). An analysis of behavioral intention to use Thai internet banking with quality management and trust. Journal of Internet Banking and Commerce, 20(3). https://doi.org/10.4172/1204-5357.1000119

Nazaretsky, T., Ariely, M., Cukurova, M., & Alexandron, G. (2022).Teachers’ trust in AI-powered educational technology and a professional development program to improve it. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(4), 914–931. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13232

Nguyen, H. V., Nguyen, C. H., & Hoang, T. T. B. (2018). Green consumption: Closing the intention‐behavior gap. Journal of Social Sciences Research, 25(3), 45-60. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.1875

Nikolopoulou, K., Gialamas, V., & Lavidas, K. (2021). Habit, hedonic motivation, performance expectancy and technological pedagogical knowledge affect teachers’ intention to use mobile internet. Computers and Education Open, 2, 100041. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2021.100041

Nikou, S. A., & Economides, A. A. (2017). Mobile-Based Assessment: Integrating acceptance and motivational factors into a combined model of Self-Determination Theory and Technology Acceptance. Computers in Human Behavior, 68, 83-95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.11.020

Oliveira, T., Thomas, M., Baptista, G., & Campos, F. (2016). Mobile payment: Understanding the determinants of customer adoption and intention to recommend the technology. Computers in Human Behavior, 61, 404–414. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CHB.2016.03.030

Oluwajana, D., Idowu, A., Nat, M., Vanduhe, V., & Fadiya, S. (2019). The adoption of students’ hedonic motivation system model to gamified learning environment. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 14(3), 156–167. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-18762019000300109

Panahifar, F., Byrne, P. J., Salam, M. A., & Heavey, C. (2018). “Supply chain collaboration and firm’s performance: The critical role of information sharing and trust.” Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 31(3), 358–379. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEIM-08-2017-0114

Parasuraman, A., & Colby, C. L. (2014). An Updated and Streamlined Technology Readiness Index. Journal of Service Research, 18(1), 59–74. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670514539730

Park, J., & Woo, S. E. (2022). Who Likes Artificial Intelligence? Personality Predictors of Attitudes toward Artificial Intelligence. The Journal of Psychology, 156(1), 68–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.2021.2012109

Pillai, R., Sivathanu, B., Metri, B., & Kaushik, N. (2023). Students’ adoption of AI-based teacher-bots (T-bots) for learning in higher education. Information Technology & People, 37(1), 328–355. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITP-02-2021-0152

Putra, F. W., Rangka, I. B., Aminah, S., & Aditama, M. H. (2023). ChatGPT in the higher education environment: Perspectives from the theory of high order thinking skills. Journal of Public Health, 45(4), 840-841. https://doi.org/10.1093/pubmed/fdad120

Rahim, F., Yan, X., Bibi, N., Nawaz, S., & Ming, Y. (2022). Epidermal Growth Factor Outperforms Placebo in the Treatment of Diabetic Foot Ulcer: A Meta-Analysis. International Journal of Diabetes and Clinical Research, 9(1), 153. https://doi.org/10.23937/2377-3634/1410153

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. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v6n7p157

Rashid, A. bin, & Kausik, M. A. K. (2024). AI revolutionizing industries worldwide: A comprehensive overview of its diverse applications. Hybrid Advances, 7, 100277. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.HYBADV.2024.100277

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. https://doi.org/10.1108/JARHE-02-2021-0054

Rogers, E. M. (1983). Diffusions of innovations (3rd ed.), Free Press, New York.

Rudhumbu, N. (2022). Applying the UTAUT2 to predict the acceptance of blended learning by university students. Asian Association of Open Universities Journal, 17(1), 15–36. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAOUJ-08-2021-0084/FULL/PDF

Rudolph, J., Tan, S., & Tan, S. (2023). ChatGPT: Bullshit spewer or the end of traditional assessments in higher education? Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching, 6(1), 342–363. https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.9

Sallam, M., Elsayed, W., Al-Shorbagy, M., Barakat, M., el Khatib, S., Ghach, W., Alwan, N., Hallit, S., Malaeb, D., Yin, H., Ye, X., John-Adubasim, I., Khatib, E. S., & Khatib, E. (2024). ChatGPT usage and attitudes are driven by perceptions of usefulness, ease of use, risks, and psycho-social impact: a study among university students in the UAE. Frontiers in Education, 9, 1414758. https://doi.org/10.3389/FEDUC.2024.1414758

Sang, S., Lee, J., & Lee, J. (2009). E-government adoption in Cambodia: A partial least squares approach. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 4(2), 138–157. https://doi.org/10.1108/17506161011047370

Sok, S., & Heng, K. (2023). Opportunities, challenges, and strategies for using ChatGPT in higher education: A literature review. Journal of Digital Educational Technology, 4(1), ep2401. https://doi.org/10.30935/jdet/14027

Strzelecki, A. (2023). To use or not to use ChatGPT in higher education? A study of students’ acceptance and use of technology. Interactive Learning Environments, 33(4), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2023.2209881

Strzelecki, A. (2024). Students’ Acceptance of ChatGPT in Higher Education: An Extended Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology. Innovative Higher Education, 49(2), 223–245. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10755-023-09686-1/TABLES/4

Suh, B., & Han, I. (2003). The Impact of Customer Trust and Perception of Security Control on the Acceptance of Electronic Commerce. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 7(3), 135-161. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27751068 

Taecharungroj, V. (2023). What can ChatGPT Do? Analyzing early reactions to the innovative AI Chatbot on Twitter. Big Data and Cognitive Computing, 7(1), 35. https://doi.org/10.3390/bdcc7010035

Tamilmani, K., Rana, N. P., Wamba, S. F., & Dwivedi, R. (2021). The extended Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT2): A systematic literature review and theory evaluation. International Journal of Information Management, 57, 102269. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJINFOMGT.2020.102269

Twum, K. K., Ofori, D., Keney, G., & Korang-Yeboah, B. (2022). Using the UTAUT, personal innovativeness and perceived financial cost to examine student’s intention to use E-learning. Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management, 13(3), 713–737. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSTPM-12-2020-0168

van der Heijden, H. (2004). User Acceptance of Hedonic Information Systems. MIS Quarterly, 28(4), 695–704. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148660

Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186–204. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926

Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-4781. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540

Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. L., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, 36(1), 157–178. https://doi.org/10.2307/41410412

Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. L., & Xu, X. (2016). Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology: A Synthesis and the Road Ahead, 17(5), 328–376. https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2800121

Williamson, B., Macgilchrist, F., & Potter, J. (2023). Re-examining AI, automation and datafication in education. Learning, Media and Technology, 48(1), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2023.2167830

Zhang, C., Schießl, J., Plößl, L., Hofmann, F., & Gläser-Zikuda, M. (2023). Acceptance of artificial intelligence among pre-service teachers: a multigroup analysis. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1186/S41239-023-00420-7/TABLES/9

Zhao, G., Fan, M., Yuan, Y., Zhao, F., & Huang, H. (2021). The comparison of teaching efficiency between virtual reality and traditional education in medical education: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Annals of Translational Medicine, 9(3), 252–252. https://doi.org/10.21037/ATM-20-2785

Zhuo, T. Y., Huang, Y., Chen, C., & Xing, Z. (2023). Exploring AI Ethics of ChatGPT: A Diagnostic Analysis. ArXiv.Org. https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2301.12867

 

Announcement

EDUPIJ Citation Metrics

EDUPIJ News!

ANNOUNCEMENT

Message from the Editor-in-Chief,

We would like to inform our authors, reviewers, and stakeholders that EDUPIJ has entered Scopus’s re-evaluation process, as officially communicated (dated 2025-12-09). This assessment is a standard quality assurance practice applied to indexed journals and aims to ensure sustained editorial quality, ethical integrity, and alignment with Scopus’s evolving evaluation framework.

EDUPIJ welcomes this process and views it as an opportunity to further consolidate its editorial governance, strengthen publication ethics, and enhance peer-review rigor.

Strengthening Editorial and Ethical Standards

To ensure full compliance with international best practices and to proactively address Scopus evaluation criteria, the following measures have been formally implemented:

1. Selective Acceptance Policy for 2026 and Beyond

In response to increased submission volume in 2025 (see Journal Metrics: https://edupij.com/index/sayfa/18/journal-metrics), EDUPIJ will adopt a more selective acceptance policy starting in 2026 and continuing in the years ahead. In doing so, the geographic distribution of authors will also be taken into account to ensure that editorial decisions are informed by transparent, year-to-year submission and authorship patterns. Acceptance rates will be carefully aligned with editorial capacity to ensure a rigorous double-blind peer review process supported by active reviewer engagement and uncompromised editorial oversight. This policy reflects our commitment to quality-driven growth rather than volume-based expansion, and it directly addresses observations that the geographic spread of authors has changed significantly during the same period by ensuring that any such shifts are systematically monitored and considered within our quality assurance framework.

In line with this approach, we have adopted a Publication Volume Policy, enacted on 2025-12-07, which establishes clear upper limits on annual publication volume and defines a framework for maintaining EDUPIJ’s output at sustainable, long-term levels, comparable to pre-2025 volumes under normal conditions. This policy is also publicly available at https://edupij.com/index/sayfa/41/publication-volume-journal-metrics-policy.

From 2026 onwards, our objective is to maintain a moderate and stable annual volume, prioritising quality and selectivity rather than growth.

2. Enhanced Author and Manuscript Integrity Screening

All submissions now undergo mandatory integrity checks, including automated screening for retraction history and potential ethical risks prior to peer review. These procedures are designed to safeguard originality, research integrity, and transparency at every stage of the editorial process.

3. Establishment of a Publication Ethics Review Committee

A dedicated Publication Ethics Review Committee has been constituted to evaluate high-risk submissions, oversee ethical investigations when necessary, and ensure consistent adherence to COPE guidelines and internationally recognized publishing standards. All ethical decisions are documented and managed through a structured, transparent process.

Ongoing Commitment:

EDUPIJ remains firmly committed to rigorous double-blind peer review, transparent editorial policies, responsible scholarly communication, and the advancement of high-quality educational research at an international level.

Our journal continues to demonstrate steady progress in terms of international visibility, indexing coverage, and citation performance. We are confident that the Scopus re-evaluation process will further support the journal’s long-term sustainability and academic impact.

We sincerely thank our authors, reviewers, and the broader scholarly community for their continued trust and contribution to EDUPIJ.

Sincerely,
Prof. Turgut Karaköse, Editor-in-Chief

 

Posted: 2025-12-09