Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Integration of ChatGPT into higher education requires assessing university educators’ perspectives regarding this novel technology. This study aimed to validate a survey instrument specifically tailored to assess ChatGPT usability and acceptability among university educators based on the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). The survey instrument comprised 40 TAM-based items in addition to items assessing participants’ demographics. We used exploratory factor analysis (EFA) with principal component analysis (PCA) to assess construct validity and Cronbach’s α for reliability. The final sample comprised 236 university educators, with 72% who heard of ChatGPT before the study (n = 169), of whom 76 have already used ChatGPT (45.0%). The EFA showed a significant Bartlett’s test of sphericity (p < 0.001) and adequate Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure (KMO = 0.698). The six constructs inferred through EFA explained a total of 64% of the variance in the educators’ attitude to ChatGPT. These constructs comprised 31 items classified into: (1) “Effectiveness” (α = 0.845), (2) “Anxiety” (α = 0.862), (3) “Technology readiness (α = 0.885), (4) Perceived usefulness (α = 0.848), (5) Social influence (α = 0.803), and (6) Perceived risk (α = 0.796). The study identified six key constructs that can be exploited for comprehensive understanding of the university educators’ attitude towards ChatGPT. The novel survey instrument herein termed “Ed-TAME-ChatGPT” involved positive influencing factors such as perceived usefulness and effectiveness, positive attitude to technology, and social influence in addition to negative factors comprising anxiety and perceived risk.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Barakat et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: