This study explores the adoption of Generative AI (GenAI) technologies, specifically ChatGPT, among students and lecturers in higher education through the lens of the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT). Using a quantitative cross-sectional survey design and a purposive—convenience sampling approach, data were collected from 415 participants (296 students and 119 lecturers) through an online questionnaire. Results highlight Performance Expectancy as the strongest predictor of ChatGPT use for both groups, underscoring the importance of perceived academic benefits. Social Influence also played a key role, especially among students, where peer use increased adoption, with stronger effects noted among female students. Among lecturers, social factors influenced perceptions of ChatGPT's usefulness more than ease of use. Additionally, an indirect link was found between procrastination and ChatGPT use, mediated by academic performance pressure. The study offers practical insights for institutions, emphasizing the need for pedagogical guidelines and training to support effective GenAI integration.
AbbasM.JamF. A.KhanT. I. (2024). Is it harmful or helpful? Examining the causes and consequences of generative AI usage among university students. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21(10), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00444-7
2.
AbrehM. K.ArthurF.AkweteyF. A.NorteyS. A. (2025). Modelling STEM students’ intention to learn artificial intelligence (AI) in Ghana: A PLS-SEM and fsQCA approach. Discover Artificial Intelligence, 5(1), 223. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44163-025-00466-8
3.
AcquahB. Y. S.ArthurF.SalifuI.MensahE.OpokuE.NorteyS. A.TettehS. A. (2025). Modelling economics students’ use of ChatGPT and academic performance: Insights from self-determination theory and epistemic curiosity. Discover Artificial Intelligence, 5(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44163-025-00373-y
4.
AdamsD.ChuahK. M.DevadasonE.AzzisM. (2024). From novice to navigator: Students’ academic help-seeking behaviour, readiness, and perceived usefulness of ChatGPT in learning. Education and Information Technologies, 29(11), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12427-8
AnsariA. N.AhmadS.BhuttaS. (2024). Mapping the global evidence around the use of ChatGPT in higher education: A systematic scoping review. Education and Information Technologies. Advance online publication, 29(9), 1–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12223-4
7.
BahrounZ.AnaneC.AhmedV.ZaccaA. (2023). Transforming education: A comprehensive review of generative artificial intelligence in educational settings through bibliometric and content analysis. Sustainability, 15(17), 12983. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151712983
8.
BaigM. I.YadegaridehkordiE. (2025). Factors influencing academic staff satisfaction and continuous usage of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 22(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-025-00506-4
9.
BaytakA. (2023). The acceptance and diffusion of generative artificial intelligence in education: A literature review. Current Perspectives in Educational Research, 6(1), 7–18. https://doi.org/10.46303/cuper.2023.2
10.
BouteraaM.Bin-NashwanS. A.Al-DaihaniM.DirieK. A.BenlahceneA.SadallahM.ZakiH. O.LadaS.AnsarR.FookL. M.ChekimaB. (2024). Understanding the diffusion of AI-generative (ChatGPT) in higher education: Does students’ integrity matter?Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 14, Article 1004021-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2024.100402
Cambra-FierroJ. J.BlascoM. F.López-PérezM.-E.TrifuA. (2025). ChatGPT adoption and its influence on faculty well-being: An empirical research in higher education. Education and Information Technologies, 30(2), 1517–1538. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12871-0
13.
ChaudhryI. S.SarwaryS. A. M.El RefaeG. A.ChabchoubH. (2023). Time to revisit existing student’s performance evaluation approach in higher education sector in a new era of ChatGPT—A case study. Cogent Education, 10(1), Article 2210461. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2210461
14.
ChoiJ. N.MoranS. V. (2009). Why not procrastinate? Development and validation of a new active procrastination scale. The Journal of Social Psychology, 149(2), 195–212. https://doi.org/10.3200/SOCP.149.2.195-212
15.
CooperG. (2023). Examining science education in ChatGPT: An exploratory study of generative artificial intelligence. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 32, 444–452. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-023-10039-y
16.
CreswellJ. W.CreswellJ. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications.
17.
DavisF. D.BagozziR. P.WarshawP. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982–1003. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982
18.
DenovanA.DagnallN. (2019). Development and evaluation of the chronic time pressure inventory. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article 2717. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02717
19.
DevlinM.GrayK. (2007). In their own words: A qualitative study of the reasons Australian university students plagiarize. Higher Education Research & Development, 26(2), 181–198. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360701310805
20.
DwivediY.HughesL.IsmagilovaE.AartsG.CoombsC.CrickT. (2021). Artificial intelligence (AI): Multidisciplinary perspectives on emerging challenges, opportunities, and agenda for research, practice and policy. International Journal of Information Management, 57(7), 101994. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.08.002
21.
EladiaC., et al. (2024). Eye on AI: Investigating the intention to use and acceptance of generative artificial intelligence in Bulacan State university. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 30(8), 236–251. https://doi.org/10.53555/kuey.v30i8.6458
22.
ElnaemM. H.OkuyanB.MubarakN.ThabitA. K.AbouKhatwaM. M.RamatillahD. L.IsahA.Al-JumailiA. A.NazarN. I. M. (2025). Students’ acceptance and use of generative AI in pharmacy education: International cross-sectional survey based on the extended unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy, 47(4), 1097–1108. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-025-01936-w
23.
GazitT.EitanT.GalL.GradovitchN. (2025). Adoption of Generative AI Technologies: Insights from the UTAUT2 Model, personality characteristics, and behavioural factors. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 42(1). https://doi.org/10.1002/jcal.70162
HairJ. F.BlackW. C.BabinB. J.AndersonR. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Pearson Education.
26.
HasebrookJ. P.MichalakL.KohnenD.MetelmannB.MetelmannC.BrinkrolfP.MöllerB. (2023). Digital transition in rural emergency medicine: Impact of job satisfaction and workload on communication and technology acceptance. PLOS ONE, 18(1), e0280956. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0280956
27.
HayesA. F. (2018). Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A regression-based approach (Methodology in the Social Sciences) (2nd ed.). The Guilford Press.
28.
HuL.-t.BentlerP. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
29.
KohH. P.ScullyG.WoodliffD. R. (2011). The impact of cumulative pressure on accounting students’ propensity to commit plagiarism: An experimental approach. Accounting & Finance, 51(4), 985–1005. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-629X.2010.00381.x
30.
LazarusR. S.FolkmanS. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. Springer.
31.
LinM. P.-C.ChangD. H.WinneP. H. (2025). A proposed methodology for investigating student–chatbot interaction patterns in giving peer feedback. Educational Technology Research and Development, 73(2), 353–386. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-024-10408-3
32.
MacNeilS.TranA.MogilD.BernsteinS.RossE.HuangZ. (2022). Generating diverse code explanations using the GPT-3 large language model. Proceedings of the 2022 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research, 2, 37–39. https://doi. org/10.1145/3501709.3544280
33.
MeyerJ. G.UrbanowiczR. J.MartinP. C.O’ConnorK.LiR.PengP. C.BrightT. J.TatonettiN.WonK. J.Gonzalez-HernandezG.MooreJ. H. (2023). ChatGPT and large language models in academia: Opportunities and challenges. BioData Mining, 16(1), Article 20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13040-023-00339-9
34.
MohamedM. G.GoktasP.KhalafS. A.KucukkuyaA.Al-FaouriI.SeleemE. A. E. S.IbraheemA.AbdelhafezA. M.AbdullahS. O.ZakiH. N.NashwanA. J. (2025). Generative artificial intelligence acceptance, anxiety, and behavioral intention in the Middle East: A TAM-based structural equation modelling approach. BioMed Central Nursing, 24(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-025-03436-8
OlugbaraC. T.ImendaS. N.OlugbaraO. O.KhuzwayoH. B. (2020). Moderating effect of innovation consciousness and quality consciousness on intention-behaviour relationship in E-learning integration. Education and Information Technologies, 25(1), 329–350. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-09960-w
37.
PetersonM. F.SmithP. B.AkandeA.AyestaranS.BochnerS.CallanV.ChoN. G.JesuinoJ. C.D’AmorimM.FrancoisP.-H.HofmannK.KoopmanP. L.LeungK.LimT. K.MortazaviJ.RadfordM.RopoA.SavageG.SetiadB.ViedgeC. (1995). Role confict, ambiguity, and overload: A 21-nation study. Academy of Management Journal, 38(2), 429–452. https://doi.org/10.5465/256687
38.
RavšeljD.KeržičD.TomaževičN.UmekL.BrezovarN.A. IahadN., et al. (2025). Higher education students’ perceptions of ChatGPT: A global study of early reactions. PLoS ONE, 20(2), e0315011. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal. pone.0315011
39.
RozentalA.ForsströmD.HussoonA.KlingsieckK. B. (2022). Procrastination among university students: Differentiating severe cases in need of support from less severe cases. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 783570. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.783570
40.
SalifuI.ArthurF.AcquahB. Y. S.OpokuE.NorteyS. A.BoatengE. (2025). Exploring graduate students’ use of generative artificial intelligence in Ghana: Insights from an extended UTAUT2 model, PLS-SEM, IPMA and fsQCA. Discover Education, 4(305), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-025-00603-6
41.
SalifuI.ArthurF.ArkorfulV.NorteyS. A.Osei-YawS. R. (2024). Economics students’ behavioural intention and usage of ChatGPT in higher education: A hybrid structural equation modelling-artificial neural network approach. Cogent Social Sciences, 10(1), 2300177. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2300177
42.
SergeevaO. V.ZheltukhinaM. R.ShoustikovaT.TukhvatullinaL. R.DobrokhotovD. A. (2025). Understanding higher education Students’ adoption of generative AI technologies: An empirical investigation using UTAUT2. Contemporary Educational Technology, 17(2), 571. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/16039
43.
ShataA.HartleyK. (2025). Artificial intelligence and communication technologies in academia: Lecturers perceptions and the adoption of generative AI. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 22(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-025-00511-7
44.
SteelP. (2007). The nature of procrastination: A meta-analytic and theoretical review of quintessential self-regulatory failure. Psychological Bulletin, 133(1), 65–94. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.133.1.65
45.
SvartdalF.LøkkeJ. A. (2022). The ABC of academic procrastination: Functional analysis of a detrimental habit. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 1019261. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1019261
46.
SzollosA. (2009). Toward a psychology of chronic time pressure: Conceptual and methodological review. Time & Society, 18(2–3), 332–350. https://doi.org/10.1177/0961463X09337847
47.
TiwariC. K.BhatM. A.KhanS. T.SubramaniamR.KhanM. A. I. (2023). What drives students toward ChatGPT? An investigation of the factors influencing adoption and usage of ChatGPT. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 21(5). https://doi.org/10.1108/ITSE-04-2023-0061
48.
TırpanE. C. (2024). The ethical issues in generative artificial intelligence: A systematic review. Business & Management Studies: An International Journal, 12(4), 729–747. https://doi.org/10.15295/bmij.v12i4.2431
49.
UstunA. B.Karaoglan-YilmazF. G.YilmazR. (2023). Educational UTAUT-based virtual reality acceptance scale: A validity and reliability study. Virtual Reality, 27(2), 1063–1076. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-022-00738-6
50.
VenkateshV.MorrisM. G.DavisG. B.DavisF. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
51.
VenkateshV.RamanR.Cruz-JesusF. (2024). AI and emerging technology adoption: A research agenda for operations management. International Journal of Production Research, 62(15), 5367–5377. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2023.2192309
52.
VenkateshV.ThongJ. Y.XuX. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of Information Technology: Extending the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 36(1), 157–178. https://doi.org/10.2307/41410412
53.
XiaoM.TianZ.ZuW. (2023). Impact of teacher–student interaction on students’ classroom wellbeing under online education environment. Education and Information Technologies. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12102-4
54.
YanD. (2023). Impact of ChatGPT on learners in a L2 writing practicum: An exploratory investigation. Education and Information Technologies, 28(11), 13943–13967. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11742-4
55.
YangC.ChenA.ChenY. (2021). College students’ stress and health in the COVID-19 pandemic: The role of academic workload, separation from school, and fears of contagion. Public Library of Science ONE, 16(2), e0246676. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0246676
56.
YilmazF. G. K.YilmazR.CeylanM. (2024). Generative artificial intelligence acceptance scale: A validity and reliability study. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 40(24), 8703–8715. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2023.2288730
57.
YilmazR.YilmazF. G. K. (2023). Augmented intelligence in programming learning: Examining student views on the use of ChatGPT for programming learning. Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans, 1(2), 100005. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbah.2023.100005
