Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The study examined determinants of library and information science lecturers’ artificial intelligence usage intention for teaching in two regions of Nigeria. The study adopted quantitative methods with the use of a survey. Multi-stage sampling technique comprising of, purposive sampling and total enumeration were used to select 222 lecturers from 20 selected universities in South west and North central, Nigeria. A questionnaire was administered virtually via Google form. After a period of five weeks, 168 of the expected respondents were returned, interpreted and analysed using inferential statistics including Pearson Product Moment Correlation and Multiple Regression and also simple percentages and descriptive statistics where appropriate. The findings revealed that LIS lecturers perceive artificial intelligence to be useful for teaching. Artificial intelligence infrastructure and tools needed for teaching are not available in the department of library and information science across south west and north central universities.

Keywords

artificial intelligence availability perceived usefulness LIS lecturers AI and teaching

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Acosta-Enriquez

B. G.

Ramos Farroñan

E. V.

Villena Zapata

L. I.

Mogollon Garcia

F. S.

Rabanal-León

H. C.

Angaspilco

J. E. M.

Bocanegra

J. C. S.

(2024). Acceptance of artificial intelligence in university contexts: A conceptual analysis based on UTAUT2 theory. Heliyon, 10(19), 1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e38315

Ahmad

Ibrahim

Ahmad

(2017). Managerial, organizational and technological determinants of ICT adoption: Survey of academic staff in Bauchi state. ATBU Journal of Science, Technology and Education, 5(1), 157–165. http://www.atbuftejoste.com/index.php/joste/article/view/340

Aljuaid

Alzahrani

Islam

A. Y. M. A.

(2013). Assessing mobile learning readiness in Saudi Arabia higher education: An empirical study. In Conference: Statistics and operational research international conference, Sarawak, Malaysia.

Ambarwati

Harja

Thamrin

(2020). The role of facilitating conditions and user habits: A case of Indonesian online learning platform. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 7(10), 481–489. https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2020.vol7.no10.481

Atoubi1

E. M.

Jahidi

(2024). Perspectives and experiences of education stakeholders: A quantitative study on the adoption of artificial intelligence in executive training using structural equation modeling. Intelligent Information Management, 16, 104–120. https://doi.org/10.4236/iim.2024.162007

Ayanwale

Molefi

(2024). Exploring intention of undergraduate students to embrace chatbots: from the vantage point of Lesotho. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21(20), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00451-8

Baker

F. W.

(2017). An alternative approach: Openness in education over the last 100 years. TechTrends, 61(2), 130–140. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0095-7

Baker

Smith

(2019). Educ-AI-tion rebooted? Exploring the future of artificial intelligence in schools and colleges. Retrieved from Nesta Foundation website: https://media.nesta.org.uk/documents/Future_of_AI_and_education_v5_WEB.pdf

Bancoro

C. H.

(2024). The relationship between artificial intelligence (AI) usage and academic performance of business administration students. International Journal of Asian Business and Management, 3(1), 27–48. https://doi.org/10.55927/ijabm.v3i1.7876

10.

Bervell

Umar

I. N.

(2017). Validation of the UTAUT model: Re-considering non-linear relationships of exogeneous variables in higher education technology acceptance research. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(10), 6471–6490. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/78076

11.

Bozkurt

(2023). Post digital artificial intelligence. In Jandrić

(Ed.), Encyclopedia of post digital science and education (pp. 198–204). Springer. https://doi.org/:10.1007/978-3-031-35469-4_2-1

12.

Cabero-Almenara

Palacios-Rodríguez

Loaiza-Aguirre

M. I.

de Rivas-Manzano

M. R.

(2024). Acceptance of educational artificial intelligence by teachers and its relationship with some variables and pedagogical beliefs. Education Sciences, 14(7), 740. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14070740

13.

Cao

Duan

Edwards

J. S.

Dwivedi

Y. K.

(2021). Understanding managers’ attitudes and behavioral intentions towards using artificial intelligence for organizational decision-making. Technovation, 106(1), 102312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2021.102312

14.

Cao

Peng

(2025). An empirical study of factors influencing usage intention for generative artificial intelligence products: A case study of China. Journal of Information Science, 51(3), 1513–1528. https://doi.org/10.1177/01655515241297329

15.

Castañeda

Selwyn

(2018). More than tools? Making sense of the ongoing digitisations of higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 15, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-018-0109-y

16.

Chandio

Seman

M. S. A.

Koondhar

M. Y.

Shah

(2019). Qualitative study on ICT adoption and management practices in public sector universities in Sindh Province, Pakistan. University of Sindh Journal of Information and Communication Technology, 3(3), 149–152. http://sujo2.usindh.edu.pk/index.php/USJICT/ar-ticle/view/286

17.

Chen

Xie

Zou

Hwang

G.-J.

(2020). Application and theory gaps during the rise of Artificial Intelligence in Education. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 1, 100002, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2020.100002

18.

Chen

Zou

(2024). Enhancing education quality: Exploring teachers’ attitudes and intentions towards intelligent MR devices. European Journal of Education, 59(4). https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12692

19.

Crawford

Butler-Henderson

Rudolph

Malkawi

Glowatz

Burton

Magni

Lam

(2020). COVID-19: 20 countries’ higher education intra-period digital pedagogy responses. Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2020.3.1.7

20.

Creswell

J. W.

Creswell

J. D.

(2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (pp. 5–25). SAGE Publications. https://www.scirp.org/reference/referencespapers?referenceid=2895169

21.

Davis

F. D.

(1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13, 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008

22.

Dhawan

Batra

(2021). Artificial intelligence in higher education: Promises, perils, and perspective. Open Journal Access System. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/348910302_Artificial_Intelligence_in_Higher_Education_Promises_Perils_and_Perspective

23.

Diebold

(2023). Higher education will have to adapt to generative AI—and that’s a good thing. Center for Data Innovation. https://datainnovation.org/2023/01/higher-education-will-have-to-adapt-to-generative-ai-and-thats-a-good-thing/

24.

Duangekanong

(2022). Applications of artificial intelligence for strategic management of organization. ABAC ODI JOURNAL Vision, Action, Outcome, 9(2), 13–17. https://doi.org/10.14456/

25.

Geddam

Nethravathi

Hussian

(2024). Understanding AI adoption: The mediating role of attitude in user acceptance. Journal of Informatics Education and Research, 4(2), 1664–1672. https://doi.org/10.52783/jier.v4i2.975

26.

Gupta

K. P.

Bhaskar

(2020). Inhibiting and motivating factors influencing teachers’ adoption of AI-based teaching and learning solutions: Prioritization using analytic hierarchy process. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 19, 693–723. https://doi.org/10.28945/4640

27.

Hang

C. N.

Tan

C. W.

P. D.

(2024). MCQGen: A large language model-driven MCQ generator for personalized learning. IEEE Access, 12(1), 23. 102261–102273.

28.

Hoya

Mah

Prilop

Jacobsen

Weber

(2024). Pre-service teachers’ AI usage: The effects of perceived usefulness, subjective norm, behavioral intention, and self-efficacy. Preprint. https//doi.org/10/31219/osf.io/284gk

29.

Imran, M. M., Jamaludin, S., Mohamad-Ayob, A. F., Mohd-Ali, A. A. I., Syed-Ahmad, S. Z. A., Ali-Akhbar, M. F., Suhrab, M., Zainal, N., Norzeli, S., & Mohamed, S. (2023). Application of artificial intelligence in marine corrosion prediction and detection. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 11(2), 256. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse11020256

30.

Irizarry-Nones

Palepu

Wallace

(2017). Artificial intelligence (AI). www.bu.edu/lernet/artemis/years/2017/projects/FinalPresenations/A.I.%20Presentation.pdf

31.

Kamalov

Santandreu Calonge

Gurrib

(2023). New era of artificial intelligence in education: Towards a sustainable multifaceted revolution. Sustainability, 15(16), 12451. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2305.18303.pdf. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151612451

32.

Kuleto

Ilić

Dumangiu

Ranković

Martins

O. M. D.

Păun

Mihoreanu

(2021). Exploring opportunities and challenges of artificial intelligence and machine learning in higher education institutions. Sustainability, 13(18), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.3390/su131810424

33.

Lavidas

Voulgari

Papadakis

Athanassopoulos

Anastasiou

Filippidi

Komis

Karacapilidis

(2024). Determinants of humanities and social sciences students’ intentions to use artificial intelligence applications for academic purposes. Information, 15, 314. https://doi.org/10.3390/info15060314

34.

(2023). Determinants of college students’ actual use of AI-based systems: An extension of the Technology Acceptance Model. Sustainability, 15(6), 1–16.

35.

Liu

(2024). Measuring EFL learners’ use of ChatGPT in informal digital learning of English based on the technology acceptance model. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 18(1), 125–138. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2023.2240316

36.

Liu

(2016). Artificial intelligence and its evolution (pp. 5–8). Science Press.

37.

Lin

Pan

(2024). A study on teachers’ willingness to use generative AI technology and its influencing factors: Based on an Integrated Model. Sustainability, 16(16), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16167216

38.

MacCallum

Jeffrey

Kinshuk

N. A.

(2014). Factors impacting teachers’ adoption of mobile learning. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 13(1), 141–162. https://doi.org/10.28945/1970

39.

Mahmoud

(2020). Artificial intelligence applications: An introduction to education development in the light of corona virus pandemic COVID 19 challenges. International Journal of Research in Educational Sciences, 3(4), 171–224. https://doi.org/10.29009/ijres.3.4.4

40.

Manning

(2020). Artificial intelligence definitions. Stanford. https://hai.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/2020-09/AI-Definitions-HAI.pdf

41.

Mijwil

M. M.

Aggarwal

Sonia

Al-Mistarehi

A. H.

Alomari

Gök

Zein Alaabdin

A. M.

Abdulrhman

S. H.

(2022). Has the future started? The current growth of artificial intelligence, machine learning, and deep learning. Iraqi Journal for Computer Science and Mathematics, 3(1), 115–123. https://doi.org/10.52866/ijcsm.2022.01.01.013

42.

Mohsin

F. H.

Isa

N. M.

Ishak

Salleh

H. M.

(2024). Navigating the adoption of artificial intelligence in higher education. International Journal of Business and Technopreneurship, 14(1), 109–120.

43.

Mutanga

M. B.

Jugoo

Adefemi

K. O.

(2024). Lecturers’ perceptions on the integration of artificial intelligence tools into teaching practice. Trends in Higher Education, 3(4), 1121–1133. https://doi.org/10.3390/higheredu3040066

44.

Nikitas

Michalakopoulou

Njoya

Karampatzakis

(2020). Artificial intelligence, transport and the smart city: Definitions and dimensions of a new mobility era. Sustainability MDPI Journal, 12(7), 1–19.

45.

Nwuke

T. J.

Yellowe

A. N.

(2025). Managing education in Nigeria and the emerging technologies in the 21st century classroom. World Journal of Innovation and Modern Technology, 9(1), 1–14.

46.

Ofori

Appiah-Nimo

(2019). Determinants of online shopping among tertiary students in Ghana: An extended technology acceptance model. Cogent Business & Management, 6(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2019.1644715

47.

Omame

Alex-Nmecha

(2020). Artificial intelligence in libraries. In Managing and adapting library information services for future users (pp. 120–144). Publisher: IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-1116-9.ch008

48.

Onyejegbu

L. N.

(2023). Challenges of integrating AI ethics into higher education curricula in West Africa: Nigerian universities narrative. In Book: AI ethics in higher education: Insights from Africa and beyond (pp. 57–66). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-23035-6_5

49.

Opele

J. K.

Alade

T. T.

jifowoke

R. O.

(2024). The impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on teaching and research experience of university lecturers: A review. Unizik Journal of Educational Research and Policy Studies, 17(1), 1–15. https://unijerps.org/index.php/unijerps/article/view/596

50.

Paniagua

Istance

(2018). Teachers as designers of learning environments: The importance of innovative pedagogies. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264085374-en

51.

Pence

H. E.

(2022). Future of artificial intelligence in libraries. The Reference Librarian, 63(4), 133–143. https://doi.org/10.1080/02763877.2022.2140741

52.

Popenici

S. A.

Kerr

(2017). Exploring the impact of artificial intelligence on teaching and learning in higher education. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 12(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41039-017-0062-8

53.

Rauniar

Rawski

Yang

Johnson

(2014). Technology acceptance model (TAM) and social media usage: An empirical study on Facebook. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 27, 6–30. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEIM-04-2012-0011

54.

Robinson

R. N.

(2018). Artificial intelligence: Its importance, challenges and applications in Nigeria. Direct Resource Journal of Engineering and Information Technology, 5(5), 36–41.

55.

Rumangkit

Surjandy

Billman

(2023). The effect of performance expectancy, facilitating condition, effort expectancy, and perceived easy to use on intention to using media support learning based on Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT). E3S Web of Conferences, 426, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202342602004

56.

Saputra

Tahir

M. H. M.

Ariff Albakri

I. S. M.

Zaini

Mokhtar

M. M.

Ismail

Anisaturrahmi

Sholihah

S. Z.

(2023). Online learning experiences for speaking activities among Malaysian undergraduate ESL students. World Journal of English Language, 13(7), 355. https://doi.org/10.5430/wjel.v13n7p355

57.

Sarfraz

Khawaja

K. F.

Ivascu

(2022). Factors affecting business school students’ performance during the COVID-19 pandemic: A moderated and mediated model. International Journal of Management Education, 20(2), 100630. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2022.100630

58.

Sarıçoban

(2013). Cover, TOC and editorial. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 9(1), 1–8.

59.

Siedlecki

S. L.

(2020). Understanding descriptive research designs and methods. Clinical Nurse Specialist, 34(1), 8–12. https://doi.org/10.1097/NUR.0000000000000493

60.

Stone

Brooks

Brynjolfsson

Calo

Etzioni

Hager

, et al. (2016). Artificial intelligence and life in 2030. In Proceedings of the one-hundred-year study on artificial intelligence: Report of the 2015–2016 (pp. 1–20). Stanford University.

61.

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization [UNESCO]. (2019). The challenge and opportunities of artificial intelligence in education. The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.

62.

Ursavaş

Ö. F.

(2022). Technology acceptance model: History, theory, and application. In Ursavaş

Ö. F.

(Ed.), Conducting technology acceptance research in education: Theory, models, implementation, and analysis (pp. 57–91). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10846-4_4

63.

Usoro

Echeng

Majewski

(2014). A model of acceptance of Web 2.0 in learning in higher education: A case study of two cultures. E–Learning and Digital Media, 11(6), 644–653. www.wwwords.co.uk/ELEA. https://doi.org/10.2304/elea.2014.11.6.644

64.

Velli

Zafiropoulos

(2024). Factors that affect the acceptance of educational AI tools by Greek teachers—A structural equation modelling study. European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education, 14(1), 2560–2579. https://doi.org/ 10.3390/ejihpe14090169

65.

Vijayakumar

Sheshadri

(2019). Applications of artificial intelligence in academic libraries. International Journal of Computer Science and Engineering, 7(16), 136–140. https://doi.org/10.26438/ijcse/v7si16.136140

66.

Wang

Rau

P. L. P.

Yuan

(2023). Measuring user competence in using artificial intelligence: Validity and reliability of artificial intelligence literacy scale. Behaviour and Information Technology, 42(1), 1324–1337. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2022.2072768

67.

Watted

(2025). Teachers’ perceptions and intentions toward AI integration in education: Insights from the UTAUT model. Power System Technology, 49(2), 164–183.

68.

Wong

C. A.

Cummings

G. G.

Ducharme

(2013). The relationship between nursing leadership and patient outcomes: A systematic review update. Journal of Nursing Management, 21(5), 709–724. https://doi.org/10.1111/JONM.12116

69.

Wong

G. K. W.

(2016). The behavioral intentions of Hong Kong primary teachers in adopting educational technology. Education and Technology Resources Delivery, 64(2), 313–338.

70.

Wang

(2024). “To use or not to use?” A mixed-methods study on the determinants of EFL college learners’ behavioral intention to use AI in the distributed learning context. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 25(3), 158–178. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v25i3.7708

71.

Yan

Sha

Zhao

Martinez-Maldonado

Chen

Jin

Gašević

(2023). Practical and ethical challenges of large language models in education: A systematic literature review. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2303.13379

72.

Yeni

Gecu-Parmaksiz

(2016). Preservice special education teachers’ acceptance and use of ICT: A structural equation model. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 4(12), 118–125. https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v41i12.1929

73.

Yuan

Liu

Deng

Ding

Wijaya

T. T.

(2023). Facilitating conditions as the biggest factor influencing elementary school teachers’ usage behaviour of dynamic mathematics software in China. Mathematics, 11, 1536. https://doi.org/10.3390/math11061536

74.

Zhang

Pei

(2019). Perceived value, cognitive process, and behavioral intention: A construct analysis of MOOC learning behavior. China Distance Education Limited, 9(2), 340–351.

Determinants of Library and Information Science Lecturers’ Artificial Intelligence Usage Intention for Teaching in Two Regions of Nigeria

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References