The use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools, such as chatbots, has significantly increased in academia and research. The present study seeks to determine the key factors influencing chatbot adoption, as well as attempts to validate the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) in the context of AI chatbots adoption among research scholars. The data for this study were collected through purposive sampling using a cross-sectional survey. The population of the study comprised research scholars enrolled in three public sector universities in Pakistan. The eight-factor proposed measurement model was estimated using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) based on 30 valid items. The goodness of fit indices suggest a favourable fit for the model χ2 = 1.710, DF = 381; p = 0.000; IFI = .902; TLI = 0.886, CFI = 0.900, RMSEA = 0.056. Our research affirms that social influence, trust, and facilitating conditions play pivotal roles as primary predictors of behavioural intentions for AI chatbots adoption among scholars. The study suggests that the perceived risks associated with using AI chatbots due to their potential misuse can be minimized by effectively implementing AI user guidelines, and developing AI literacy among scholars. Information professionals and ethical libraries can play an important role in “building the bridge” between cutting-edge technology capabilities and information users’ needs and rights. The proposed eight-factor AI chatbots adoption model holds substantial potential in understanding the influence of performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, trust, perceived risk, and facilitating conditions on behavioural intention to AI chatbots adoption. This study contributes to the limited body of research investigating the factors influencing AI chatbot adoption among research scholars using the UTAUT model with additional constructs for trust and perceived risk.
AbdullahFWardR (2016) Developing a general extended technology acceptance model for e-learning (GETAMEL) by analysing commonly used external factors. Computers in Human Behavior56: 238–256. DOI: 10.1016/J.CHB.2015.11.036.
2.
AfzalA.ChalumattuR.MatthesF.EspunyL. M. (2024). AdaptEval: Evaluating Large Language Models on Domain Adaptation for Text Summarization. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.11591.
3.
AjzenIFishbeinM (1977) Attitude-behavior relations: A theoretical analysis and review of empirical research. Psychological Bulletin84(5): 888–918. DOI: /10.1037/0033-2909.84.5.888.
4.
AlaiadAAlsharoMAlnsourY (2019) The determinants of M-health adoption in developing countries: An empirical investigation. Applied Clinical Informatics10(5): 820–840. DOI: 10.1055/S-0039-1697906/ID/OR190070RA-39/BIB.
5.
AlalwanAADwivediYKRanaNP (2015) Factors influencing adoption of mobile banking by Jordanian bank customers: Extending UTAUT2 with trust. Computers in Human Behavior50(3): 602–620. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2017.01.002.
6.
AlharbiST (2014) Trust and acceptance of cloud computing: A revised UTAUT model. In: Proceedings—2014 international conference on computational science and computational intelligence, CSCI2014, 2, pp.131–134. DOI: 10.1109/CSCI.2014.107.
7.
AliMYNaeemSBBhattiR, et al. (2024a) Artificial intelligence application in university libraries of Pakistan: SWOT analysis and implications. Global Knowledge, Memory and Communication73(1–2): 219–234. DOI: 10.1108/GKMC-12-2021-0203/FULL/XML.
8.
AliMYNaeemSBBhattiR (2024b) Artificial Intelligence (AI) applications and usage among the LIS professionals of Pakistan. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science. DOI: 10.1177/09610006241241306.
9.
AliMYNaeemSBBhattiR (2020) Artificial intelligence tools and perspectives of university librarians: An overview. Business Information Review37(3): 116–124. DOI: 10.1177/0266382120952016.
10.
AliMYNaeemSBBhattiR (2021) Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Pakistani university library services. Library Hi Tech News38(8): 12–15. DOI: 10.1108/LHTN-10-2021-0065/FULL/XML.
11.
AlmahriFAJBellDMerhiM (2020) Understanding student acceptance and use of chatbots in the United Kingdom Universities: A Structural Equation Modelling Approach. In: 2020 6th IEEE international conference on information management, ICIM 2020, pp.284–288. DOI: 10.1109/ICIM49319.2020.244712.
12.
AlmaiahMAAlamriMMAl-RahmiW (2019) Applying the UTAUT model to explain the students’ acceptance of mobile learning system in higher education. IEEE Access7: 174673–174686. DOI: 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2957206.
13.
AlqahtaniTBadreldinHAAlrashedM, et al. (2023) The emergent role of artificial intelligence, natural learning processing, and large language models in higher education and research. Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy19(8): 1236–1242. DOI: 10.1016/J.SAPHARM.2023.05.016.
14.
AltalhiM (2021) Toward a model for acceptance of MOOCs in higher education: the modified UTAUT model for Saudi Arabia. Education and Information Technologies26(2): 1589–1605. DOI: 10.1007/S10639-020-10317-X/TABLES/6.
15.
AndersB (2023) Is using ChatGPT cheating, plagiarism, both, neither, or forward thinking?. Patterns4(3): 100694. DOI: 10.1016/j.patter.2023.100694.
16.
AndrewsJEWardHYoonJW (2021) UTAUT as a model for understanding intention to adopt AI and related technologies among librarians. Journal of Academic Librarianship47(6): 102437. DOI: 10.1016/j.acalib.2021.102437.
17.
AnnamalaiNAb RashidRHashmiUM, et al. (2023) Using chatbots for English language learning in higher education. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence5: 100153. DOI: 10.1016/J.CAEAI.2023.100153.
18.
ArshadNBaberMUUllahA (2024) Assessing the transformative influence of ChatGPT on research practices among scholars in Pakistan. Mesopotamian Journal of Big Data10: 1–10. DOI: 10.58496/MJBD/2024/001.
19.
AzamMNaeemSB (2022) Academic integrity among medical students and postgraduate trainees in the teaching hospitals of South Punjab Pakistan. Health Information and Libraries Journal39(4): 377–384. DOI: 10.1111/hir.12458.
20.
BalakrishnanJAbedSSJonesP (2022) The role of meta-UTAUT factors, perceived anthropomorphism, perceived intelligence, and social self-efficacy in chatbot-based services?. Technological Forecasting and Social Change180(December 2021): 121692. DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121692.
21.
BanduraA (1991) Social cognitive theory of self-regulation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes50(2): 248–287. DOI: 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90022-L.
22.
BehlAChavanMJainK, et al. (2022) The role of organizational culture and voluntariness in the adoption of artificial intelligence for disaster relief operations. International Journal of Manpower43(2): 569–586. DOI: 10.1108/IJM-03-2021-0178.
23.
BervellBUmarIN (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 Education13(10): 6471–6490. DOI: 10.12973/EJMSTE/78076.
24.
BilquiseGIbrahimSSalhiehSEM (2023) Investigating student acceptance of an academic advising chatbot in higher education institutions. Education and Information Technologies29: 1–26. DOI: 10.1007/s10639-023-12076-x.
25.
BoontarigWChutimaskulWChongsuphajaisiddhiV, et al. (2012) Factors influencing the Thai elderly intention to use smartphone for e-Health services. SHUSER 2012—2012 IEEE Symposium on Humanities, Science and Engineering Research4: 479–483. DOI: 10.1109/SHUSER.2012.6268881.
26.
BorreroJDYousafzaiSYJavedU, et al. (2014) Expressive participation in Internet social movements: Testing the moderating effect of technology readiness and sex on student SNS use. Computers in Human Behavior30: 39–49. DOI: 10.1016/J.CHB.2013.07.032.
27.
CaiLYuenKFWangX (2023) Explore public acceptance of autonomous buses: An integrated model of UTAUT, TTF and trust. Travel Behaviour and Society31: 120–130. DOI: 10.1016/j.tbs.2022.11.010.
28.
ChengXZhangXCohenJ, et al. (2022) Human vs. AI: Understanding the impact of anthropomorphism on consumer response to chatbots from the perspective of trust and relationship norms. Information Processing & Management59(3): 102940. DOI: 10.1016/J.IPM.2022.102940.
29.
ChokriB (2012) Factors influencing the adoption of the e- earning technology in teaching and learning by students of a university class. European Scientific Journal (ESJ)8(28): 165–190. Available at: http://eujournal.org/index.php/esj/article/view/645
ChoudhuryAShamszareH (2023) Investigating the impact of user trust on the adoption and use of ChatGPT: Survey analysis. Journal of Medical Internet Research25(July): e47184. DOI: 10.2196/47184.
32.
CraigRDaltonD (2014) Developing a platform for a culture of honest inquiry and the academic construction of knowledge in first-year students. International Journal for Educational Integrity10(1): 56–69. DOI: 10.21913/IJEI.V10I1.934.
33.
DaveD. M.MandvikarS.EngineerP. A. (2023). Augmented intelligence: Human-AI collaboration in the era of digital transformation. International Journal of Engineering Applied Sciences & Technology8(6): 24–33.
34.
DawarSPanwarSDhakaS, et al. (2022) Antecedents and role of trust in chatbot use intentions: an indian perspective. Marketing and Management of Innovations13(4): 198–206. DOI: 10.21272/mmi.2022.4-18.
35.
de Andrés-SánchezJGené-AlbesaJ (2023) Explaining policyholders’ chatbot acceptance with an unified technology acceptance and use of technology-based model. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research18(3): 1217–1237. DOI: 10.3390/jtaer18030062.
DuttaD (2017) Developing an Intelligent Chat-bot Tool to Assist High School Students for Learning General Knowledge Subjects’. Georgia Institute of Technology. Available at: http://hdl.handle.net/1853/59088 (accessed 11 October 2023).
38.
DwivediYKRanaNPJeyarajA, et al. (2019) Re-examining the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT): Towards a revised theoretical model. Information Systems Frontiers21(3): 719–734. DOI: 10.1007/s10796-017-9774-y.
39.
EsselHBVlachopoulosDEssumanAB, et al. (2024) ChatGPT effects on cognitive skills of undergraduate students: Receiving instant responses from AI-based conversational large language models (LLMs). Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence6(December 2023): 100198. DOI: 10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100198.
40.
FiratM (2023) What ChatGPT means for universities: Perceptions of scholars and students. Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching6(1): 57–63. DOI: 10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.22.
41.
GansserOAReichCS (2021) A new acceptance model for artificial intelligence with extensions to UTAUT2: An empirical study in three segments of application. Technology in Society65: 101535. DOI: 10.1016/J.TECHSOC.2021.101535.
42.
GiannakouliVVraimakiEKoulourisA, et al. (2023) How academic librarians combat student plagiarism. The Journal of Academic Librarianship49(6): 102785. DOI: 10.1016/J.ACALIB.2023.102785.
43.
GunasingheAHamidJAKhatibiA, et al. (2020) The adequacy of UTAUT-3 in interpreting academician’s adoption to e-Learning in higher education environments. Interactive Technology and Smart Education17(1): 86–106. DOI: 10.1108/ITSE-05-2019-0020/FULL/PDF.
44.
Hasan EmonMMHassanFNahidMH, et al. (2023) Predicting adoption intention of artificial intelligence. Ajse22(2): 189–196.
45.
HsiaoCHTangKY (2014) Explaining undergraduates’ behavior intention of e-textbook adoption: Empirical assessment of five theoretical models. Library Hi Tech32(1): 139–163. DOI: 10.1108/LHT-09-2013-0126.
46.
HuangCYYangMCHuangCY. (2021) An empirical study on factors influencing consumer adoption intention of an ai-powered chatbot for health and weight management. International Journal of Performability Engineering17(5): 422–432. DOI: 10.23940/ijpe.21.05.p2.422432.
47.
HuangJXLeeKSKwonOW, et al. (2017) A chatbot for a dialogue-based second language learning system. CALL in a climate of change: Adapting to turbulent global conditions–short papers from EUROCALL, pp.151–156.
48.
IcekA (1991) The theory of planned behavior organizational behavior and human decision processes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes50(2): 179–211.
49.
JainRGargNKheraSN (2022) Adoption of AI-enabled tools in social development organizations in India: An extension of UTAUT model. Frontiers in Psychology13(June): 893691. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.893691.
50.
JoshiH (2021) Perception and adoption of customer service chatbots among millennials: an empirical validation in the Indian context. in In Proceedings of the 17th international conference on web information systems and technologies (WEBIST 2021), pp. 197–208. DOI: 10.5220/0010718400003058.
51.
KerlylAHallPBullS (2007) Bringing chatbots into education: towards natural language negotiation of open learner models. Applications and Innovations in Intelligent Systems XIV179–192: 14. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-84628-666-7_14.
52.
KhalilMErE (2023) Will ChatGPT get you caught? Rethinking of Plagiarism detection. arXiv preprint arXiv [Preprint]. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-031-34411-4_32.
53.
KhalilzadehJOzturkABBilgihanA (2017) Security-related factors in extended UTAUT model for NFC based mobile payment in the restaurant industry. Computers in Human Behavior70: 460–474. DOI: 10.1016/J.CHB.2017.01.001.
54.
KimSMSonYD (2022) A study on the intention of financial consumers to accept AI services using UTAUT model. Journal of Korean Society for Quality Management50(1): 43–61.
55.
KuberkarSKumar SinghalT (2020) Factors influencing adoption intention of AI powered chatbot for public transport services within a smart city. International Journal on Emerging Technologies11(3): 948–958. Available at: www.researchtrend.net (accessed 1 October 2023).
56.
LiLPengWRheuMMJ (2023) Factors predicting intentions of adoption and continued use of artificial intelligence chatbots for mental health: Examining the role of UTAUT model, stigma, privacy concerns, and artificial intelligence hesitancy. Telemedicine and e-Health30: 722–730. DOI: 10.1089/TMJ.2023.0313.
57.
LinHCHoCFYangH (2022) Understanding adoption of artificial intelligenceenabled language e-learning system: An empirical study of UTAUT model. International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation16(1): 74–94. DOI: 10.1504/IJMLO.2022.119954.
58.
LiuHAzamMBin NaeemS, et al. (2023) An overview of the capabilities of ChatGPT for medical writing and its implications for academic integrity. Health Information and Libraries Journal40(4): 440–446. DOI: 10.1111/hir.12509.
59.
LoLS (2023) An initial interpretation of the U.S. Department of education’s AI report: Implications and recommendations for academic libraries. The Journal of Academic Librarianship49(5): 102761. DOI: 10.1016/J.ACALIB.2023.102761.
60.
MaXHuoY (2023) Are users willing to embrace ChatGPT? Exploring the factors on the acceptance of chatbots from the perspective of AIDUA framework. Technology in Society75: 102362. DOI: 10.1016/J.TECHSOC.2023.102362.
61.
MalinkaKPeresíniMFircA, et al. (2023) On the educational impact of ChatGPT: Is artificial intelligence ready to obtain a university degree?. In: Conference on innovation and technology in computer science education. Association for Computing Machinery (ACM), pp.47–53. DOI: 10.1145/3587102.3588827.
62.
MenonDShilpaK (2023) “Chatting with ChatGPT”: Analyzing the factors influencing users’ intention to Use the Open AI’s ChatGPT using the UTAUT model. Heliyon9(11): e20962. DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e20962.
63.
Mikic-FonteFALlamas-NistalMCaeiro-RodriguezM (2019) Using a Chatterbot as a FAQ assistant in a course about computers architecture. Proceedings—Frontiers in education conference, FIE, 2018-October. DOI: 10.1109/FIE.2018.8659174.
64.
Mohd RahimNIA. IahadNYusofAF, et al. (2022) AI-based chatbots adoption model for higher-education institutions: A hybrid PLS-SEM-neural network modelling approach. Sustainability14(19): 2726. DOI: 10.3390/SU141912726.
65.
MostafaRBKasamaniT (2022) Antecedents and consequences of chatbot initial trust. European Journal of Marketing56(6): 1748–1771. DOI: 10.1108/EJM-02-2020-0084.
66.
MosunmolaAMayowaAOkuboyejoS, et al. (2018) Adoption and use of mobile learning in higher education: The UTAUT model. In: ACM international conference proceeding series. Association for Computing Machinery, pp.20–25. DOI: 10.1145/3183586.3183595.
67.
NgoTTA (2023) The perception by university students of the use of ChatGPT in education. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning18(17): 4–19. DOI: 10.3991/IJET.V18I17.39019.
68.
NguyenDMChiuYTHLeHD (2021) Determinants of continuance intention towards banks’ chatbot services in Vietnam: A necessity for sustainable development. Sustainability13(14): 7625. DOI: 10.3390/SU13147625.
69.
OliveiraTThomasMEspadanalM (2014) Assessing the determinants of cloud computing adoption: An analysis of the manufacturing and services sectors. Information and Management51(5): 497–510. DOI: 10.1016/j.im.2014.03.006.
70.
ParanjapeKSchinkelMPandayRN, et al. (2019) Introducing artificial intelligence training in medical education. JMIR Medical Education5(2): e16048. DOI: 10.2196/16048.
71.
PerkinsM (2023) Academic integrity considerations of AI large language models in the post-pandemic era: ChatGPT and beyond. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice20(2): 7. DOI: 10.53761/1.20.02.07.
72.
PrzegalinskaACiechanowskiLStrozA, et al. (2019) In bot we trust: A new methodology of chatbot performance measures. Business Horizons62(6): 785–797. DOI: 10.1016/J.BUSHOR.2019.08.005.
73.
RaffaghelliJERodríguezMEGuerrero-RoldánAE, et al. (2022) Applying the UTAUT model to explain the students’ acceptance of an early warning system in higher education. Computers & Education182: 104468. DOI: 10.1016/J.COMPEDU.2022.104468.
74.
RaghebMATantawiPFaroukN, et al. (2022) Investigating the acceptance of applying chat-bot (Artificial intelligence) technology among higher education students in Egypt. International Journal of Higher Education Management (IJHEM)8(2). Available at: www.cberuk.com (accessed 2 October 2023).
75.
RajaobelinaLProm TepSArcandM, et al. (2021) Creepiness: Its antecedents and impact on loyalty when interacting with a chatbot. Psychology & Marketing38(12): 2339–2356. DOI: 10.1002/MAR.21548.
76.
Rejón-GuardiaFVich-I-MartorellGÀ (2020) Design and acceptance of chatbots for information automation in university classrooms. EDULEARN20 Proceedings1: 2452–2462. DOI: 10.21125/EDULEARN.2020.0757.
77.
RogersEM (1963) Diffusion of innovations. Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences52(6): 612–612. DOI: 10.1002/JPS.2600520633.
78.
RohTParkBXiaoS (2023) Adoption of Ai-enabled robo-advisors in fintech: simultaneous employment of utaut and the theory of reasoned action. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research24(1): 29–47.
79.
RudolphJTanSTanS (2023) War of the chatbots: Bard, Bing Chat, ChatGPT, Ernie and beyond. The new AI gold rush and its impact on higher education. Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching6(1): 364–389. DOI: 10.37074/JALT.2023.6.1.23.
SalloumSAShaalanK (2019) Factors affecting students’ acceptance of E-learning system in higher education using UTAUT and structural equation modeling approaches. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing845: 469–480. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-99010-1_43/COVER.
82.
ShahNUNaeemSBBhattiR (2023) Digital data sets management in university libraries: challenges and opportunities. Global Knowledge, Memory and Communication. DOI: 10.1108/GKMC-06-2022-0150/FULL/XML.
83.
SinhaSBasakSDeyY, et al. (2020) An educational Chatbot for answering queries. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing937: 55–60. DOI: 10.1007/978-981-13-7403-6_7/COVER.
84.
SladeELDwivediYKPiercyNC, et al. (2015) Modeling consumers’ adoption intentions of remote mobile payments in the United Kingdom: Extending UTAUT with innovativeness, risk, and trust. Psychology & Marketing32(8): 860–873. DOI: 10.1002/MAR.20823.
TerblancheNKiddM (2022) Adoption factors and moderating effects of age and gender that influence the intention to use a non-directive reflective coaching Chatbot. SAGE Open12(2): 6136. DOI: 10.1177/21582440221096136.
87.
ThakurRSrivastavaM (2014) Adoption readiness, personal innovativeness, perceived risk and usage intention across customer groups for mobile payment services in India. Internet Research24(3): 369–392. DOI: 10.1108/INTR-12-2012-0244/FULL/XML.
88.
SladeELDwivediYKPiercyNC, et al. (2013) The utility of the UTAUT model in explaining mobile learning adoption. International Journal of Education and Development using ICT, 9(3): 71–85.
89.
ThompsonRLHigginsCAHowellJM (1994) Influence of experience on personal computer utilization: Testing a conceptual model. Journal of Management Information Systems11(1): 167–187. DOI: 10.1080/07421222.1994.11518035.
90.
TranLTTNguyenPT (2020) Co-creating blockchain adoption: Theory, practice and impact on usage behavior. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics33(7): 1667–1684. DOI: 10.1108/APJML-08-2020-0609.
91.
VenkateshVMorrisMGDavisGB, et al. (2003) User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems27(3): 425–478. DOI: 10.2307/30036540.
92.
VenkateshV (2022) Adoption and use of AI tools: A research agenda grounded in UTAUT. Annals of Operations Research308(1–2): 641–652. DOI: 10.1007/s10479-020-03918-9.
93.
VenkateshVSpeierCMorrisMG (2002) User acceptance enablers in individual decision making about technology: Toward an integrated model. Decision Sciences33(2): 297–316. DOI: 10.1111/J.1540-5915.2002.TB01646.X.
94.
VentayenRJM (2023) ChatGPT by OpenAI: Students’ viewpoint on cheating using artificial intelligence-based application. SSRN Electronic Journal [Preprint]. DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.4361548.
WilliamsMRanaNDwivediY, et al. (2011) Is utaut really used or just cited for the sake of it? A systematic review of citations of utaut’s originating article. ECIS 2011 Proceedings. Available at: https://aisel.aisnet.org/ecis2011/231 (accessed: 2 October 2023).
97.
WirtzJPattersonPGKunzWH, et al. (2018) Brave new world: Service robots in the frontline. Journal of Service Management29(5): 907–931. DOI: 10.1108/JOSM-04-2018-0119/FULL/PDF.
98.
WuYLTaoYHYangPC (2007) Using UTAUT to explore the behavior of 3G mobile communication users. In: IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management8: 199–203. DOI: 10.1109/IEEM.2007.4419179.
99.
YenCChiangMC (2021) Trust me, if you can: A study on the factors that influence consumers’ purchase intention triggered by chatbots based on brain image evidence and self-reported assessments. Behaviour & Information Technology40(11): 1177–1194. DOI: 10.1080/0144929X.2020.1743362.
100.
YiMMJacksonJDParkJS, et al. (2006) Understanding information technology acceptance by individual professionals: Toward an integrative view. Information and Management43(3): 350–363. DOI: 10.1016/j.im.2005.08.006.
101.
YinJGohTTYangB, et al. (2021) Conversation technology with micro-learning: the impact of chatbot-based learning on students’ learning motivation and performance. Journal of Educational Computing Research59(1): 154–177. DOI: 10.1177/0735633120952067/ASSET/IMAGES/LARGE/10.1177_0735633120952067-FIG4.JPEG.
102.
ZhangW. (2020) A Study on the user acceptance model of artificial intelligence music based on UTAUT. Journal of The Korea Society of Computer and Information25(6): 25–33.
103.
ZhouTLuYWangB. (2010) Integrating TTF and UTAUT to explain mobile banking user adoption. Computers in Human Behavior26(4): 760–767. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2010.01.013.
