The study explored the adoption of ChatGPT in argumentative writing among students using the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology model as a framework. A mixed methods study was employed, and data were collected from surveys, interviews and document analysis (essays). The study revealed that participants’ acceptance of ChatGPT is linked to performance expectancy, effort expectancy, facilitation conditions, social influence, self-efficacy, and habit. However, establishing habitual use is still in its initial phases, and social influences are not the primary drivers behind students’ adoption of the tool. Participants reported improved organization, expanded vocabulary, and valuable writing prompts, enhancing their learning experience in argumentative writing. Participants intended to continue using ChatGPT for essay writing, acknowledging its significant contribution to argumentative writing.
AllenT. J.MizumotoA. (2024). ChatGPT over my friends: Japanese English-as-a-foreign-language learners’ preferences for editing and proofreading strategies. RELC Journal, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/00336882241262533
2.
AlmaiahM. A.AlamriM. M.Al-RahmiW. (2019). Applying the UTAUT model to explain the students’ acceptance of mobile learning system in higher education. IEEE Access, 7, 174673–174686. https://doi.org/10.1109/access. 2019.2957206
3.
AmadinF. I.ObienuA. C.OsaseriR. O.OmputerD. E. O. F. C.CienceS.EninU. N. O. F. B., et al. (2018). Main barriers and possible enablers of Google apps for education adoption among university staff members. Nigerian Journal of Technology (NIJOTECH), 37(2), 432–439.
BraunV.ClarkeV. (2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 11(4), 589–597. https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806
8.
CreswellJ.PothC. (2017). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
ErlandsonD. (1993). Doing naturalistic inquiry: A guide to methods. Sage.
11.
GaroneA.PynooB.TondeurJ.CocquytC.VanslambrouckS.BruggemanB.StruyvenK. (2019). Clustering university teaching staff through UTAUT: Implications for the acceptance of a new learning management system. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(5), 2466–2483. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12867
12.
HsiehJ. J. P.-A.RaiA.KeilM. (2008). Understanding digital inequality: Comparing continued use behavioral models of the socio-economically advantaged and disadvantaged. MIS Quarterly, 32(1), 97–126. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148830
13.
HuangF.TeoT.ZhaoX. (2023). Examining factors influencing Chinese ethnic minority English teachers’ technology adoption: An extension of the UTAUT model. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2023.2239304
14.
JeonJ.LeeS. (2023). Large language models in education: A focus on the complementary relationship between human teachers and ChatGPT. Education and Information Technologies, 28(12), 15873–15892. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11834-1
15.
JeonJ.LeeS.ChoeH. (2023). Beyond ChatGPT: A conceptual framework and systematic review of speech-recognition chatbots for language learning. Computers & Education, 104898.
16.
KasneciE.SeßlerK.KüchemannS.BannertM.DementievaD.FischerF.KasneciG. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. https://doi.org/10.35542/osf.io/5er8f
17.
KermanN. T.NorooziO.BanihashemS. K.KaramiM.BiemansH. J. (2024). Online peer feedback patterns of success and failure in argumentative essay writing. Interactive Learning Environments, 32(2), 614–626. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2022.2093914
KrumpalI. (2024). Social desirability bias and context in sensitive surveys. In Encyclopedia of quality of life and well-being research (pp. 6527–6532). Springer International Publishing.
20.
LabadzeL.GrigoliaM.MachaidzeL. (2023). Role of AI chatbots in education: Systematic literature review. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1), 56. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023- 00426-1
21.
LatifiS.NorooziO. (2021). Supporting argumentative essay writing through an online supported peer-review script. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 58(5), 501–511. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2021.1961097
22.
LatifiS.NorooziO.TalaeeE. (2023). Worked example or scripting? Fostering students’ online argumentative peer feedback, essay writing and learning. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(2), 655–669. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1799032
23.
LimayemM.CheungC. M. K. (2010). Predicting the continued use of internet-based learning technologies: The role of habit. Behaviour & Information Technology, 30(1), 91–99. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2010.490956
24.
LimayemM.HirtS. G.CheungC. M. (2007). How habit limits the predictive power of intention: The case of information systems continuance. MIS quarterly, 31(4), 705–737. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148817
25.
LimayemM.CheungC. M. (2011). Predicting the continued use of Internet-based learning technologies: The role of habit. Behaviour & Information Technology, 30(1), 91–99. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2010.490956
26.
LwogaE. T.KombaM. (2015). Antecedents of continued usage intentions of web based learning management system in Tanzania. Education Training, 57(7), 738–756. https://doi.org/10.1108/ET-02-2014-0014
27.
MacdonaldC.AdeloyeD.SheikhA.RudanI. (2023). Can ChatGPT draft a research article? An example of population-level vaccine effectiveness analysis. Journal of Global Health, 13, 01003. https://doi.org/10.7189/jogh.13.01003
28.
MaheshwariG. (2023). Factors influencing students ‘intention to adopt and use ChatGPT in higher education: A study in the Vietnamese context. Education and Information Technologies, 29(10). 0123456789. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12333-z
29.
MaxwellJ. (2005). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. Sage.
30.
MilesM. B.HubermanA. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Sage.
31.
MisiejukK.WassonB.EgelandsdalK. (2021). Using learning analytics to understand student perceptions of peer feedback. Computers in Human Behavior, 117, 106658. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106658
32.
NorooziO.BanihashemS. K.BiemansH. J.SmitsM.VervoortM. T.VerbaanC. L. (2023). Design, implementation, and evaluation of an online supported peer feedback module to enhance students’ argumentative essay quality. Education and Information Technologies, 28(10), 12757–12784. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11683-y
33.
ShenD.ChoM. H.TsaiC. L.MarraR. (2013). Unpacking online learning experiences: Online learning self-efficacy and learning satisfaction. The Internet and Higher Education, 19, 10–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2013.04.001
34.
SuY.LinY.LaiC. (2023). Collaborating with ChatGPT in argumentative writing classrooms. Assessing Writing, 57, Article 100752. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2023.100752
35.
TeubnerT.FlathC. M.WeinhardtC.van der AalstW.HinzO. (2023). Welcome to the era of chatgpt et al. the prospects of large language models. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 65(2), 95–101. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-023-00795-x
36.
TianS.YangW. (2024). Modeling the use behavior of interpreting technology for student interpreters: An extension of UTAUT model. Education and Information Technologies, 29(9), 10499–10528. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12225-2
37.
TsengT. H.LinS.WangY. S.LiuH. X. (2022). Investigating teachers’ adoption of MOOCs: the perspective of UTAUT2. Interactive Learning Environments, 30(4), 635–650. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1674888
VenkateshV.ThongJ. Y. L.XuX. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157–178. https://doi.org/10.2307/41410412
40.
WangS.ScellsH.KoopmanB.ZucconG. (2023).Wang, S., Scells, H., Koopman, B., & Zuccon, G. (2023, July). Can ChatGPT write a good boolean query for systematic review literature search?. In Proceedings of the 46th international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval (pp. 1426–1436).
41.
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
42.
ZouM.HuangL. (2023). To use or not to use? Understanding doctoral students’ acceptance of ChatGPT in writing through technology acceptance model. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1259531
