UTAUT2-Based Questionnaire: Translation to Canadian French, Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Cognitive Debriefing (Preprint)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND From the early stages of development of a new tool or device to its implementation in real-life settings, it is crucial to take the perception of potential users into consideration. A number of theories have been proposed to better understand acceptance of technology. The Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) combines eight of these theories and has been shown to accurately predict technology acceptance. An extended version, the UTAUT2, was proposed in 2012 and includes three new concepts to accurately analyze acceptance and usage of technology from a consumer perspective. No validated Canadian French version of this tool currently exists. OBJECTIVE The main objective was to cross-culturally adapt the UTAUT2-based questionnaire for use in the French-Canadian population. A cognitive debriefing involving potential users (workers) and experts (rehabilitation clinicians) was included to confirm clarity and relevance of questionnaire content. METHODS The procedure was developed in line with published guidelines and included five steps: (1) Forward translation by two bilingual members of the research team, (2) Synthesis of the translated versions by the research team, (3) Backward translation by two other bilingual members, (4) Synthesis by a multidisciplinary committee and proposal of the Pre-final Canadian French UTAUT2-based questionnaire, and (5) Cognitive debriefing. Cognitive debriefing consisted in the assessment of the clarity of the pre-final version content by a French-Canadian sample of potential responders (i.e. workers) and by an expert panel of rehabilitation professionals. Experts also appraised the relevance of each item of the pre-final version. Any questionnaire content or item not reaching an 80% inter-rater agreement for clarity or relevance was re-evaluated by the multidisciplinary committee until a final version was unanimously approved. RESULTS The multidisciplinary committee (n=6) was composed of researchers and clinicians from four different backgrounds. Twelve workers and 12 experts participated in the cognitive debriefing step. Each content or item (n=40) was judged as "clear" by at least 92% of the worker sample. When clarity was assessed by the experts, six terms/phrases did not reach 80% agreement and were therefore reviewed by the multidisciplinary committee. Four of the 27 items were also reviewed by the committee following the experts’ relevance assessment. The final version of the Canadian French UTAUT2-based questionnaire was approved unanimously by the members of the multidisciplinary committee. CONCLUSIONS The final version of the Canadian French version of the UTAUT2-based questionnaire is culturally appropriate for use in French-speaking Canada. Further studies are necessary to determine its psychometric properties.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,012 | 0,023 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,038 | 0,012 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».