MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390989781 · doi:10.5267/j.ijdns.2023.11.001

Adopting ChatGPT: Pioneering a new era in learning platforms

2024· article· en· W4390989781 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kevin Ayoubi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Data and Network Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicTechnology Adoption and User Behaviour
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStructural equation modelingKnowledge managementSustainabilityContext (archaeology)PsychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The advent of technology has dramatically reshaped the ways in which we assimilate knowledge, teach, and access information. From online learning platforms to interactive educational games and virtual reality simulations, technology has transformed the traditional classroom into a vibrant, engaging, and inclusive educational landscape. A notable advancement in artificial intelligence technology is ChatGPT (Generative Pre-trained Transformer), which provides personalized and effective learning experiences by delivering customized feedback and explanations to students. Despite the considerable research on the adoption or acceptance of e-learning, there is a paucity of research on the acceptance and utilization of ChatGPT, highlighting the need for further investigation. This study aims to bridge this gap by proposing an integrated model that incorporates three key constructs: perceived learning value, perceived satisfaction, and personal innovativeness. A questionnaire survey was administered to 289 university students in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), and the data collected were analyzed using the partial least squares-structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) approach. The results revealed that "perceived learning value, perceived satisfaction, and personal innovativeness" are the most influential and critical determinants of students' intentions to use learning platforms through ChatGPT. This research contributes to the existing body of literature on AI and environmental sustainability, providing invaluable insights for practitioners, policymakers, and AI product developers. These insights can guide the development and implementation of AI technologies to better align with users' needs and preferences, while also considering the broader environmental context.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.855
Threshold uncertainty score0.705

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.123
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.302 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Data and Network ScienceSame topicTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourFrench-language works237,207