The Italian version of the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology questionnaire: a pilot validation study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology is a self-rated questionnaire to assess twelve constructs related to the level of acceptance of a robot, consisting of 41 items rated on a 5-point Likert scale. The aim of the study was to conduct a preliminary evaluation of the psychometric properties of the Italian version of the UTAUT (I-UTAUT) in a sample of Italian healthy subjects (HCs). Materials and methods: 30 HCs underwent the I-UTAUT to assess its comprehensibility. Reliability and divergent validity of the I-UTAUT were evaluated in a sample of 121 HCs, who also underwent the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). Results: The final I-UTAUT version was easily comprehensible. There were no missing data, no floor and ceiling effects. Contrarily to the original version, the Principal Components Analysis suggested a seven-component structure; Cronbach's alpha was 0.94. The I-UTAUT score did not correlate with MoCA. Conclusion: The I-UTAUT represented a reliable and valid questionnaire to identify the level of acceptance of robotics technology in Italian healthy sample.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it