In the present study we explored the validity of a novel survey instrument specifically designed to assess the attitude to ChatGPT among university educators. Throughout the study period, a notable increase in the number of university academics who self-reported the use of ChatGPT was observed. This finding is indicative of ChatGPT’s growing popularity as a tool in higher education among students and academics alike as indicated by recent studies [35, 41, 59–63]. The trend of increasing ChatGPT usage suggests the recognition of generative AI potential as a valuable aid in teaching and learning processes. This shift can also be indicative of an impending broader transformation in educational methodologies manifested in increasing digitization and incorporation of AI in higher educational settings.
To reach reliable conclusions regarding university educators' attitudes towards ChatGPT, it is imperative to pursue such an aim using validated methodologies. This approach is necessary to ensure that the investigation of such an aim accurately achieve a comprehensive understanding of the motivators and barriers that could enhance or preclude the integration of generative AI in higher education. One popular, practical, and highly relevant framework that was used in this study is the TAM, with its suitable applicability to assess educators’ adoption of a novel technology shown in a meta-analysis by Scherer et al. [51].
In this study, six constructs were identified based on the TAM and appear to explain a substantial degree of the educators’ attitude towards ChatGPT. These constructs were effectiveness, anxiety, technology readiness, perceived usefulness, social influence, and perceived risk. Reflection on these TAM-based constructs suggests the relevance of psychological, social, and practical factors that influence the adoption and integration of new technologies such as ChatGPT among educators in higher educational settings. The identification of these factors highlights the complex nature of the process of AI integration into higher education, which was previously shown in various similar contexts. For example, several factors were identified to severely affect the quality of distance-based online learning particularly during COVID-19 pandemic such as unreliable internet availability, the lack of motivation, psychological distress, and institutional support [64–66]. A systematic review by Regmi & Jones identified highlighted the complexity of e-learning in health sciences education in terms of challenges such as poor motivation, the need for resources and relevance of information technology (IT) skills [67]. Under the lens of TAM, the acceptance and adoption of previous digital education focused mainly on the students’ perspectives and identified several constructs were identified as relevant determinants of attitudes to such technologies such as the perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, self-efficacy, behavioral intention, social influences, among others [49, 68–71].
In the current study, the perceived usefulness emerged as a significant predictor of attitude towards ChatGPT among the participating university educators. This result is understandable based on the previous evidence showing the greater likelihood of embracing a novel technology if it is perceived as beneficial [72–74], which was recently shown by Wang et al. in the context of AI adoption in e-commerce [75]. Usefulness in the context of generative AI such as ChatGPT pertains to its potential to enhance learning outcomes, to facilitate personalized education, and to streamline the tedious administrative tasks [76, 77]. Thus, understanding and addressing the university educators’ perceptions of ChatGPT usefulness appears critical for the acceptance and adoption of ChatGPT among this relevant group in higher education.
In this validation study, effectiveness emerged as an important construct reflecting the evident impact of perceived technology effectiveness on educational objectives. The anticipation of significant benefits from generative AI such as ChatGPT in enhancing student engagement and interaction with academic tasks can play a crucial role in creating a positive attitude towards it among university educators [78]. Additionally, the expectation that ChatGPT can enhance the overall quality of education, is manifested in higher perceived effectiveness which would be regarded as an important factor for adopting ChatGPT to achieve academic excellence.
Social influence was identified as an important construct expected to play a significant role in shaping university educators' acceptance of ChatGPT. This construct captures the influence of peer opinions, institutional culture, and prevailing educational trends on the decision-making process regarding the adoption of new technologies such as ChatGPT. Endorsements of adoption generative AI from colleagues and the broader academic community appeared to play an important role in shaping university educators' willingness to acceptance and utilize ChatGPT in educational settings. Therefore, it is important to recognize and consider the role of social influence in facilitating the widespread adoption of generative AI technologies in higher education. The role of perceiving AI as a social norm was revealed in a recent study by Rahiman & Kodikal among academic staff members in Asia, which further supports the identification of social influence as a construct in this study [79].
Technology readiness was the fourth key construct identified in this study in relation to ChatGPT usage among university educators. This construct involved the assessment of university educators’ willingness and capacity to adopt and effectively use novel technological tools. Facilitating technology readiness involves providing necessary resources, training, and support, which would enable the university educators to confidently integrate ChatGPT into their teaching practices. A meta-analysis on the technology readiness impact on the use of technology highlighted the importance of considering the motivators (optimism and innovativeness) and inhibitors (insecurity and discomfort) for further dissecting this important factor in driving the adoption and use of novel technologies [80].
Conversely, the barriers to ChatGPT use as identified in the current study were represented by two constructs namely the anxiety and perceived risk. Anxiety represents a key factor in determining the hesitancy among university educators. This issue could be ascribed to apprehension regarding the educators digital proficiency, as well as concerns over the potential impact of AI on conventional teaching methodologies, which was comprehensively reviewed by Hao Yu [27, 81]. Mitigating the educators’ anxiety can be achieved through targeted training, technological support, and clear guidelines for the ethical and responsible use of ChatGPT, which could lead to its successful integration into educational practices.
Furthermore, the perception of risks associated with technological adoption, including ChatGPT appeared to play an important role in its acceptance. The perceptions of risk could stem from concerns regarding data privacy, the potential spread of misinformation, and the negative effects on students’ critical thinking abilities [8, 10, 16, 31]. Addressing these concerns by establishing ethical standards for ChatGPT use and transparency by AI developer is imperative for enhance trust in ChatGPT. The importance of perceived risks as an important determinant of ChatGPT adoption and use has been recognized as a recurrent result in various recent studies among students, which highlight its central role as a factor determining the attitude to this AI technology in education [41, 42, 82–85].
In this study, albeit with a very small sample size, multivariate analysis showed the central role of four Ed-TAME-ChatGPT constructs (perceived risk, social influence, effectiveness, and perceived usefulness), to significantly shape the attitudes to ChatGPT use. This result needs further confirmation in future studies with larger sample size to enable reaching a conclusive and comprehensive evidence regarding the role of these factors among the demographic and academic variables in driving ChatGPT use among university educators.
Future research should also involve confirmatory factor analysis to further validate the reliability of the constructs identified in this study. Additionally, we call for open utilization of Ed-TAME-ChatGPT tool to explore the attitude of university educators attitude to ChatGPT. Such an investigation can provide deeper insights into the effective and ethical integration of generative AI technologies in educational settings, contributing to the advancement of AI-enhanced learning. This is particularly important considering the limited number of studies involving university educators.
Finally, this study is not without limitations, which should be considered as follows. First, the small sample size could limit the generalizability of the results. The difficulty in reaching a larger sample size could be related to the lengthy nature of this exploratory survey which would cause respondent fatigue [86]. Second, the potential for selection bias should be considered in light of the participants’ recruitment approach. Utilizing a convenience sampling approach which involved the authors' professional networks may limit the representativeness of university educators included in the study. Third, the restriction of data collection to Jordan could introduce a cultural limitations to the study based on the expected variation in the educational systems, technological infrastructure, and cultural attitudes towards AI across different regions. Consequently, confirmation of the study findings should be considered by conducting future multinational studies using a non-probability sampling approach.