SavedAdd your journal

Journals / IOJET / 2020 / Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 4

AN ADAPTATION OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE ANXIETY SCALE INTO TURKISH: RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY STUDY

Ragip TERZİ
Journal
IOJET
Pages
1501–1515
Publication Date
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Additionally, anxiety levels ofteachers are not related to teachers’ age and years of experience in teaching.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The widespread use of artificial intelligence (AI) has been growing in various fields.
📊
Key Findings & Data:AI isdefined as human-like automation in place of human beings that can operate many functionsbased on some level of intelligence.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Additionally, anxiety levels ofteachers are not related to teachers’ age and years of experience in teaching.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The widespread use of artificial intelligence (AI) has been growing in various fields. AI isdefined as human-like automation in place of human beings that can operate many functionsbased on some level of intelligence. In education, AI offers powerful pedagogical tools thatcan help enhance instructional quality. Given the inevitable advancements of AI in education,this study aims to investigate teachers’ AI anxiety levels based on various demographic factors.For this purpose, the AI Anxiety Scale is adapted into Turkish, which provides a good fit ofthe model to the data for the construct validity. Moreover, the reliability coefficients of thescale show strong evidence of consistency in teachers’ responses to the items. Forsociotechnical blindness dimension, male and female teachers do not show any significantdifferences. However, for learning, job replacement, AI configuration dimensions and the totalscale, female teachers are more anxious towards AI than male teachers. Moreover, there is nodifference observed based on degree levels teachers hold. Additionally, anxiety levels ofteachers are not related to teachers’ age and years of experience in teaching.

🔖

Cite This Article

TERZİ, R. (2022). AN ADAPTATION OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE ANXIETY SCALE INTO TURKISH: RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY STUDY. IOJET, Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 4, 1501–1515. https://ajindex.com/articles/542261

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238-246.
  2. Bentler, P., M., & Hu. P. (1995). EQS: Structural equations program manual. Los Angeles, CA: BMPD Statistical Software. Bostrom, N. (2014). Superintelligence: Paths, dangers, strategies. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
  3. Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–162),
  4. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Cairns, L., & Malloch, M. (2017). Computers in education: The impact on schools and Classrooms. In R. Maclean (Ed.), Life in schools classrooms: Past, present and future (pp. 603-617). Singapore: Springer Nature. Chen, L., Chen, P., & Lin, Z. (2020). Artificial intelligence in education: A review. IEEE Access, 8, 75264-75278.
  5. Chou, C. (2003). Incidences and correlates of internet anxiety among high school teachers in Taiwan. Computers in Human Behavior, 19(6), 731–749.
  6. Chuo, Y. H., Tsai, C. H., Lan, Y. L., & Tsai, C. S. (2011). The effect of organizational support, self efficacy, and computer anxiety on the usage intention of e-learning system in hospital. African Journal of Business Management, 5(14), 5518–5523.
  7. Coppin, B. (2004). Artificial intelligence illuminated. Boston, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning. Esterhuyse, M. P., Scholtz, B. M., & Venter, D. (2016). Intention to use and satisfaction of elearning for training in the corporate context. Interdisciplinary Journal of Information, Knowledge, and Management, 11, 347–365. Future of Life Institute (FLI). (2015). Autonomous weapons: An open letter from AI & robotics researchers. Retrieved from http://futureoflife.org/open-letter-autonomous-weapons/
  8. Guilford, J. P. (1954). Psychometric methods (2nd Ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill Book Corp. Hofer, M., & Swan, K. O. (2008). Technological pedagogical content knowledge in action: A case study of a middle school digital documentary project. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 41(2), 179-200.
  9. IBM Corp. (2013). IBM SPSS statistics for Windows (Version 22.0). Armonk, NY: IBM Corp. Johnson, D. G., & Verdicchio, M. (2017). AI anxiety. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 68(9), 2267-2270.
  10. Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th Edition). New York: Guilford Press.
  11. Korobili, S., Togia, A., & Malliari, A. (2010). Computer anxiety and attitudes among undergraduate students in Gre