Determinants of Google’s Gemini AI Chatbot Adoption Among Higher Education Students in Bangkok, Thailand

ผู้แต่ง

  • Yarnaphat Shaengchart Faculty of Information Technology and Digital Innovation, King Mongkut's University of Technology North Bangkok, Bangkok, Thailand
  • Nalinpat Bhumpenpein Faculty of Information Technology and Digital Innovation, King Mongkut's University of Technology North Bangkok, Bangkok, Thailand
  • Pongsakorn Limna Faculty of Economics, Rangsit University, Pathum Thani, Thailand

คำสำคัญ:

Google’s Gemini, Artificial Intelligence (AI), Chatbots, Higher Education

บทคัดย่อ

This study aims to examine the determinants influencing the intention to use the AI chatbot, like Gemini, among higher education students in Bangkok, Thailand. The research focuses on the perceptions and attitudes of Thai higher education students towards Gemini, evaluating factors such as perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, attitude towards Gemini, privacy and security concerns, and facilitating conditions. A quantitative research approach was employed, collecting data from 385 students through online closed-ended questionnaires designed with a five-point Likert Scale. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics to outline respondent characteristics and inferential statistics to test hypotheses and ascertain relationships between variables. The findings revealed that perceived usefulness and facilitating conditions are significant positive predictors of the intention to use Gemini, while privacy and security concerns also show an unexpectedly positive influence. Conversely, perceived ease of use and attitude towards Gemini do not significantly impact usage intentions. The study underscores the importance of demonstrating practical benefits and providing adequate support to enhance AI chatbot adoption in educational settings, while effectively addressing privacy and security concerns to further encourage usage. These insights offer valuable guidance for educators, policymakers, and technology developers aiming to integrate AI tools like Gemini into higher education.

References

Abbad, M. M. (2021). Using the UTAUT model to understand students’ usage of e-learning systems in developing countries. Education and Information Technologies, 26(6), 7205-7224. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10573-5

Al-Adwan, A. S., Li, N., Al-Adwan, A., Abbasi, G. A., Albelbisi, N. A., & Habibi, A. (2023). Extending the technology acceptance model (TAM) to predict university students’ intentions to use metaverse-based learning platforms. Education and Information Technologies, 28(11), 15381-15413. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11816-3

Al-Emran, M., Mezhuyev, V., & Kamaludin, A. (2018). Technology Acceptance Model in m-learning context: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 125, 389-412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.06.008

Arpaci, I., Kilicer, K., & Bardakci, S. (2015). Effects of security and privacy concerns on educational use of cloud services. Computers in Human Behavior, 45, 93-98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.11.075

Bélanger, F., & Crossler, R. E. (2011). Privacy in the digital age: A review of information privacy research in information systems. MIS Quarterly, 35(4), 1017-1042. https://doi.org/10.2307/41409971

Chen, L., Chen, P., & Lin, Z. (2020). Artificial intelligence in education: A review. IEEE Access, 8, 75264-75278. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2988510

Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008

Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Addison-Wesley. https://lib.ugent.be/en/catalog/rug01:000839739

Granić, A., & Marangunić, N. (2019). Technology acceptance model in educational context: A systematic literature review. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(5), 2572-2593. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12864

Igbokwe, I. C. (2023). Application of artificial intelligence (AI) in educational management. International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, 13(3), 300-307. http://dx.doi.org/10.29322/IJSRP.13.03.2023.p13536

Imran, M., & Almusharraf, N. (2024). Google Gemini as a next generation AI educational tool: A review of emerging educational technology. Smart Learning Environments, 11, 22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-024-00310-z

Kamalov, F., Calonge, D. S., & Gurrib, I. (2023). New era of artificial intelligence in education: Towards a sustainable multifaceted revolution. Sustainability, 15(16), 12451. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151612451

Khechine, H., Raymond, B., & Augier, M. (2020). The adoption of a social learning system: Intrinsic value in the UTAUT model. British Journal of Educational Technology, 51(6), 2306-2325. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12905

King, W. R., & He, J. (2006). A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model. Information & Management, 43(6), 740-755. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2006.05.003

Labadze, L., Grigolia, M., & Machaidze, L. (2023). Role of AI chatbots in education: Systematic literature review. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1), 56. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00426-1

Lai, P. (2013). The literature review of technology adoption models and theories for the novelty technology. Journal of Information Systems and Technology Management, 10(1), 21-38. https://doi.org/10.4301/S1807-17752013000100002

Lutz, C. (2019). Digital inequalities in the age of artificial intelligence and big data. Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies, 1(2), 141-148. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbe2.140

Lwin, M., Wirtz, J., & Williams, J. D. (2007). Consumer online privacy concerns and responses: A power–responsibility equilibrium perspective. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 35, 572-585. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-006-0003-3

Namraksa, S., & Kraiwanit, T. (2024). Factors influencing the selection of international schools in Thailand's educational landscape amidst the digital economy. In RSU International Research Conference 2024 on Social Science and Humanities, Education, and Management (pp. 213-223). Pathum Thani: Rangsit University. https://rsucon.rsu.ac.th/proceeding/article/3390

Perera, P., & Lankathilake, M. (2023). Preparing to revolutionize education with the multi-model GenAI tool Google Gemini? A journey towards effective policy making. Journal of Advances in Education and Philosophy, 7(8), 246-253. https://saudijournals.com/media/articles/JAEP_78_246-253.pdf

Rad, D., Egerau, A., Roman, A., Dughi, T., Balas, E., Maier, R., Ignat, S., & Rad, G. (2022). A preliminary investigation of the technology acceptance model (TAM) in early childhood education and care. BRAIN. Broad Research in Artificial Intelligence and Neuroscience, 13(1), 518-533. https://doi.org/10.18662/brain/13.1/297

Rafique, H., Almagrabi, A. O., Shamim, A., Anwar, F., & Bashir, A. K. (2020). Investigating the acceptance of mobile library applications with an extended technology acceptance model (TAM). Computers & Education, 145, 103732. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103732

Saif, N., Khan, S. U., Shaheen, I., ALotaibi, F. A., Alnfiai, M. M., & Arif, M. (2024). Chat-GPT; validating Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) in education sector via ubiquitous learning mechanism. Computers in Human Behavior, 154, 108097. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2023.108097

Teo, T. (2010). Development and validation of the E-learning Acceptance Measure (ElAM). Internet and Higher Education, 13(3), 148-152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2010.02.001

Teo, T. (2011). Factors influencing teachers’ intention to use technology: Model development and test. Computers & Education, 57(4), 2432-2440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.06.008

Teo, T., & Noyes, J. (2014). Explaining the intention to use technology among pre-service teachers: A multi-group analysis of the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology. Interactive Learning Environments, 22(1), 51-66. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2011.641674

Vanduhe, V. Z., Nat, M., & Hasan, H. F. (2020). Continuance intentions to use gamification for training in higher education: Integrating the technology acceptance model (TAM), social motivation, and task technology fit (TTF). IEEE Access, 8, 21473-21484. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2966179

Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186-204. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926

Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540

Vinitpittayakul, K. (2023). The studies of influencing factors to technology acceptance use in online instruction. Rajamangala University of Technology Tawan-Ok Social Science Journal, 12(2), 119-126. https://so05.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/SocialJournal2rmutto/article/view/251578

Winkler, R., & Söllner, M. (2018). Unleashing the potential of chatbots in education: A state-of-the-art analysis. Proceedings of the Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS 2018), 1-10.

Wong, W. K. O. (2024). The sudden disruptive rise of generative artificial intelligence? An evaluation of their impact on higher education and the global workplace. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 10(2), 100278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joitmc.2024.100278

Yalcin, M. E., & Kutlu, B. (2019). Examination of students' acceptance of and intention to use learning management systems using extended TAM. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(5), 2414-2432. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12798

Zhou, T. (2011). Understanding online community user participation: A social influence perspective. Internet Research, 21(1), 67-81. https://doi.org/10.1108/10662241111104884

Downloads

เผยแพร่แล้ว

23-12-2024