ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025
Exploring the determinants of AIGC usage intention based on the extended AIDUA model: a multi-group structural equation modeling analysis.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond Positive Response Rates: Capturing Information Richness in Workplace AI Acceptance Using Belief Structure TOPSIS.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Psychological responses and cognitive mechanisms of university teachers in using generative AI in teaching: a configurational path analysis based on the MOA framework.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- AI-associated academic writing anxiety in AI-assisted contexts: evidence from Chinese EFL postgraduate students.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Determinants of HIV testing intentions among heterosexual men in the Bolgatanga Municipality of Ghana: Evidence from the theory of planned behaviour.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: With the rapid development and widespread adoption of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) technologies, their unique characteristics-such as conversational capabilities, creative intelligence, and continuous evolution-have posed challenges for traditional technology acceptance models (TAMs) in adequately explaining user adoption intentions. To better understand the key factors influencing users' acceptance of GenAI, this study extends the AIDUA model by incorporating system compatibility, technology transparency, and human-computer interaction perception. These variables are introduced to systematically explore the determinants of users' intention to adopt GenAI. Furthermore, the study examines the varying mechanisms of influence across different user groups and application scenarios, providing theoretical insights and practical guidance for optimizing and promoting GenAI technologies. Methods: During the data collection phase, this study employed a survey method to measure behavioral intentions and other key variables within the proposed framework. The survey design included demographic information about the respondents as well as detailed information related to their use of GenAI. In the data processing and analysis phase, a Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) approach was utilized to systematically examine the path relationships among the variables. Additionally, to compare the differences in variable relationships across different subgroups, a multi-group structural equation modeling(MGSEM) analysis was conducted. Results: (1) Effects on Key Expectations: Social influence significantly enhances performance expectancy (β = 0.109, Discussion: This study reveals several key findings within the extended AIDUA model. Our results indicate that technological transparency emerges as the strongest predictor of performance expectancy, alongside system compatibility and human-computer interaction perception, significantly enhancing users' perceived system performance. Regarding effort expectancy, hedonic motivation and technological transparency demonstrate the most prominent effects, implying that system design should emphasize user experience enjoyability and transparency. Notably, the lack of significant influence of hedonic motivation on performance expectancy, contradicting our initial hypothesis. Furthermore, the MGSEM analysis reveals significant heterogeneity in acceptance mechanisms across user groups, providing crucial implications for the differentiated design of GenAI systems tailored to diverse user needs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.