ArticleFrontiers in artificial intelligence2026
Generative AI use and advisory performance among agricultural extension agents in Benin.
Article in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Harnessing Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) offers promising avenues to enhance agricultural advisory services. Yet, understanding extension agents' engagement with such technologies remains limited. Using the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) as an analytical lens, this study investigates how agricultural extension agents in Benin interact with GenAI and its impact on their advisory performance. We surveyed 240 extension agents across six districts and applied Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling to examine relationships among perceived usefulness, workload, time pressure, attitudes, behavioral intentions, GenAI use, and performance. Results reveal that GenAI use is positively associated with improved advisory effectiveness. Workload and pressure emerge as key motivators for GenAI use, while perceived usefulness strongly predicts both positive attitudes toward GenAI and perceived ease of use. However, contrary to TAM assumptions, attitude has a negative influence on behavioral intention, a paradoxical engagement pattern implying that while extension agents value GenAI, they hesitate to rely fully on it, reflecting concerns about professional judgment, accountability, and trust in AI outputs. Finally, attitude, pressure, and behavioral intention indirectly affect the performance of extension agents using GenAI. This study contributes to agricultural extension research and AI governance debates by revealing how professional intermediaries navigate tensions between technological promise and institutional responsibility, offering insights for capacity-building and policy frameworks that promote responsible AI integration.
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.