Evaluation of nursing students’ ethical decision-making biases and attitudes toward artificial intelligence in nursing education

IF 3.3 3区医学 Q1 NURSING

Nurse Education in Practice Pub Date : 2025-06-18 DOI:10.1016/j.nepr.2025.104432

Tuba Sengul , Sebnem Bilgic , Buse Macit , Fatma Sevim , Sebnem Alik , Holly Kirkland-Kyhn

{"title":"Evaluation of nursing students’ ethical decision-making biases and attitudes toward artificial intelligence in nursing education","authors":"Tuba Sengul , Sebnem Bilgic , Buse Macit , Fatma Sevim , Sebnem Alik , Holly Kirkland-Kyhn","doi":"10.1016/j.nepr.2025.104432","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Aim</h3><div>This study examines nursing students' attitudes toward artificial intelligence (AI) and their association with biases in ethical decision-making processes.</div></div><div><h3>Background</h3><div>AI technologies are central to healthcare, particularly clinical decision support systems and simulations. While AI accelerates decision-making processes, it also brings ethical responsibilities.</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>This is a descriptive cross-sectional study.</div></div><div><h3>Method</h3><div>265 nursing students were selected through stratified sampling from two universities in Turkey. Data were collected via an online survey using a demographic information form, the AI Attitude Scale (GAAIS) and the Ethical Decision-Making Bias Scale (EDBS).</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Most participants were female (n = 223), with an average age of 20.45 (SD 1.67) years. The results of the GAAIS revealed that students generally had a positive attitude (3.38 SD 0.47). However, 36.2 % expressed distrust toward AI students who trusted AI more successfully to solve ethical issues and used AI tools more effectively. The average score on the EDBS was 2.48 SD 0.41. Additionally, students who encountered ethical decisions more frequently (2.30 SD 0.32) showed lower bias levels than those who experienced them less often (2.50SD0.44). Positive attitudes toward AI were positively associated with students' confidence in ethical decision-making (p < 0.05). Distrust in AI and difficulty accessing accurate information were identified as significant barriers.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Attitudes toward AI significantly influence students' biases in ethical decision-making processes. The nursing curriculum should include AI ethics, critical thinking and decision-making skills. Integrating ethical decision-making in AI usage within nursing education can ensure that future nurses can provide patient-centered care while maintaining ethical values.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48715,"journal":{"name":"Nurse Education in Practice","volume":"86 ","pages":"Article 104432"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nurse Education in Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S147159532500188X","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim

This study examines nursing students' attitudes toward artificial intelligence (AI) and their association with biases in ethical decision-making processes.

Background

AI technologies are central to healthcare, particularly clinical decision support systems and simulations. While AI accelerates decision-making processes, it also brings ethical responsibilities.

Design

This is a descriptive cross-sectional study.

Method

265 nursing students were selected through stratified sampling from two universities in Turkey. Data were collected via an online survey using a demographic information form, the AI Attitude Scale (GAAIS) and the Ethical Decision-Making Bias Scale (EDBS).

Results

Most participants were female (n = 223), with an average age of 20.45 (SD 1.67) years. The results of the GAAIS revealed that students generally had a positive attitude (3.38 SD 0.47). However, 36.2 % expressed distrust toward AI students who trusted AI more successfully to solve ethical issues and used AI tools more effectively. The average score on the EDBS was 2.48 SD 0.41. Additionally, students who encountered ethical decisions more frequently (2.30 SD 0.32) showed lower bias levels than those who experienced them less often (2.50SD0.44). Positive attitudes toward AI were positively associated with students' confidence in ethical decision-making (p < 0.05). Distrust in AI and difficulty accessing accurate information were identified as significant barriers.

Conclusions

Attitudes toward AI significantly influence students' biases in ethical decision-making processes. The nursing curriculum should include AI ethics, critical thinking and decision-making skills. Integrating ethical decision-making in AI usage within nursing education can ensure that future nurses can provide patient-centered care while maintaining ethical values.

查看原文本刊更多论文

护理教育中护生伦理决策偏差及对人工智能的态度评价

目的探讨护生对人工智能（AI）的态度及其与伦理决策偏差的关系。人工智能技术是医疗保健的核心，特别是临床决策支持系统和模拟。人工智能在加速决策过程的同时，也带来了道德责任。这是一项描述性横断面研究。方法对土耳其两所大学的265名护理专业学生进行分层抽样调查。数据是通过使用人口统计信息表、人工智能态度量表（GAAIS）和道德决策偏差量表（EDBS）的在线调查收集的。结果大多数参与者为女性（n = 223），平均年龄20.45岁（SD 1.67）。GAAIS结果显示，学生普遍持积极态度（3.38 SD 0.47）。然而，36.2% 的学生对那些更信任人工智能来解决道德问题并更有效地使用人工智能工具的人工智能学生表示不信任。EDBS的平均得分为2.48 SD 0.41。此外，经常遇到道德决策的学生（2.30 SD 0.32）比不经常遇到道德决策的学生（2.50SD0.44）表现出更低的偏见水平。对人工智能的积极态度与学生道德决策的信心呈正相关（p <； 0.05）。对人工智能的不信任和难以获取准确信息被认为是重大障碍。结论对人工智能的态度显著影响学生在伦理决策过程中的偏见。护理课程应包括人工智能伦理、批判性思维和决策技能。在护理教育中整合人工智能使用的道德决策，可以确保未来的护士在提供以患者为中心的护理的同时保持道德价值观。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Nurse Education in Practice NURSING-

CiteScore

5.40

自引率

9.40%

发文量

180

审稿时长

51 days

期刊介绍： Nurse Education in Practice enables lecturers and practitioners to both share and disseminate evidence that demonstrates the actual practice of education as it is experienced in the realities of their respective work environments. It is supportive of new authors and will be at the forefront in publishing individual and collaborative papers that demonstrate the link between education and practice.