编制教育恐惧症量表并研究其心理测量特征

IF 4.8 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Deniz Mertkan Gezgin, Tuğba Türk Kurtça
{"title":"编制教育恐惧症量表并研究其心理测量特征","authors":"Deniz Mertkan Gezgin, Tuğba Türk Kurtça","doi":"10.1007/s10639-024-12984-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The purpose of this research is to create a reliable and valid scale to assess AIlessphobia in Education (the fear of being without Artificial Intelligence in education) among university students. In three phases, a sample of 1378 undergraduate students from different faculties at a public university participated in the reliability and validity investigations of the scale during the academic year 2023–2024. Expert comments were obtained to assess the scale's face validity and content validity. The first group sample (<i>n</i> = 420) underwent exploratory factor analysis (EFA), the second group sample (<i>n</i> = 510) underwent confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and the third group sample (<i>n</i> = 448) underwent criterion-related validity testing. EFA revealed that the scale had a two-factor structure with 18 items that explained 56.23% of the total variance. The CFA analysis verified the scale's two-factor structure and produced good fit values (χ2/df = 2.25, CFI = .99; TLI = .99; NFI = .98; IFI = .99; SRMR = .049; RMSEA = 0.050 [0.42–0.57]). The first factor's analysis showed acceptable values for Guttman's lambda (λ = 0.930–0.948), McDonald's omega (ω = 0.923–0.929), and Cronbach's alpha (α = 0.925–0.935). Similarly, the second factor's analysis also showed acceptable values for these measures (λ = 0.851–0.880, ω = 0.850–0.879, α = 0.847–0.877). Overall, the entire scale demonstrated acceptable values for Cronbach's alpha (0.925–0.935), McDonald's omega (0.922–0.942), and Guttman's lambda (0.940–0.942). Additionally, the scale exhibited a positive and statistically significant correlation with the Fırat Netlessphobia Scale, indicating satisfactory criterion validity. Cross-gender invariance analysis was also performed, showing that gender invariance was achieved. The results indicate that this scale is valid and reliable for university students. In conclusion, the scale fills a critical gap in educational research by providing a reliable tool to measure students' fears and anxieties about the absence of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in their learning experiences. By accurately assessing this unique form of anxiety, educators and policymakers can develop targeted interventions to better understand and mitigate students' fears and support the integration of AI in education, thereby enhancing its constructive contribution to learning.</p>","PeriodicalId":51494,"journal":{"name":"Education and Information Technologies","volume":"16 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Developing the AIlessphobia in education scale and examining its psychometric characteristics\",\"authors\":\"Deniz Mertkan Gezgin, Tuğba Türk Kurtça\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10639-024-12984-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The purpose of this research is to create a reliable and valid scale to assess AIlessphobia in Education (the fear of being without Artificial Intelligence in education) among university students. In three phases, a sample of 1378 undergraduate students from different faculties at a public university participated in the reliability and validity investigations of the scale during the academic year 2023–2024. Expert comments were obtained to assess the scale's face validity and content validity. The first group sample (<i>n</i> = 420) underwent exploratory factor analysis (EFA), the second group sample (<i>n</i> = 510) underwent confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and the third group sample (<i>n</i> = 448) underwent criterion-related validity testing. EFA revealed that the scale had a two-factor structure with 18 items that explained 56.23% of the total variance. The CFA analysis verified the scale's two-factor structure and produced good fit values (χ2/df = 2.25, CFI = .99; TLI = .99; NFI = .98; IFI = .99; SRMR = .049; RMSEA = 0.050 [0.42–0.57]). The first factor's analysis showed acceptable values for Guttman's lambda (λ = 0.930–0.948), McDonald's omega (ω = 0.923–0.929), and Cronbach's alpha (α = 0.925–0.935). Similarly, the second factor's analysis also showed acceptable values for these measures (λ = 0.851–0.880, ω = 0.850–0.879, α = 0.847–0.877). Overall, the entire scale demonstrated acceptable values for Cronbach's alpha (0.925–0.935), McDonald's omega (0.922–0.942), and Guttman's lambda (0.940–0.942). Additionally, the scale exhibited a positive and statistically significant correlation with the Fırat Netlessphobia Scale, indicating satisfactory criterion validity. Cross-gender invariance analysis was also performed, showing that gender invariance was achieved. The results indicate that this scale is valid and reliable for university students. In conclusion, the scale fills a critical gap in educational research by providing a reliable tool to measure students' fears and anxieties about the absence of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in their learning experiences. By accurately assessing this unique form of anxiety, educators and policymakers can develop targeted interventions to better understand and mitigate students' fears and support the integration of AI in education, thereby enhancing its constructive contribution to learning.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51494,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Education and Information Technologies\",\"volume\":\"16 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Education and Information Technologies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12984-6\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Education and Information Technologies","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12984-6","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究的目的是编制一份可靠有效的量表,用于评估大学生的教育领域人工智能恐惧症(对教育领域没有人工智能的恐惧)。在 2023-2024 学年期间,来自一所公立大学不同院系的 1378 名本科生分三个阶段参与了量表的信度和效度调查。量表的表面效度和内容效度通过专家意见进行评估。第一组样本(n = 420)进行了探索性因子分析(EFA),第二组样本(n = 510)进行了确认性因子分析(CFA),第三组样本(n = 448)进行了标准相关效度测试。EFA 分析表明,该量表具有双因素结构,共有 18 个项目,解释了总方差的 56.23%。CFA分析验证了量表的双因素结构,并得出了良好的拟合值(χ2/df = 2.25, CFI = .99; TLI = .99; NFI = .98; IFI = .99; SRMR = .049; RMSEA = 0.050 [0.42-0.57])。第一个因子的分析结果显示,古特曼λ(λ = 0.930-0.948)、麦当劳Ω(ω = 0.923-0.929)和克朗巴赫α(α = 0.925-0.935)的值均可接受。同样,第二因子分析也显示这些测量值是可以接受的(λ = 0.851-0.880,ω = 0.850-0.879,α = 0.847-0.877)。总体而言,整个量表的 Cronbach's alpha(0.925-0.935)、McDonald's omega(0.922-0.942)和 Guttman's lambda(0.940-0.942)值均可接受。此外,该量表与 Fırat 恐网症量表呈统计学意义上的正相关,表明标准效度令人满意。我们还进行了跨性别不变性分析,结果表明该量表具有性别不变性。结果表明,该量表对大学生有效且可靠。总之,该量表填补了教育研究中的一个重要空白,提供了一个可靠的工具来测量学生对学习经历中缺乏人工智能(AI)的恐惧和焦虑。通过准确评估这种独特形式的焦虑,教育工作者和政策制定者可以制定有针对性的干预措施,更好地了解和减轻学生的恐惧,支持将人工智能融入教育,从而提高人工智能对学习的建设性贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Developing the AIlessphobia in education scale and examining its psychometric characteristics

The purpose of this research is to create a reliable and valid scale to assess AIlessphobia in Education (the fear of being without Artificial Intelligence in education) among university students. In three phases, a sample of 1378 undergraduate students from different faculties at a public university participated in the reliability and validity investigations of the scale during the academic year 2023–2024. Expert comments were obtained to assess the scale's face validity and content validity. The first group sample (n = 420) underwent exploratory factor analysis (EFA), the second group sample (n = 510) underwent confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and the third group sample (n = 448) underwent criterion-related validity testing. EFA revealed that the scale had a two-factor structure with 18 items that explained 56.23% of the total variance. The CFA analysis verified the scale's two-factor structure and produced good fit values (χ2/df = 2.25, CFI = .99; TLI = .99; NFI = .98; IFI = .99; SRMR = .049; RMSEA = 0.050 [0.42–0.57]). The first factor's analysis showed acceptable values for Guttman's lambda (λ = 0.930–0.948), McDonald's omega (ω = 0.923–0.929), and Cronbach's alpha (α = 0.925–0.935). Similarly, the second factor's analysis also showed acceptable values for these measures (λ = 0.851–0.880, ω = 0.850–0.879, α = 0.847–0.877). Overall, the entire scale demonstrated acceptable values for Cronbach's alpha (0.925–0.935), McDonald's omega (0.922–0.942), and Guttman's lambda (0.940–0.942). Additionally, the scale exhibited a positive and statistically significant correlation with the Fırat Netlessphobia Scale, indicating satisfactory criterion validity. Cross-gender invariance analysis was also performed, showing that gender invariance was achieved. The results indicate that this scale is valid and reliable for university students. In conclusion, the scale fills a critical gap in educational research by providing a reliable tool to measure students' fears and anxieties about the absence of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in their learning experiences. By accurately assessing this unique form of anxiety, educators and policymakers can develop targeted interventions to better understand and mitigate students' fears and support the integration of AI in education, thereby enhancing its constructive contribution to learning.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Education and Information Technologies
Education and Information Technologies EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
10.00
自引率
12.70%
发文量
610
期刊介绍: The Journal of Education and Information Technologies (EAIT) is a platform for the range of debates and issues in the field of Computing Education as well as the many uses of information and communication technology (ICT) across many educational subjects and sectors. It probes the use of computing to improve education and learning in a variety of settings, platforms and environments. The journal aims to provide perspectives at all levels, from the micro level of specific pedagogical approaches in Computing Education and applications or instances of use in classrooms, to macro concerns of national policies and major projects; from pre-school classes to adults in tertiary institutions; from teachers and administrators to researchers and designers; from institutions to online and lifelong learning. The journal is embedded in the research and practice of professionals within the contemporary global context and its breadth and scope encourage debate on fundamental issues at all levels and from different research paradigms and learning theories. The journal does not proselytize on behalf of the technologies (whether they be mobile, desktop, interactive, virtual, games-based or learning management systems) but rather provokes debate on all the complex relationships within and between computing and education, whether they are in informal or formal settings. It probes state of the art technologies in Computing Education and it also considers the design and evaluation of digital educational artefacts.  The journal aims to maintain and expand its international standing by careful selection on merit of the papers submitted, thus providing a credible ongoing forum for debate and scholarly discourse. Special Issues are occasionally published to cover particular issues in depth. EAIT invites readers to submit papers that draw inferences, probe theory and create new knowledge that informs practice, policy and scholarship. Readers are also invited to comment and reflect upon the argument and opinions published. EAIT is the official journal of the Technical Committee on Education of the International Federation for Information Processing (IFIP) in partnership with UNESCO.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信