放射科员工的人工智能感知与技术压力:人工智能接受度的中介作用和自我效能感的调节作用

IF 2.5 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Giovanni Di Stefano, Sergio Salerno, Domenica Matranga, Manuela Lodico, Dario Monzani, Valeria Seidita, Roberto Cannella, Laura Maniscalco, Silvana Miceli
{"title":"放射科员工的人工智能感知与技术压力:人工智能接受度的中介作用和自我效能感的调节作用","authors":"Giovanni Di Stefano, Sergio Salerno, Domenica Matranga, Manuela Lodico, Dario Monzani, Valeria Seidita, Roberto Cannella, Laura Maniscalco, Silvana Miceli","doi":"10.3390/bs15091276","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study examined how perceptions of artificial intelligence (AI) relate to technostress in healthcare professionals, testing whether AI acceptance mediates this relationship and whether self-efficacy moderates the formation of acceptance. Seventy-one participants completed measures of Perceptions of AI (Shinners), AI Acceptance (UTAUT), Self-Efficacy, and four technostress outcomes: Technostress Overall, Techno-Overload, Techno-Complexity/Insecurity, and Techno-Uncertainty. Conditional process analyses (PROCESS Model 7; 5000 bootstrap samples) were performed controlling for sex, age (years), and professional role (radiology residents, attending radiologists, PhD researchers). Perceptions of AI were directly and positively associated with Technostress Overall (b = 0.57, <i>p</i> = 0.003), Techno-Overload (b = 0.58, <i>p</i> = 0.008), and Techno-Complexity/Insecurity (b = 0.83, <i>p</i> < 0.001), but not with Techno-Uncertainty (b = -0.02, <i>p</i> = 0.930). AI Acceptance negatively predicted the same three outcomes (e.g., Technostress Overall b = -0.55, <i>p</i> = 0.004), and conditional indirect effects indicated significant negative mediation at low, mean, and high self-efficacy for these three outcomes. Self-efficacy moderated the Perceptions → Acceptance path (interaction b = -0.165, <i>p</i> = 0.028), with a stronger X→M effect at lower self-efficacy, but indices of moderated mediation were not significant for any outcome. The results suggest that perceptions of AI exert both demand-like direct effects and buffering indirect effects via acceptance; implementation should therefore foster acceptance, build competence, and address workload and organizational clarity.</p>","PeriodicalId":8742,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral Sciences","volume":"15 9","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12467842/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Artificial Intelligence Perceptions and Technostress in Staff Radiologists: The Mediating Role of Artificial Intelligence Acceptance and the Moderating Role of Self-Efficacy.\",\"authors\":\"Giovanni Di Stefano, Sergio Salerno, Domenica Matranga, Manuela Lodico, Dario Monzani, Valeria Seidita, Roberto Cannella, Laura Maniscalco, Silvana Miceli\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/bs15091276\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This study examined how perceptions of artificial intelligence (AI) relate to technostress in healthcare professionals, testing whether AI acceptance mediates this relationship and whether self-efficacy moderates the formation of acceptance. Seventy-one participants completed measures of Perceptions of AI (Shinners), AI Acceptance (UTAUT), Self-Efficacy, and four technostress outcomes: Technostress Overall, Techno-Overload, Techno-Complexity/Insecurity, and Techno-Uncertainty. Conditional process analyses (PROCESS Model 7; 5000 bootstrap samples) were performed controlling for sex, age (years), and professional role (radiology residents, attending radiologists, PhD researchers). Perceptions of AI were directly and positively associated with Technostress Overall (b = 0.57, <i>p</i> = 0.003), Techno-Overload (b = 0.58, <i>p</i> = 0.008), and Techno-Complexity/Insecurity (b = 0.83, <i>p</i> < 0.001), but not with Techno-Uncertainty (b = -0.02, <i>p</i> = 0.930). AI Acceptance negatively predicted the same three outcomes (e.g., Technostress Overall b = -0.55, <i>p</i> = 0.004), and conditional indirect effects indicated significant negative mediation at low, mean, and high self-efficacy for these three outcomes. Self-efficacy moderated the Perceptions → Acceptance path (interaction b = -0.165, <i>p</i> = 0.028), with a stronger X→M effect at lower self-efficacy, but indices of moderated mediation were not significant for any outcome. The results suggest that perceptions of AI exert both demand-like direct effects and buffering indirect effects via acceptance; implementation should therefore foster acceptance, build competence, and address workload and organizational clarity.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8742,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Behavioral Sciences\",\"volume\":\"15 9\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12467842/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Behavioral Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15091276\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behavioral Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15091276","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究考察了医疗保健专业人员对人工智能(AI)的认知与技术压力之间的关系,测试了人工智能接受度是否介导了这种关系,以及自我效能感是否调节了接受度的形成。71名参与者完成了对人工智能的感知(Shinners)、人工智能接受(UTAUT)、自我效能和四项技术压力结果的测量:技术压力总体、技术超载、技术复杂性/不安全感和技术不确定性。进行条件过程分析(过程模型7;5000个bootstrap样本),控制性别、年龄和专业角色(放射科住院医师、主治放射科医生、博士研究人员)。对人工智能的感知与技术压力总体(b = 0.57, p = 0.003)、技术过载(b = 0.58, p = 0.008)和技术复杂性/不安全感(b = 0.83, p < 0.001)直接呈正相关,但与技术不确定性(b = -0.02, p = 0.930)无关。人工智能接受负向预测相同的三个结果(例如,技术压力总体b = -0.55, p = 0.004),条件间接效应表明在低、中、高自我效能对这三个结果有显著的负向中介作用。自我效能调节感知→接受路径(交互作用b = -0.165, p = 0.028),自我效能较低时,X→M效应更强,但调节的指标对任何结果均不显著。结果表明,对人工智能的感知既会产生需求样的直接影响,也会通过接受来缓冲间接影响;因此,实现应该促进接受,建立能力,并处理工作量和组织清晰度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Artificial Intelligence Perceptions and Technostress in Staff Radiologists: The Mediating Role of Artificial Intelligence Acceptance and the Moderating Role of Self-Efficacy.

Artificial Intelligence Perceptions and Technostress in Staff Radiologists: The Mediating Role of Artificial Intelligence Acceptance and the Moderating Role of Self-Efficacy.

This study examined how perceptions of artificial intelligence (AI) relate to technostress in healthcare professionals, testing whether AI acceptance mediates this relationship and whether self-efficacy moderates the formation of acceptance. Seventy-one participants completed measures of Perceptions of AI (Shinners), AI Acceptance (UTAUT), Self-Efficacy, and four technostress outcomes: Technostress Overall, Techno-Overload, Techno-Complexity/Insecurity, and Techno-Uncertainty. Conditional process analyses (PROCESS Model 7; 5000 bootstrap samples) were performed controlling for sex, age (years), and professional role (radiology residents, attending radiologists, PhD researchers). Perceptions of AI were directly and positively associated with Technostress Overall (b = 0.57, p = 0.003), Techno-Overload (b = 0.58, p = 0.008), and Techno-Complexity/Insecurity (b = 0.83, p < 0.001), but not with Techno-Uncertainty (b = -0.02, p = 0.930). AI Acceptance negatively predicted the same three outcomes (e.g., Technostress Overall b = -0.55, p = 0.004), and conditional indirect effects indicated significant negative mediation at low, mean, and high self-efficacy for these three outcomes. Self-efficacy moderated the Perceptions → Acceptance path (interaction b = -0.165, p = 0.028), with a stronger X→M effect at lower self-efficacy, but indices of moderated mediation were not significant for any outcome. The results suggest that perceptions of AI exert both demand-like direct effects and buffering indirect effects via acceptance; implementation should therefore foster acceptance, build competence, and address workload and organizational clarity.

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
Behavioral Sciences
Behavioral Sciences Social Sciences-Development
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
7.70%
发文量
429
审稿时长
11 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信