The Journal of Korean Academic Society of Nursing Education (한국간호교육학회지)

The Korean Academic Society of Nursing Education (한국간호교육학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The validity and reliability of the Korean version of the General Attitudes towards Artificial Intelligence Scale for nursing students

한국어판 간호대학생의 인공지능에 대한 태도 측정도구 신뢰도 및 타당도 검증

  • Seo, Yon Hee (Department of Nursing, Yeoju Institute of Technology) ;
  • Ahn, Jung-Won (Department of Nursing, Gangneung-Wonju National University)
  • Received : 2022.05.01
  • Accepted : 2022.08.15
  • Published : 2022.11.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of the study was to verify the validity and reliability of the Korean version of the General Attitudes towards Artificial Intelligence Scale (GAAIS-K) for nursing students. Methods: Data from 235 participants were collected from April 12 to April 26, 2022. A total of 230 participants' data were analyzed. The data were analyzed for content, discriminant, known-groups, and construct validity using content validity index, correlation coefficient, and confirmatory factor analyses. The reliability of the GAAIS-K was examined using internal consistency and test-retest analyses. Results: The expert-rated content validity index was ≥.80. The sub-scales of the GAAIS-K were moderately correlated with attitude toward accepting technology, indicative of its discriminant validity. The male students' positive attitude score was significantly higher than that of the female students, satisfying the known-groups validity. Cronbach's α for the scale was .86 (positive) and .74 (negative), and the intra-class correlation coefficient for the two-week test-retest reliability was .86 (positive) and .60 (negative). The scores for positive and negative attitudes were 3.68±0.46 and 3.05±0.55. Conclusion: This study shows that the GAAIS-K is a valid and reliable instrument for assessing nursing students. Additional research is recommended to continue the evaluation of the GAAIS-K with a focus on healthcare settings.

Keywords

References

  1. Jiang F, Jiang Y, Zhi H, Dong Y, Li H, Ma S, et al. Artificial intelligence in healthcare: Past, present and future. Stroke and Vascular Neurology. 2017;2(4):230-243. https://doi.org/10.1136/svn-2017-000101
  2. Hong JP, Kim EJ, Park HY. An analysis of determinants for artificial intelligence industry competitiveness. Journal of the Korea Institute of Information and Communication Engineering. 2017;21(4):663-671. https://doi.org/10.6109/jkiice.2017.21.4.663
  3. Song DU, Jeong DG. Trend on intelligent medical devices and service. Journal of Korean Institute of Information Technology. 2017;15(2):41-48.
  4. Pepito JA, Locsin R. Can nurses remain relevant in a technologically advanced future? International Journal of Nursing Sciences. 2018;6(1):106-110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnss.2018.09.013
  5. Eriksson H, Salzmann-Erikson M. The digital generation and nursing robotics: A netnographic study about nursing care robots posted on social media. Nursing Inquiry. 2017;24(2):e12165. https://doi.org/10.1111/nin.12165
  6. Song YA, Kim HJ, Lee HK. Nursing, robotics, technological revolution: Robotics to support nursing work. Journal of Korean Gerontological Nursing. 2018;20(Suppl 1):144-153. https://doi.org/10.17079/jkgn.2018.20.s1.s144
  7. Aly A, Griffiths S, Stramandinoli F. Metrics and benchmarks in human-robot interaction: Recent advances in cognitive robotics. Cognitive Systems Research. 2017;43:313-323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogsys.2016.06.002
  8. Khader N, Lashier A, Yoon SW. Pharmacy robotic dispensing and planogram analysis using association rule mining with prescription data. Expert Systems with Applications. 2016;57:296-310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2016.02.045
  9. McGrow K. Artificial intelligence: Essentials for nursing. Nursing. 2019;49(9):46-49. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.NURSE.0000577716.57052.8d
  10. Swan BA. Assessing the knowledge and attitudes of registered nurses about artificial intelligence in nursing and health care. Nursing Economic$. 2021;39(3):139-143.
  11. Douthit BJ, Hu X, Richesson RL, Kim H, Cary MP. How artificial intelligence is transforming the future of nursing: Thinking about care in a new light. American Nurse Journal. 2020;15(9):100-103.
  12. Davis FD. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly. 1989;13(3):319-339. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
  13. Venkatesh V, Davis F, Morris MG. Dead or alive? The development, trajectory and future of technology adoption research. Journal of the Association for Information Systems. 2007;8(4):267-286. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00120
  14. Schepman A, Rodway P. Initial validation of the general attitudes towards Artificial Intelligence Scale. Computers in Human Behavior Reports. 2020;1:100014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2020.100014
  15. Lin JSC, Hsieh PL. Refinement of the technology readiness index scale: A replication and cross-validation in the self- service technology context. Journal of Service Management. 2012;23(1):34-53. https://doi.org/10.1108/09564231211208961
  16. Parasuraman A. Technology readiness index (Tri): A multiple-item scale to measure readiness to embrace new technologies. Journal of Service Research. 2000;2(4):307-320. https://doi.org/10.1177/109467050024001
  17. Venkatesh V, Morris MG, Davis GB, Davis FD. User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly. 2003;27(3):425-478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
  18. Kim SW, Lee YJ. Development of test tool of attitude toward artificial intelligence for middle school students. The Journal of Korean Association of Computer Education. 2020;23(3):17-30. https://doi.org/10.32431/kace.2020.23.3.003
  19. Kim SW, Lee YJ. Attitudes toward artificial intelligence of high school students' in Korea. Journal of the Korea Convergence Society. 2020;11(12):1-13. https://doi.org/10.15207/JKCS.2020.11.12.001
  20. Sousa VD, Rojjanasrirat W. Translation, adaptation and validation of instruments or scales for use in cross-cultural health care research: A clear and user-friendly guideline. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice. 2011;17(2):268-274. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2753.2010.01434.x
  21. Lynn MR. Determination and quantification of content validity. Nursing Research. 1986;35(6):382-386. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006199-198611000-00017
  22. Han SS, Lee SC. Nursing and health statistical analysis. 2nd ed. Seoul: Hannarae; 2018. p. 1-520.
  23. Sassis L, Kefala-Karli P, Sassi M, Zervides C. Exploring medical students' and faculty's perception on artificial intelligence and robotics. A questionnaire survey. Journal of Artificial Intelligence for Medical Sciences. 2021;2(1-2):76-84. https://doi.org/10.2991/jaims.d.210617.002
  24. Loh E. Medicine and the rise of the robots: A qualitative review of recent advances of artificial intelligence in health. BMJ Leader. 2018;2:59-63. https://doi.org/10.1136/leader-2018-000071
  25. Schermelleh-Engel K, Moosbrugger H, Muller H. Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research. 2003;8(2):23-74.
  26. Kang H. A guide on the use of factor analysis in the assessment of construct validity. Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing. 2013;43(5):587-594. https://doi.org/10.4040/jkan.2013.43.5.587
  27. Lam SY, Chiang J, Parasuraman A. The effects of the dimensions of technology readiness on technology acceptance: An empirical analysis. Journal of Interactive Marketing. 2008;22(4):19-39. https://doi.org/10.1002/dir.20119
  28. Fitzpatrick R, Davey C, Buxton MJ, Jones DR. Evaluating patient-based outcome measures for use in clinical trials. Health Technology Assessment. 1998;2(14):i-iv, 1-74.
  29. Streiner DL, Norman GR, Cairney J. Health measurement scales: A practical guide to their development and use. 5th ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2015. https://doi.org/10.1093/med/9780199685219.001.0001