Factors Influencing ChatGPT Usage, AI Anxiety, and Learning Satisfaction: An Investigation of Teacher Aspirants’ Understanding of AI Anxiety and Ethical Concerns in Research-Based Education
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56294/ai2025423Keywords:
ChatGPT, AI in education, preservice teachersAbstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) has increasingly transformed education, with ChatGPT emerging as a widely used tool that supports student learning, collaboration, and research. Despite its promise, concerns remain regarding its usefulness, ethical implications, and potential for AI-related anxiety among learners. This study aimed to investigate the factors influencing ChatGPT use, AI anxiety, and learning satisfaction among preservice teachers. Specifically, it examined perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, interaction with ChatGPT, information quality, interaction quality, collaborative learning, and learning motivation and their relationships with ChatGPT use, AI anxiety, and satisfaction. A descriptive-quantitative design was employed, utilizing survey questionnaires administered to 169 preservice teachers across five teacher education programs. The data were analyzed via descriptive statistics and Pearson correlation. The findings revealed that most constructs were rated at moderate levels, except for learning motivation, which was high, and perceived usefulness, which was weak. ChatGPT use was strongly positively correlated with learning motivation, whereas learning satisfaction was significantly related to information quality, collaborative learning, and motivation. AI anxiety was generally low but influenced how preservice teachers engaged with ChatGPT, often with caution and validation of outputs. The study concludes that while AI anxiety does not prevent ChatGPT adoption, it shapes how preservice teachers evaluate and engage with the tool. Structured training, clear guidelines, and collaborative learning opportunities are recommended to enhance perceptions of usefulness, promote responsible adoption, and strengthen learning satisfaction in teacher education.
References
1. Celik I, Dindar M, Muukkonen H, Järvelä S. The promises and challenges of artificial intelligence for educators: A systematic review of research. TechTrends. 2022;66(4):616–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-022-00715-y
2. Clorion FDD, Fuentes J, Suicano DJ, Estigoy E, Eijansantos A, Rillo R, et al. AI‑Powered Professionals and Digital Natives: A Correlational Analysis of the Use and Benefits of Artificial Intelligence for the Employability Skills of Postgraduate Education Students. Procedia Comput Sci. 2025; 263:107–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2025.07.014
3. Fuentes JO, Clorion FD, Abequibel B, Valerio S, Alieto EO. Understanding the attitude of teacher education students toward utilizing ChatGPT as a learning tool: A quantitative analysis. In: Motahhir S, Bossoufi B, editors. Digital technologies and applications. ICDTA 2024. Lect Notes Netw Syst. 2024;1098:82–93. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-68650-4_9
4. Zawacki-Richter, O., Marin, V. I., Bond, M., & Gouverneur, F. (2019). Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education – where are the educators? International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(39), 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239
5. Zhou C. Integration of modern technologies in higher education on the example of artificial intelligence use. Educ Inf Technol. 2023;28(4):3893–3910. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11309-9
6. Franken S, Wattenberg M. The impact of AI on employment and organisation in the industrial working environment of the future. In: Proceedings of the 1st European Conference on the Impact of Artificial Intelligence and Robotics; 2019 Oct; Oxford. Denkfabrik Digitalisierte Arbeitswelt.
7. Munim, Z. H., Dandapat, D., & Andersson, D. (2020). Big data, AI, and the future of decision-making. Journal of Business Research, 116, 321–328.
8. Ayanwale MA, Owolabi PA, Molefi RR, Adeeko O, Ishola AM. Examining artificial intelligence literacy among pre-service teachers for future classrooms. Comput Educ Open. 2024; 6:100179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2024.100179
9. Crompton H, Burke D. Artificial intelligence in higher education: the state of the field. Int J Educ Technol High Educ. 2023;20:22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00392-8
10. Funa A, Gabay RA. Policy guidelines and recommendations on AI use in teaching and learning: A meta synthesis study. Soc Sci Humanit Open. 2025; 11:101221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2024.101221
11. Torres-Toukoumidis A, Jiménez MMF, Merchán-Romero J, Vega-Ramírez JFA. Gamification and artificial intelligence in the educational context: analysis of scientific literature. In: Schönbohm A, et al., editors. Games and Learning Alliance. GALA 2024. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Cham: Springer; 2025. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-78269-5_34
12. Anthony A, Sharma S, Sharma S. Is ChatGPT the future of academic writing? A sequential explanatory study to explore generative conversational AI as an academic writing support tool for research scholars. Bull Sci Technol Soc. 2025;45(1-2):23-39. https://doi.org/10.1177/02704676251353105
13. Jauhiainen JS, Guerra AG. Generative AI and education: dynamic personalization of pupils’ school learning material with ChatGPT. Front Educ. 2024;9:1288723. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1288723
14. Lee D, Arnold M, Srivastava A, Plastow K, Strelan P, Ploeckl F, Lekkas D, Palmer E. The impact of generative AI on higher education learning and teaching: A study of educators’ perspectives. Comput Educ Artif Intell. 2024;6:100221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100221
15. Cengiz S, Peker A. Generative artificial intelligence acceptance and artificial intelligence anxiety among university students: the sequential mediating role of attitudes toward artificial intelligence and literacy. Curr Psychol. 2025. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-025-07433-7
16. Dempere J, Modugu K, Hesham A, Ramasamy LK. The impact of ChatGPT on higher education. Front Educ. 2023;8:1206936. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1206
17. Shahzad MF, Xu S, Javed I. ChatGPT awareness, acceptance, and adoption in higher education: the role of trust as a cornerstone. Int J Educ Technol High Educ. 2024;21:46. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00478-x
18. Alieto EO, Dumagay AH, Serdenia JRC, Labad EM, Galang SK, Vallejo RG. Attitude toward artificial intelligence among teacher aspirants in an emerging AI landscape: A gender-based analysis. In: González Vallejo R, Moukhliss G, Schaeffer E, Paliktzoglou V, editors. The Second International Symposium on Generative AI and Education (ISGAIE’2025). Lecture Notes on Data Engineering and Communications Technologies. Vol. 262. Cham: Springer; 2025. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-98476-1_39
19. Bajaj R, Sharma V. Smart education with artificial intelligence-based determination of learning styles. Procedia Comput Sci. 2018; 132:834–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2018.05.095
20. Hopcan S, Türkmen G, Polat E. Exploring the artificial intelligence anxiety and machine learning attitudes of teacher candidates. Educ Inf Technol. 2024;29:7281–7301. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12086-9
21. Fu CJ, Silalahi ADK, Huang SC, Phuong DTT, Eunike IJ, Yu ZH. The (Un)Knowledgeable, the (Un)Skilled? Undertaking Chat-GPT users’ benefit-risk-coping paradox in higher education focusing on an integrated, UTAUT and PMT. Int J Hum Comput Interact. 2024;41(9):5663-93. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2024.2365028
22. Galindo-Domínguez H, Delgado H, Campo L, Losada D. Relationship between teachers’ digital competence and attitudes towards artificial intelligence in education. Int J Educ Res. 2024; 126:102381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2024.102381
23. Hsu WL, Silalahi ADK. Exploring the paradoxical use of ChatGPT in education: Analyzing benefits, risks, and coping strategies through integrated UTAUT and PMT theories using a hybrid approach of SEM and fsQCA. Comput Educ Artif Intell. 2024;7:100329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100329
24. Chen D, Liu W, Liu X. What drives college students to use AI for L2 learning? Modeling the roles of self-efficacy, anxiety, and attitude based on an extended technology acceptance model. Acta Psychol (Amst). 2024;249:104442. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2024.104442
25. Wang YY, Wang YS. Development and validation of an artificial intelligence anxiety scale: An initial application in predicting motivated learning behavior. Interact Learn Environ. 2022;30(4):619–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1674887
26. Yaşar H, Karagucuk V. The effect of artificial intelligence anxiety on career decidedness among students in English-related departments at universities. Discov Artif Intell. 2025;5:48. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44163-025-00284-y
27. Johnson DG, Verdicchio M. AI Anxiety. J Assoc Inf Sci Technol. 2017;68(9):2267-70. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23867
28. Maghanoy J, Tahil M, Sulasula J, Vallejo RG, Dumagay AH, Alieto EO. Gender and educational attainment dynamics on artificial intelligence anxiety among educators with emerging understanding. In: González Vallejo R, Moukhliss G, Schaeffer E, Paliktzoglou V, editors. The Second International Symposium on Generative AI and Education (ISGAIE’2025). Lecture Notes on Data Engineering and Communications Technologies. Vol. 262. Springer; 2025. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-98476-1_40
29. Francisco CI, Pantaleon CE, Lantaya GMA, Francisco WAR, Alieto EO. Understanding the attitude of senior high school students toward utilizing ChatGPT as a learning tool: A quantitative analysis. In: Sustainable Data Management: Navigating Big Data, Communication Technology, and Business Digital Leadership. Vol. 1. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland; 2025. p. 37-49. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-83911-5_4
30. Gapol PAM, Alieto EO, Capacio EA, Dumagay AH, Francisco CI, Vallejo RG. Preservice teachers’ extent of knowledge and willingness to adopt generative AI in higher education. In: González Vallejo R, Moukhliss G, Schaeffer E, Paliktzoglou V, editors. The Second International Symposium on Generative AI and Education (ISGAIE’2025). Lecture Notes on Data Engineering and Communications Technologies. Vol. 262. Cham: Springer; 2025. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-98476-1_6
31. Jauhiainen, J. S., & Guerra, A. G. (2024). Generative AI and education: Dynamic personalization of pupils’ school learning material with ChatGPT. Frontiers in Education, 9, 1288723. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1288723
32. Barrett A, Pack A. Not quite eye to A.I.: student and teacher perspectives on the use of generative artificial intelligence in the writing process. Int J Educ Technol High Educ. 2023;20:59. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00427-0
33. Yusuf A, Pervin N, Román-González M. Generative AI and the future of higher education: a threat to academic integrity or reformation? Evidence from multicultural perspectives. Int J Educ Technol High Educ. 2024;21:21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00453-6
34. Giannakos M, Azevedo R, Brusilovsky P, Cukurova M, Dimitriadis Y, Hernandez-Leo D, et al. The promise and challenges of generative AI in education. Behav Inf Technol. 2024;44(11):2518-44. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2024.2394886
35. Saúde, S., Barros, J. P., & Almeida, I. (2024). Impacts of generative artificial intelligence in higher education: Research trends and students’ perceptions. Social Sciences, 13(8), 410. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci13080410
36. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
37. Al-Rahmi WM, Zeki AM. A model of using social media for collaborative learning to enhance learners’ performance on learning. J King Saud Univ Comput Inf Sci. 2017;29(4):526-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jksuci.2016.09.002
38. Liaw SS, Huang HM. Perceived satisfaction, perceived usefulness and interactive learning environments as predictors to self-regulation in e-learning environments. Comput Educ. 2013;60(1):14-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.07.015
39. Bantoto FMO, Rillo R, Abequibel B, Mangila BB, Alieto EO. Is AI an effective “learning tool” in academic writing? Investigating the perceptions of third-year university students on the use of artificial intelligence in classroom instruction. In: International Conference on Digital Technologies and Applications. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland; 2024. p. 72–81. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-68650-4_8
40. Davis FD. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q. 1989;13(3):319-40. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
41. Dumagay, A. H., Balasa, K. A., Kunting, A. F., & Cabangcala, R. B. (2025). AI acceptance among prospective social studies and culture and arts education students. In K. Arai (Ed.), Intelligent computing. CompCom 2025 (Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, Vol. 1426). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-92611-2_11
42. Serdenia JR, Dumagay AH, Balasa KA, Capacio EA, Lauzon LDS. Attitude, acceptability, and perceived effectiveness of artificial intelligence in education: A quantitative cross-sectional study among future teachers. LatIA. 2025;3:313
43. Balasa KA, Dumagay AH, Alieto EO, Vallejo RG. Gender and age dynamics in future educators’ attitudes toward AI integration in education: a sample from state managed universities in Zamboanga Peninsula, Philippines. Semin Med Writ Educ. 2025;4:668. https://doi.org/10.56294/mw2025668
44. Cabato JU. From awareness to practice: Exploring the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of secondary ESL teachers in the Philippines toward ChatGPT in education. LatIA. 2025;3:360. https://doi.org/10.62486/latia2025360
45. Asio JM, Soriano ID. The state of artificial intelligence (AI) use in higher education institutions (HEIs) in the Philippines. In: Mobo F, editor. Impacts of AI on Students and Teachers in Education 5.0. IGI Global Scientific Publishing; 2025. p. 523–52. https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3693-8191-5.ch019
46. Flores B, Amabao K, Aidil-Karanain F, Dumagay AH. Bachelor of Culture and Arts student’s attitude toward using digital games for learning. Sci Int (Lahore). 2023;35(3):357–61.
47. Berganio ME, Tanpoco M, Dumagay AH. Preservice teachers’ perceived level of digital literacy: A quantitative study from a developing country. In: Motahhir S, Bossoufi B, editors. ICDTA 2024. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, vol. 1101. Cham: Springer; 2024. p. 158–67.
48. Gonzales LI, Yusoo RJ, Miñoza M, Casimiro A, Devanadera A, Dumagay AH. Reading in the 21st century: Digital reading habit of prospective elementary language teachers. In: Farhaoui Y, Hussain A, Saba T, Taherdoost H, Verma A, editors. Artificial Intelligence, Data Science and Applications. ICAISE 2023. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, vol. 837. Cham: Springer; 2024. p. 134–41.
49. Alieto E, Abequibel-Encarnacion B, Estigoy E, Balasa K, Eijansantos A, Torres-Toukoumidis A. Teaching inside a digital classroom: A quantitative analysis of attitude, technological competence and access among teachers across subject disciplines. Heliyon. 2024;10(2): e24282. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon. 2024.e24282
50. Habibi A, Muhaimin M, Danibao BK, Wibowo YG, Wahyuni S, Octavia A. ChatGPT in higher education learning: Acceptance and use. Comput Educ Artif Intell. 2023;5:100190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100190
51. Li X, Zhu W. System quality, information quality, satisfaction and acceptance of online learning platform among college students in the context of online learning and blended learning. Front Psychol. 2022; 13:1054691. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1054691
52. Pelau C, Dabija DC, Ene I. What makes an AI device human-like? The role of interaction quality, empathy and perceived psychological anthropomorphic characteristics in the acceptance of artificial intelligence in the service industry. Comput Human Behav. 2021;122:106855. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106855
53. Almulla MA. Investigating influencing factors of learning satisfaction in AI ChatGPT for research: University students perspective. Heliyon. 2024;10(11):e32220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e32220
54. Torrato JB, Pillar GA, Robledo DAR, Aguja SE, Prudente MS. Knowledge, attitudes, and practices on ChatGPT: Perspectives from students and teachers of De La Salle Santiago Zobel School. In: Proceedings of the 2024 15th International Conference on E-Education, E-Business, E-Management and E-Learning (IC4E). New York: ACM; 2024. p. 107-116. https://doi.org/10.1145/3670013.3670058
55. Robledo DAR, Zara CG, Montalbo SM, Maalihan ED, Torrato JB, Pillar GA, et al. Development and validation of a survey instrument on knowledge, attitude, and practices (KAP) regarding the educational use of ChatGPT among preservice teachers in the Philippines. Int J Inf Educ Technol. 2023;13(10):1695-1704. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2023.13.10.1965
56. Clorion FD, Fuentes JO, Suicano DJ, Estigoy E, Serdenia JR, Alejandrino P, et al. Smartphones and syntax: A quantitative study on harnessing the role of mobile-assisted language learning in the digital classroom and applications for language learning. Procedia Comput Sci. 2025; 257:7–14.
57. Chiu TKF. The impact of Generative AI (GenAI) on practices, policies, and research direction in education: A case of ChatGPT and Midjourney. Interact Learn Environ. 2023;1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2023.2253861
58. Alalwan AA, Al-Rahmi WM, Alfarraj O, Alzahrani AI, Yahaya N, Al-Rahmi AM. Integrated three theories to develop a model of factors affecting students’ academic performance in higher education. IEEE Access. 2019;7:98725-42. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2928142
59. Al-Zahrani AM. Unveiling the shadows: Beyond the hype of AI in education. Heliyon. 2024;10(9):e30696. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e30696
60. Zhai C, Wibowo S, Li LD. The effects of over-reliance on AI dialogue systems on students' cognitive abilities: a systematic review. Smart Learn Environ. 2024;11:28. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-024-00316-7
61. Ma M, Ng DTK, Liu Z, Wong GKW. Fostering responsible AI literacy: A systematic review of K-12 AI ethics education. Comput Educ Artif Intell. 2025;8:100422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100422
62. Schmidt DA, Alboloushi B, Thomas A, Magalhaes R. Integrating artificial intelligence in higher education: perceptions, challenges, and strategies for academic innovation. Comput Educ Open. 2025;9:100274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2025.100274
63. Subaveerapandiyan A, Kalbande D, Ahmad N. Perceptions of effectiveness and ethical use of AI tools in academic writing: A study among PhD scholars in India. Inf Dev. 2025;41(3):728-46. https://doi.org/10.1177/02666669251314840
64. Domingo AR, Clorion FDD, Mangila B, Hasan NN, Tarroza R, Flores B, Rillo R, Pantaleon C, Francisco CI, Delos Santos M, Alieto EO. Quill & Bytes: A qualitative analysis on the perceived impacts of AI-based paraphrasing tools in academic writing and performance toward higher education students. Procedia Comput Sci. 2025; 263:664–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2025.07.079
65. Santos ZMB, Cadano KJ, Gyawali YP, Alieto EO, Clorion FD. Navigating between conditions and convictions: Investigating the influence of sociogeographical factors on interest and attitudes toward artificial intelligence among secondary school teachers. Lect Notes Netw Syst. 2024;168–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-68675-7_17
66. Creswell JW. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage Publications; 2009.
67. Creswell JW, Creswell JD. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches. 6th ed. London: Sage Publications Ltd; 2023.
68. Alieto E, Devanadera A, Buslon J. Women of K-12: Exploring teachers' cognition in language policy implementation. Asian EFL J. 2019;24(4.1):143–62.
69. Devanadera A, Alieto O. Lexical bias among Tagalog-speaking Filipino preschool children. Asian EFL J. 2019;24(4):207–28.
70. Lee A, Alieto E. Analyzing teaching self-efficacy correlates in virtual education: A gender-driven structural equation modeling approach. Malays J ELT Res. 2023;20(2):110–28.
71. Gerlich M. Exploring motivators for trust in the dichotomy of human–AI trust dynamics. Soc Sci. 2024;13(5):251. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci130502512.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Jama Kaye B. Peluta (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The article is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Unless otherwise stated, associated published material is distributed under the same licence.
