GENERATIVE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (GENAI) ACCEPTANCE AMONG MALAYSIAN FOUNDATION STUDENTS: AN APPLICATION OF THE TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE MODEL
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35631/IJMOE.831007Keywords:
Actual Use, Behavioural Intention, Foundation Students, Generative Artificial Intelligence, Higher Education, Malaysia, Technology Acceptance ModelAbstract
Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) is increasingly being used in higher education to support learning, academic writing, information searching, and other academic activities. However, limited research has examined GenAI acceptance among foundation students in Malaysia. This study therefore examined the acceptance and actual use of GenAI among Malaysian foundation students using the Technology Acceptance Model. Specifically, the study investigated the relationships among Perceived Ease of Use (PEOU), Perceived Usefulness (PU), Attitude (ATT), Behavioural Intention (BI), and Actual Use (AU). Data were collected from 238 foundation students and analysed using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM). The results showed that five of the six hypothesised relationships were positive and statistically significant. PEOU significantly influenced PU and ATT, while PU significantly influenced ATT. ATT significantly influenced BI, and BI significantly influenced AU. However, PU did not have a significant direct effect on BI. Among the significant relationships, the effect of ATT on BI demonstrated the strongest effect, followed by BI on AU), highlighting the importance of students’ attitudes and behavioural intentions in shaping their actual use of GenAI. The findings support the applicability of TAM in explaining GenAI acceptance among Malaysian foundation students. The study contributes to the limited Malaysian literature on GenAI acceptance at the foundation level and provides practical insights for educational institutions to promote the effective and responsible use of GenAI for academic purposes.
Downloads
References
Abd Hadi, N. A., Mohamad, F., Md Johar, E., & Abdul Kadir, Z. (2024). Exploring the Acceptance of ChatGPT as an Assisting Tool in Academic Writing among ESL Undergraduate Students – International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, 8(10), 2886–2901.
Abd Rahim, E. M., Abd Rahim, M. E., Razawi, N. A., & Mohamed, N. A. (2023). Students’ perception on the use of ChatGPT as a language learning tool. Idealogy Journal, 8(2), 70–78. https://doi.org/10.24191/idealogy.v8i2.456
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural Equation Modeling in Practice: A Review and Recommended Two-Step Approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411–423. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411
Biloš, A., & Budimir, B. (2024). Understanding the Adoption Dynamics of ChatGPT among Generation Z: Insights from a Modified UTAUT2 Model. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 19(2), 863–879. https://doi.org/10.3390/jtaer19020045
Blahopoulou, J., & Ortiz-Bonnin, S. (2025). Student perceptions of ChatGPT: Benefits, costs, and attitudinal differences between users and non-users toward AI integration in higher education. Education and Information Technologies, 30(14), 19741–19764. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-025-13575-9
Cain, M. K., Zhiyong Zhang, & Yuan, K.-H. (2017). Univariate and multivariate skewness and kurtosis for measuring nonnormality: Prevalence, influence and estimation. Behavior Research Methods, 49(5), 1716–1735. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-016-0814-1
Chan, C. K. Y., & Hu, W. (2023). Students’ voices on generative AI: Perceptions, benefits, and challenges in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1), 43. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00411-8
Cheah, C. C. W., & Teik Aun, W. (2025). Unleashing AI in Education: A Comparative Analysis of Malaysian University Student Engagement and Learning Support between Google Gemini and ChatGPT. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 54(2), 310–325. https://doi.org/10.1177/00472395251380292
Chin, W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. Modern Methods for Business Research, 295(2), 295–336.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. In Technometrics (Vol. 31, Issue 4). Lawrence Erlbaum. https://doi.org/10.1080/00401706.1989.10488618
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2017.08.036
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models. Management Science, 35(8), 982–1003. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A. G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G* Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior research methods, 41(4), 1149-1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A.-G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. 41, 1149–1160.
Foroughi, B., Iranmanesh, M., Ghobakhloo, M., Senali, M. G., Annamalai, N., Naghmeh-Abbaspour, B., & Rejeb, A. (2025). Determinants of ChatGPT adoption among students in higher education: The moderating effect of trust. The Electronic Library, 43(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1108/EL-12-2023-0293
Hair, J. J., Hult, G., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2016). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage publications.
Hair, J., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2021). A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) (3rd ed.).
He, A. J., Zhang, Z., Anand, P., & McMinn, S. (2025). Embracing generative artificial intelligence tools in higher education: A survey study at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. Journal of Asian Public Policy, 18(2), 352–376. https://doi.org/10.1080/17516234.2024.2447195
Henseler, J., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135.
Ibrahim, R., Leng, N. S., Yusoff, R. C. M., Samy, G. N., Masrom, S., & Rizman, Z. I. (2017). E-Learning Acceptance Based on Technology Acceptance Mode (TAM). Journal of Fundamental and Applied Sciences ISSN, 9(4S), 871–889. https://doi.org/10.4314/jfas.v9i4S.50
Liu, G., & Ma, C. (2024). Measuring EFL learners’ use of ChatGPT in informal digital learning of English based on the technology acceptance model. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 18(2), 125–138. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2023.2240316
Ni, A., & Cheung, A. (2023). Understanding secondary students’ continuance intention to adopt AI-powered intelligent tutoring system for English learning. Education and Information Technologies, 28(3), 3191–3216. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11305-z
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common Method Biases in Behavioral Research: A Critical Review of the Literature and Recommended Remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Becker, J.-M. (2015). SmartPLS 3. Bönningstedt.
Yap, Y. Y., Tan, S. H., & Tan, B. C. (2025). Beyond the Hype: Generative Artificial Intelligence Adoption and Academic Performance among Higher Education Students. In 2025 International Conference on Education Technology and Computers (ICETC) 241–245. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICETC66579.2025.11387548
Yuli Bangun, N., Sujadi, I., Kurniawati, I., Andriatna, R., & Wulandari, A. N. (2025). The emergent role of artificial intelligence in Mathematics education: Examining students’ acceptance and perception. Journal of Educational Management and Instruction (JEMIN), 5(2), 249–264. https://doi.org/10.22515/jemin.v5i2.11242
Žáková, K., Urbano, D., Cruz-Correia, R., Guzmán, J. L., & Matišák, J. (2025). Exploring student and teacher perspectives on ChatGPT’s impact in higher education. Education and Information Technologies, 30(1), 649–692. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-13184-y
Zou, M., & Huang, L. (2023). Frontiers | To use or not to use? Understanding doctoral students’ acceptance of ChatGPT in writing through technology acceptance model. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1259531. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1259531
