Medición de las percepciones sobre el uso de la inteligencia artificial en la educación superior: propuesta de marco de adaptación para el contexto latinoamericano

Gerardo Antonio Hernández Torres; SILVIA PATRICIA AQUINO ZUNIGA; Manuel Jesús Izquierdo Sandoval

doi:10.54104/papeles.v18n35.2317

Authors

Gerardo Antonio Hernández Torres Universidad Juárez Autónoma de Tabasco https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5498-8358
SILVIA PATRICIA AQUINO ZUNIGA Universidad Juárez Autónoma de Tabasco https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7223-8582
Manuel Jesús Izquierdo Sandoval Universidad Juárez Autónoma de Tabasco https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5605-2318

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54104/papeles.v18n35.2317

Keywords:

Artificial intelligence, perception, higher education, questionnaires, measurement

Abstract

Introduction: The adoption of artificial intelligence tools in higher education has generated growing interest in understanding the factors that influence their acceptance, as well as in assessing the quality of the instruments used for their measurement. In this context, it is necessary to critically examine the theoretical models and the psychometric evidence supporting these instruments. Methodology: A systematic review was conducted following the Prisma guidelines, through which 26 empirical studies published between 2022 and 2025 and indexed in Scopus, Web of Science, SciELO and Redalyc were analyzed. The selected studies predominantly employ questionnaires with Likert-type scales to measure the constructs proposed by the TAM and UTAUT2 models and report information on instrument validation and reliability procedures. Results and Discussion: The findings reveal a consistent use of construct validity and internal reliability as minimum criteria for instrumental evaluation, although relevant variations are observed in methodological procedures and in the contextual adaptation of the models. In addition, challenges related to digital equity and institutional trust are identified as factors influencing the acceptance of artificial intelligence, particularly in Latin American contexts. Based on these findings, guidelines are proposed to improve the assessment of artificial intelligence acceptance in Latin American higher education. Conclusions: The review suggests that Likert-scale–based questionnaires are widely used and potentially replicable instruments; however, their application in Latin American higher education requires contextual and regulatory adaptations to ensure the validity of the measured constructs. In this regard, there is a clear need to advance toward instrumental designs that are more sensitive to the structural and institutional conditions of the region.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Acosta-Enríquez, B. G., Arbulú Ballesteros, M. A., Huamaní Jordan, O., López Roca, C. y Saavedra Tirado, K. (2024). Analysis of college students’ attitudes toward the use of ChatGPT in their academic activities: Effect of intent to use, verification of information and responsible use. BMC Psychology, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-024-01764-z DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-024-01764-z

Alhwaiti, M. (2023). Acceptance of artificial intelligence application in the post-covid ERA and its impact on faculty members’ occupational well-being and teaching self efficacy: A path analysis using the utaut 2 model. Applied Artificial Intelligence, 37(1), 2175110. https://doi.org/10.1080/08839514.2023.2175110 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/08839514.2023.2175110

Almogren, A. S., Al-Rahmi, W. M. y Dahri, N. A. (2024). Exploring factors influencing the acceptance of ChatGPT in higher education: A smart education perspective. Heliyon, 10(11), e31887. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e31887 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e31887

Almulla, M. A. (2024). Investigating influencing factors of learning satisfaction in AI ChatGPT for research: University students perspective. Heliyon, 10(11), e32220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e32220 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e32220

Alshammari, S. H., Almankory, A. Z. y Alrashidi, M. E. (2025). Efectos de la conciencia y confianza en la disposición estudiantil para usar ChatGPT: Modelo TAM-ECM integrado. RIED: Revista Iberoamericana de Educación a Distancia, 28(2), 155-180. https://doi.org/10.5944/ried.28.2.43476 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5944/ried.28.2.43476

Alzahrani, A. y Alzahrani, A. (2024). Comprendiendo la adopción de ChatGPT en universidades: El impacto del TPACK y UTAUT2 en los docentes. RIED: Revista Iberoamericana de Educación a Distancia, 28(1). https://doi.org/10.5944/ried.28.1.41498 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5944/ried.28.1.41498

Amer Jid Almahri, F. A., Bell, D. y Gulzar, Z. (2024). Chatbot technology use and acceptance using educational personas. Informatics, 11(2). https://doi.org/10.3390/informatics11020038 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/informatics11020038

Ayoubi, K. (2024). Adopting ChatGPT: Pioneering a new era in learning platforms. International Journal of Data and Network Science, 8(2), 1341-1348. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.ijdns.2023.11.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5267/j.ijdns.2023.11.001

Barroga, E. y Matanguihan, G. J. (2022). A practical guide to writing quantitative and qualitative research questions and hypotheses in scholarly articles. Journal of Korean Medical Science, 37(16), e121. https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2022.37.e121 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2022.37.e121

Boyle, J. y Fisher, S. (2008). Educational testing: A competence-based approach. John Wiley & Sons. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470774090

Bryman, A. (1984). The debate about quantitative and qualitative research: A question of method or epistemology? The British Journal of Sociology, 35(1), 75-92. https://doi.org/10.2307/590553 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/590553

Cabero-Almenara, J., Palacios-Rodríguez, A., Loaiza-Aguirre, M. I. y Rivas-Manzano, M.ª del R. de. (2024). Acceptance of educational artificial intelligence by teachers and its relationship with some variables and pedagogical beliefs. Education Sciences, 14(7). https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14070740 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14070740

Cambra-Fierro, J. J., Fuentes Blasco, M.ª, López-Pérez, M.ª E. y Trifu, A. (2025). ChatGPT adoption and its influence on faculty well-being: An empirical research in higher education. Education and Information Technologies, 30(2), 1517-1538. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12871-0 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12871-0

Cohen, L., Manion, L. y Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education (8.ª ed.). Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315456539

Cortina, J. M. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(1), 98-104. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.78.1.98 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037//0021-9010.78.1.98

Dauzón-Ledesma, L. e Izquierdo, J. (2023). Language learning investment in Higher Education: Validation and implementation of a Likert-scale questionnaire in the context of compulsory EFL Learning. Education Sciences, 13(4). https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13040370 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13040370

Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P. y 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 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982

Duckett, L. J. (2021). Quantitative research excellence: Study design and reliable and valid measurement of variables. Journal of Human Lactation, 37(3), 456-463. https://doi.org/10.1177/08903344211019285 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/08903344211019285

Fabila Echauri, A. M., Minami, H. y Izquierdo Sandoval, M. J. (2014). La escala de Likert en la evaluación docente: Acercamiento a sus características y principios metodológicos. Perspectivas docentes, 50. https://doi.org/10.19136/pd.a0n50.589

Falebita, O. S. y Kok, P. J. (2025). Artificial intelligence tools usage: A structural equation modeling of undergraduates’ technological readiness, self-efficacy and attitudes. Journal for STEM Education Research, 8(2), 257-282. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41979-024-00132-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41979-024-00132-1

Field, A. (2018). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (5.ª ed.). Sage.

G. C, S. B., Bhandari, P., Gurung, S. K., Srivastava, E., Ojha, D. y Dhungana, B. R. (2024). Examining the role of social influence, learning value and habit on students’ intention to use ChatGPT: The moderating effect of information accuracy in the UTAUT2 model. Cogent Education, 11(1), 2403287. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2024.2403287 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2024.2403287

Gil-Vera, V. D. (2024). Uso de ChatGPT por estudiantes universitarios: Un análisis relacional. Formación Universitaria, 17(5), 129-138. https://doi.org/10.4067/s0718-50062024000400129 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4067/s0718-50062024000400129

Glass, G. V. y Hopkins, K. D. (2008). Statistical methods in education and psychology (3.ª ed.). Allyn & Bacon.

Gómez-García, M., Ruiz-Palmero, J., Boumadan-Hamed, M. y Soto-Varela, R. (2025). Perceptions of future teachers and pedagogues on responsible AI: A measurement instrument. RIED: Revista Iberoamericana de Educación a Distancia, 28(2), 105-130. https://doi.org/10.5944/ried.28.2.43288 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5944/ried.28.2.43288

Grassini, S., Aasen, M. L. y Møgelvang, A. (2024). Understanding university students’ acceptance of ChatGPT: Insights from the UTAUT2 model. Applied Artificial Intelligence, 38(1), 2371168. https://doi.org/10.1080/08839514.2024.2371168 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/08839514.2024.2371168

Gravetter, F. J., Wallnau, L. B., Forzano, L. B. y Witnauer, J. E. (2021). Essentials of statistics for the behavioral sciences (10.ª ed.). Cengage.

Haddaway, N. R., Page, M. J., Pritchard, C. C. y McGuinness, L. A. (2022). PRISMA2020: An R package and Shiny app for producing Prisma 2020-compliant flow diagrams, with interactivity for optimised digital transparency and Open Synthesis. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 18(2), e1230. https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1230 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1230

Hernández Hernández, M. e Izquierdo Sandoval, M. J. (2020). Cambios curriculares y enseñanza del inglés: Cuestionario de percepción docente. Sinéctica: Revista Electrónica de Educación, 54, 1-22. https://doi.org/10.31391/S2007-7033(2020)0054-012 DOI: https://doi.org/10.31391/S2007-7033(2020)0054-012

Hodge, D. R. y Gillespie, D. F. (2007). Phrase completion scales: A better measurement approach than Likert scales? Journal of Social Service Research, 33(4), 1-12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J079v33n04_01 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1300/J079v33n04_01

Hoy, W. K. y Adams, C. M. (2016). Quantitative research in education: A primer (2.ª ed.). Sage. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781071984307

Kanont, K., Pingmuang, P., Simasathien, T., Wisnuwong, S., Wiwatsiripong, B., Poonpirome, K., Songkram, N. y Khlaisang, J. (2024). Generative-AI, a learning assistant? Factors influencing higher-ed students’ technology acceptance. Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 22(6), 18-33. https://doi.org/10.34190/ejel.22.6.3196 DOI: https://doi.org/10.34190/ejel.22.6.3196

Köhler, T., Landis, R. S. y Cortina, J. M. (2017). From the editors: Establishing methodological rigor in quantitative management learning and education research: The role of design, statistical methods, and reporting standards. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 16(2), 173-192. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2017.0079 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2017.0079

Li, Q. y Qin, Y. (2023). AI in medical education: Medical student perception, curriculum recommendations and design suggestions. BMC Medical Education, 23(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-023-04700-8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-023-04700-8

Lodico, M. G., Spaulding, D. T. y Voegtle, K. H. (2006). Methods in educational research: From theory to practice. Jossey-Bass.

Mahmud, A., Sarower, A. H., Sohel, A., Assaduzzaman, M. y Bhuiyan, T. (2024). Adoption of ChatGPT by university students for academic purposes: Partial least square, artificial neural network, deep neural network and classification algorithms approach. Array, 21, 100339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.array.2024.100339 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.array.2024.100339

Marimon, F., Arias Valle, M. B., Coria Augusto, C. J. y Larrea Arnau, C. M. (2025). Del optimismo a la confianza: El impacto de ChatGPT en la confianza de los estudiantes en el aprendizaje asistido por IA. RIED: Revista Iberoamericana de Educación a Distancia, 28(2), 131-153. https://doi.org/10.5944/ried.28.2.43238 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5944/ried.28.2.43238

McKinley, J. y Rose, H. (eds.) (2019). The Routledge handbook of research methods in applied linguistics. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780367824471 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780367824471

Merhi, R. (2011). Expectativas del estudiantado en la universidad del nuevo milenio. La Cuestión Universitaria, 7, 23-31. https://polired.upm.es/index.php/lacuestionuniversitaria/article/view/3353/3418

Mohd Rahim, N. I., Iahad, N. A., Yusof, A. F. y Al-Sharafi, M. A. (2022). AI-based chatbots adoption model for higher-education institutions: A hybrid PLS-SEM-neural network modelling approach. Sustainability, 14(19), 12726. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141912726 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su141912726

Norman, G. (2010). Likert scales, levels of measurement and the “laws” of statistics. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 15(5), 625-632. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-010-9222-y DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-010-9222-y

O’Mara‐Eves, A. y Thomas, J. (2016). Ongoing developments in meta‐analytic and quantitative synthesis methods: Broadening the types of research questions that can be addressed. Review of Education, 4(1), 5-27. https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3062 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3062

OpenAI. (2022, 30 de noviembre). Presentamos ChatGPT. https://openai.com/es-419/index/chatgpt/

Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S. … Alonso-Fernández, S. (2021). Declaración Prisma 2020: Una guía actualizada para la publicación de revisiones sistemáticas. Revista Española de Cardiología, 74(9), 790-799. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.recesp.2021.06.016 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rec.2021.07.010

Persson, P. B., Hillmeister, P. y Persson, A. B. (2022). Perception. Acta Physiologica, 235(3), e13842. https://doi.org/10.1111/apha.13842 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/apha.13842

Rahman, M. S., Sabbir, M. M., Zhang, J., Moral, I. H. y Hossain, G. M. S. (2023). Examining students’ intention to use ChatGPT: Does trust matter? Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 39(6), 51-71. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.8956 DOI: https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.8956

Robles Morales, R. E. (2025). Factores determinantes en la adopción de inteligencia artificial en la educación superior dominicana. Cuaderno de Pedagogía Universitaria, 22(43), 79-103. https://doi.org/10.29197/cpu.v22i43.647 DOI: https://doi.org/10.29197/cpu.v22i43.647

Romero Calle, G. P., Tivillin-Gutama, D. M. y Bonisoli, L. (2025). La inteligencia artificial y su influencia en el comportamiento de los estudiantes. Kairós: Revista de Ciencias Económicas, Jurídicas y Administrativas, 8(14), 67-87. https://doi.org/10.37135/kai.03.14.04 DOI: https://doi.org/10.37135/kai.03.14.04

Romero-Rodríguez, J. M., Ramírez-Montoya, M. S., Buenestado-Fernández, M. y Lara-Lara, F. (2023). Use of ChatGPT at university as a tool for complex thinking: Students’ perceived usefulness. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 12(2), 323-339. https://doi.org/10.7821/naer.2023.7.1458 DOI: https://doi.org/10.7821/naer.2023.7.1458

Ruiz Mendoza, K. K., Miramontes Arteaga, M.ª A. y Reyna García, C. (2024). Percepciones y expectativas de estudiantes universitarios sobre la IAG. European Public & Social Innovation Review, 9, 1-21. https://doi.org/10.31637/epsir-2024-357 DOI: https://doi.org/10.31637/epsir-2024-357

Saihi, A., Ben-Daya, M., Hariga, M. y As’ad, R. (2024). A structural equation modeling analysis of generative AI chatbots adoption among students and educators in higher education. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 7, 100274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100274 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100274

Salazar-Altamirano, M. A., Martínez-Arvizu, O. J., Galván-Vela, E., Ravina-Ripoll, R., Hernández-Arteaga, L. G. y Gómez Sánchez, D. (2025). AI as a facilitator of creativity and wellbeing in business students: A multigroup approach between public and private universities. Encontros Bibli: Revista Eletrônica de Biblioteconomia e Ciência da Informação, 30, 1-30. https://doi.org/10.5007/1518-2924.2025.e103485 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5007/1518-2924.2025.e103485

Sallam, M., Salim, N. A., Barakat, M., Al-Mahzoum, K., Al-Tammemi, A. B., Malaeb, D., Hallit, R. y Hallit, S. (2023). Assessing health students’ attitudes and usage of ChatGPT in Jordan: Validation study. JMIR Medical Education, 9, e48254. https://doi.org/10.2196/48254 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/48254

Scates, D. E. y Hoban, C. F. (1937). Critical questions for the evaluation of research. The Journal of Educational Research, 31(4), 241-254. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.1937.10880747 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.1937.10880747

Scott, D. (2007). Resolving the quantitative-qualitative dilemma: A critical realist approach. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 30(1), 3-17. https://doi.org/10.1080/17437270701207694 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17437270701207694

Segarra Ciprés, M., Grangel Seguer, R. y Belmonte Fernández, Ó. (2024). ChatGPT como herramienta de apoyo al aprendizaje en la educación superior: Una experiencia docente. Revista Tecnología, Ciencia y Educación, 28, 7-44. https://doi.org/10.51302/tce.2024.19083 DOI: https://doi.org/10.51302/tce.2024.19083

Shahzad, M. F., Xu, S. y Javed, I. (2024). ChatGPT awareness, acceptance, and adoption in higher education: The role of trust as a cornerstone. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21(1), 46. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00478-x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00478-x

Shaker, P. y Ruitenberg, C. (2007). ‘Scientifically‐based research’: The art of politics and the distortion of science. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 30(2), 207-219. https://doi.org/10.1080/17437270701383545 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17437270701383545

Sigüenza Orellana, J., Andrade Cordero, C. y Chitacapa Espinoza, J. (2024). Validación del cuestionario para docentes: Percepción sobre el uso de ChatGPT en la educación superior. Revista Andina de Educación, 8(1), 000816. https://doi.org/10.32719/26312816.2024.8.1.6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.32719/26312816.2024.8.1.6

Strzelecki, A. (2024). Students’ acceptance of ChatGPT in higher education: An extended unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. Innovative Higher Education, 49(2), 223-245. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-023-09686-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-023-09686-1

Strzelecki, A., Cicha, K., Rizun, M. y Rutecka, P. (2024). Acceptance and use of ChatGPT in the academic community. Education and Information Technologies, 29(17), 22943-22968. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12765-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12765-1

Universidad Juárez Autónoma de Tabasco. (2024). Plan de Desarrollo Institucional 2024-2028. https://archivos.ujat.mx/2024/rectoria/PDI-24-28.pdf

Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. y Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157-178. https://doi.org/10.2307/41410412 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/41410412

Villegas-Ch, W., García-Ortiz, J. y Sánchez-Viteri, S. (2024). Personalization of learning: Machine learning models for adapting educational content to individual learning styles. IEEE Access, 12, 121114-121130. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3452592 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3452592

Walsh, C., Stein, M. M., Tapping, R., Smith, E. M. y Holmes, N. G. (2021). Exploring the effects of omitted variable bias in physics education research. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 17(1), 010119. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.17.010119 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.17.010119

White, P. (2013). Who’s afraid of research questions? The neglect of research questions in the methods literature and a call for question-led methods teaching. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 36(3), 213-227. https://doi.org/10.1080/1743727X.2013.809413 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1743727X.2013.809413

Zhu, J. y Liu, W. (2020). A tale of two databases: The use of Web of Science and Scopus in academic papers. Scientometrics, 123(1), 321-335. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03387-8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03387-8

Zyphur, M. J. y Pierides, D. C. (2020). Making quantitative research work: From positivist dogma to actual social scientific inquiry. Journal of Business Ethics, 167(1), 49-62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04189-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04189-6