PRISMA Systematic Literature Review: Penerimaan Generative AI dalam Bidang Pendidikan
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33005/santika.v6i1.949Keywords:
Generative AI, penerimaan teknologi, Pendidikan, systematic literature review, PRISMAAbstract
Perkembangan teknologi Generative Artificial Intelligence (Generative AI) telah membawa perubahan signifikan dalam bidang pendidikan, khususnya dalam mendukung proses pembelajaran, akses informasi, dan penyusunan materi akademik. Seiring meningkatnya penggunaan teknologi ini di lingkungan pendidikan, penting untuk memahami faktor-faktor yang memengaruhi penerimaan pengguna terhadap Generative AI. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengidentifikasi model penerimaan teknologi yang digunakan, variabel yang paling sering muncul, serta tren publikasi penelitian terkait penerimaan Generative AI dalam bidang pendidikan. Metode yang digunakan adalah Systematic Literature Review (SLR) dengan mengacu pada pedoman PRISMA. Proses seleksi literatur menghasilkan 34 artikel penelitian yang memenuhi kriteria inklusi pada periode 2024–2026. Hasil analisis menunjukkan bahwa model penerimaan teknologi yang paling banyak digunakan adalah Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology, Technology Acceptance Model, serta Theory of Planned Behavior dan beberapa model hibrida. Variabel yang paling dominan dalam penelitian meliputi behavioral intention, facilitating conditions, dan performance expectancy. Selain itu, tren publikasi menunjukkan peningkatan penelitian pada tahun 2025 hingga 2026, yang menandakan meningkatnya perhatian akademik terhadap pemanfaatan Generative AI dalam pendidikan. Hasil penelitian ini diharapkan dapat memberikan gambaran komprehensif mengenai perkembangan penelitian serta menjadi dasar bagi pengembangan penelitian empiris selanjutnya terkait penerimaan Generative AI dalam bidang pendidikan.
References
UNESCO, Guidance for Generative AI in Education and Research. Paris: UNESCO, 2023.
F. D. Davis, “Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology,” MIS Quarterly, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 319–340, Sep. 1989.
V. Venkatesh, M. G. Morris, G. B. Davis, and F. D. Davis, “User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view,” MIS Quarterly, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 425–478, Sep. 2003.
E. Kasneci et al., “ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education,” Learning and Individual Differences, vol. 103, Apr. 2023.
Y. K. Dwivedi et al., “Opinion paper: ‘So what if ChatGPT wrote it?’ Multidisciplinary perspectives on opportunities, challenges and implications of generative conversational AI for research, practice and policy,” International Journal of Information Management, vol. 71, Aug. 2023.
B. Kitchenham and S. Charters, Guidelines for Performing Systematic Literature Reviews in Software Engineering. Keele, U.K.: Keele University and Durham University Joint Report, 2007.
M. J. Page et al., “The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews,” Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, vol. 134, pp. 178–189, Jun. 2021.
A. T. Baharin, “Exploring the adoption of generative artificial intelligence by TVET students: A UTAUT analysis of perceptions, benefits, and implementation challenges,” Journal of Information Systems Engineering and Management, vol. 10, no. 19s, pp. 429–437, Mar. 2025.
A. BinJwair, “Predicting STEM students’ adoption of generative AI in academic contexts: An application of the UTAUT model,” Frontiers in Education, vol. 10, Nov. 2025.
“Battle of AI chatbots: Graduate students’ perceptions of ChatGPT versus Gemini for learning purposes in Egyptian higher education,” Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching, vol. 8, no. 1, Jan. 2025.
Ö. F. Ursavaş, Y. Yalçın, H. İslamoğlu, E. Bakır-Yalçın, and M. Cukurova, “Rethinking the importance of social norms in generative AI adoption: Investigating the acceptance and use of generative AI among higher education students,” International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, vol. 22, no. 1, p. 38, Jun. 2025.
Y. Tang and L. Zhong, “K-12 teachers’ adoption of generative AI for teaching: An extended TAM perspective,” Education Sciences, vol. 16, no. 1, p. 136, Jan. 2026.
A.-K. Kleine, I. Schaffernak, and E. Lermer, “Exploring predictors of AI chatbot usage intensity among students: Within- and between-person relationships based on the technology acceptance model,” Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans, vol. 3, p. 100113, Mar. 2025.
L. Weis, J. L. Bele, and V. Erčulj, “Acceptance and use of generative artificial intelligence in higher education: A UTAUT-based model integrating trust and privacy,” Education Sciences, vol. 16, no. 2, p. 173, Jan. 2026.
T. T. A. Ngo, T. T. A. Vo, and M. T. Phan, “The psychology of AI adoption in education: University students’ intentions to use large language models for learning from a TAM and TPB perspective,” Acta Psychologica, vol. 261, p. 105789, Nov. 2025.
N. B. Alotaibi, “Adoption of AI tools in education: Examining influencing factors and their impact on students’ critical thinking skills,” Computers in Human Behavior Reports, vol. 21, p. 100990, Mar. 2026.
C. Kai, W. Ping, and J. Xiaomin, “AI anxiety and adoption intention in higher education based on an extended TAM-UTAUT and PLS-SEM analysis,” Scientific Reports, vol. 16, no. 1, p. 3672, Jan. 2026.
