What Drives University Students to Use ChatGPT for Translation? Disciplinary and Experiential Influences
Dados Bibliográficos
| ID | 12114957 |
|---|---|
| Autores | Lulu Wang (0000-0002-6610-860X, Department of Language Science and Technology The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Kowloon Hong Kong SAR China), Simin Xu (0009-0000-9463-5557, Department of Language Science and Technology The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Kowloon Hong Kong SAR China), Kanglong Liu (0000-0003-3962-2563, Department of Language Science and Technology The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Kowloon Hong Kong SAR China, autor correspondente) |
| Ano | 2025 |
| Data de publicação | 2025-08-20 |
| Peer Reviewed | Sim |
| Open Access | Sim |
| Tipo | ARTICLE |
| Periódico | International Journal of Applied Linguistics (JOURNAL) |
| Identificadores do periódico | ISSN: 0802-6106 • E-ISSN: 1473-4192 |
| Editora | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/ijal.12856 |
| OpenAlex | W4413355768 |
| Idioma | EN |
| Citações recebidas | 1 |
| Referências citadas | 44 |
The increasing use of large language models like ChatGPT has sparked interest in their potential for translation tasks. However, little is known about what drives university students to adopt these tools or how disciplinary background and prior experience shape their decisions. Guided by the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT), this study explores the adoption of ChatGPT for translation tasks among university students in Hong Kong. Survey responses from 308 students, including translation and non‐translation majors, were analyzed using structural equation modeling. Results show that performance expectancy is the strongest determinant of adoption intention, followed by facilitating conditions, while effort expectancy and social influence were less significant. Experience level emerged as an important moderating factor: novice users relied on both social influence and performance expectations, whereas experienced users prioritized performance alone. Disciplinary differences were also pronounced. Translation students primarily valued performance benefits and used their technical expertise to evaluate ChatGPT independently. Non‐translation students, however, were influenced by both performance expectations and facilitating conditions, suggesting a greater need for institutional support. These findings highlight the importance of tailored educational approaches that address the specific motivations of different student populations. For translation students, this means emphasizing advanced features and critical evaluation, while for non‐translation students, it involves providing stronger support systems and guidance. The study also offers insights for LLM developers, underscoring the need for user‐centered design that accommodates the diverse needs, experiences, and expectations of different student groups
Discipline · Experiential learning · Pedagogy · Social science · Sociology · AI in Service Interactions · Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education · Online Learning and Analytics · Psychology
The unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT)
Covariance-Based Structural Equation Modeling in the Journal of Advertising
The median split
The Technology Acceptance Model
Why Don’t Men Ever Stop to Ask for Directions? Gender, Social Influence, and Their Role in Technology Acceptance and Usage Behavior1
Testing for Multigroup Invariance Using Amos Graphics
G*Power 3
User Acceptance of Information Technology
Consumer Acceptance and Use of Information Technology
A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling
The Use of Cronbach’s Alpha When Developing and Reporting Research Instruments in Science Education
What are the differences? A comparative study of generative artificial intelligence translation and human translation of scientific texts
Machine translation of Chinese classical poetry
Privacy and everyday users of machine translation
Deconstructing translational trust
Artificial intelligence and posthumanist translation
Can you tell the difference? A study of human vs machine-translated subtitles
Human-Centered augmented translation
GenAI as a translation assistant? A corpus-based study on lexical and syntactic complexity of GPT-post-edited learner translation
Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling
A Cross Sectional Study of ChatGPT in Translation
| Obras citantes distintas | 1 |
|---|---|
| Citações por ano | 1 |
| Intervalo de citações | 2026 - 2026 (1) |
| Velocidade de citação | current |
| Altamente citado | Não |
| Tipos de citação | Neutras: 1 |