Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
English | Español (España)
Editorial
Revistas / Journals
Salud, Ciencia y Tecnología Metaverse Basic and Applied Research Data & Metadata Interdisciplinary Rehabilitation Salud, Ciencia y Tecnología - Serie de Conferencias Community and Interculturality in Dialogue Seminars in Medical Writing and Education Health Leadership and Quality of Life Gamification and Augmented Reality Southern perspective / Perspectiva austral
Home
Issue
Current Issue Previous Issues Special Issue
About
About the Journal Editorial Team Privacy Statement Digital preservation policy Contact
Submissions
Guidelines for authors Peer Review Process Open Access Policy and Copyright Ethical aspects Anti-plagiarism policy Crossmark Policy
Indexing
×
English | Español (España)
Editorial

Salud, Ciencia y Tecnología Metaverse Basic and Applied Research Data & Metadata Interdisciplinary Rehabilitation Salud, Ciencia y Tecnología - Serie de Conferencias Community and Interculturality in Dialogue Seminars in Medical Writing and Education Health Leadership and Quality of Life Gamification and Augmented Reality Southern perspective / Perspectiva austral
Home

Current Issue Previous Issues Special Issue

About the Journal Editorial Team Privacy Statement Digital preservation policy Contact

Guidelines for authors Peer Review Process Open Access Policy and Copyright Ethical aspects Anti-plagiarism policy Crossmark Policy
Indexing
Original
Published: 2022-12-26
DOI: https://doi.org/10.56294/mr202214

Psychometric properties of an instrument to assess the level of knowledge about artificial intelligence in university professors

By
Camilo Andrés Silva-Sánchez ,
Camilo Andrés Silva-Sánchez

Universidad Andrés Bello, Facultad de Enfermería. Santiago de Chile, Chile

Search this author on:

PubMed | Google Scholar

Abstract

Introduction: Knowledge of AI in university professors allows them to integrate these technological tools into their teaching strategies and thus improve the quality of learning.
Goal: Determine the sustainable factorial structure of the dimension of relations of an instrument to assess the level of knowledge of artificial intelligence in university professors.
Methods: A cross-sectional, metric validating study was carried out. A sample of 83 university professors was chosen. An instrument on artificial intelligence for university professors was applied, said instrument being composed of 15 questions divided into three sections. A psychometric analysis was conducted in order to assess its validity and reliability.
Results: The results show that Part 1 has an alpha coefficient of 0.77, Part 2 has an alpha coefficient of 0.65, and Part 3 has an alpha coefficient of 0.83. The alpha coefficients for each subscale (0.77 for Part 1, 0.65 for Part 2 and 0.83 for Part 3) indicate that the instrument has good internal consistency and the questions within each subscale relate to one another. Ratio χ2/gl of 2.1 indicates good fit of the model, and the GFI, NFI and CFI values are close to 1, which indicates good fit of the model.
Conclusions: The results of this study support the validity, reliability and sustainable factorial structure of the instrument on artificial intelligence for university professors, which makes it an adequate tool to assess the level of knowledge of AI in university professors.

Keywords:

artificial intelligence,
psychometric properties,
reliability,
validity,
university professors,

How to Cite

1.
Silva-Sánchez CA. Psychometric properties of an instrument to assess the level of knowledge about artificial intelligence in university professors. Metaverse Basic and Applied Research [Internet]. 2022 Dec. 26 [cited 2024 Jul. 27];1:14. Available from: https://mr.saludcyt.ar/index.php/mr/article/view/14

Copyright Notice

The article is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Unless otherwise stated, associated published material is distributed under the same licence.

Article metrics

Google scholar: See link

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Vol. 1 (2022)
See full issue

The statements, opinions and data contained in the journal are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publisher and the editor(s). We stay neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.