Generative AI Adoption Among Business School Students: Drivers Of Use And Policy Implications

Aivars Spilbergs; Biruta Sloka; Gunta Innuse-Breidaka; Laima Čable; Ginta Tora; Kristīne Liepiņa

doi:10.29284/fbv9zf73

Authors

Aivars Spilbergs Department of Economics and Finance, BA School of Business and Finance, University of Latvia, Riga
Biruta Sloka Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, University of Latvia, Riga, Latvia
Gunta Innuse-Breidaka Department of Economics and Finance, BA School of Business and Finance, University of Latvia, Riga
Laima Čable Department of Economics and Finance, BA School of Business and Finance, University of Latvia, Riga
Ginta Tora Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, University of Latvia, Riga, Latvia
Kristīne Liepiņa Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, University of Latvia, Riga, Latvia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.29284/fbv9zf73

Keywords:

artificial intelligence, business school students, drivers of use, policy implications, UTAUT2.

Abstract

The rapid integration of generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) tools into higher education presents both transformative potential and pedagogical challenges. This study researches the key factors influencing the adoption of GenAI among business school students, utilizing the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology 2 (UTAUT2) as its theoretical framework. Drawing on survey data from 441 students across the Baltic Sea region, the research employed partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) to estimate the relationships between performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, study value, habit, facilitating conditions, and hedonic motivation in predicting the use of GenAI.

The findings reveal that habit, social influence, and study value significantly impact students' adoption of GenAI tools. At the same time, performance expectancy, effort expectancy, facilitating conditions, and hedonic motivation do not show statistically significant effects. These results suggest a behavioral-intention gap: positive perceptions of GenAI do not consistently translate into actual use. The study highlights the importance of fostering habitual engagement and peer-driven norms to encourage meaningful integration of GenAI in academic settings. By offering empirical insights into student behavior, this study contributes to the discourse on digital transformation in higher education. It provides actionable recommendations for educators and policymakers to support the ethical, practical, and student-centered adoption of GenAI, aligning with the conference's mission to advance innovation and quality in higher education studies.

References

[1] A. Almogren, W. Al-Rahmi, and N. Dahri, “Exploring factors influencing the acceptance of ChatGPT in higher education: A smart education perspective,” Heliyon, vol. 10, no. 11, 2024.

[2] S. Balaskas, V. Tsiantos, S. Chatzifotiou, and M. Rigou, “Determinants of ChatGPT adoption intention in higher education: Expanding on TAM with the mediating roles of trust and risk,” Information, vol. 16, no. 2, p. 82, 2025.

[3] C. Chan, & W. Hu, “Students’ voices on generative AI: Perceptions, benefits, and challenges in higher education”, International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1), 43, 2023.

[4] M. Faraon, K. Rönkkö, M. Milrad, & E.Tsui, “International perspectives on artificial intelligence in higher education: An explorative study of students’ intention to use ChatGPT across the Nordic countries and the USA. Education and Information Technologies, 1-46, 2025. UTAUT2

[5] S. Grassini, M. Aasen, and A. Møgelvang, “Understanding university students’ acceptance of ChatGPT: Insights from the UTAUT2 model,” Applied Artificial Intelligence, vol. 38, no. 1, 2024.

[6] J. Hair, J. Risher, M. Sarstedt, and C. Ringle, “When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM,” European Business Review, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 2–24, 2019.

[7] S. Haroud and N. Saqri, “Generative AI in higher education: Teachers’ and students’ perspectives on support, replacement, and digital literacy,” Education Sciences, vol. 15, no. 4, p. 396, 2025.

[8] L. Hughes, T. Malik, S. Dettmer, A. Al-Busaidi, and Y. Dwivedi, “Reimagining higher education: Navigating the challenges of generative AI adoption,” Information Systems Frontiers, 2025.

[9] A. Korchak, G. Al Murshidi, A. Getman et al., “The role of social influence in generative artificial intelligence ChatGPT adoption intentions among undergraduate and graduate students,” Innovations in Education and Teaching International, vol. 1, 2025.

[10] K. Lavidas, I. Voulgari, S. Papadakis et al., “Determinants of humanities and social sciences students’ intentions to use artificial intelligence applications for academic purposes,” Information, vol. 15, no. 6, p. 314, 2024.

[11] R. Lenart, B. A. Sypniewska, J. Chen, and K. Janowski, “Antecedents of students' behavioural intention to use generative artificial intelligence: Quantitative research,” Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 7–21, 2025.

[12] N. Milićević, B. Kalaš, N. Djokić, B. Malčić, and I. Djokic, “Students’ intention toward artificial intelligence in the context of digital transformation,” Sustainability, vol. 16, no. 9, p. 3554, 2024.

[13] L. Reiter, M. Jörling, C. Fuchs, & R. Böhm, “Student (Mis) Use of Generative AI Tools for University-Related Tasks”. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 1-14, 2025 TAM

[14] J. Romero-Rodríguez, M. Ramírez-Montoya, M. Buenestado-Fernández, & F. Lara-Lara, “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, 2023. UTAUT2 PE, HM, SV

[15] A. Shuhaiber, M. Kuhail, & S. Salman, “ChatGPT in higher education: A Student's perspective”, Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 17, 100565, 2025. UTAUT2 PE, EF, HM

[16] A. Sousa and P. Cardoso, “Use of generative AI by higher education students,” Electronics, vol. 14, no. 7, p. 1258, 2025.

[17] A. Strzelecki, “Students’ acceptance of ChatGPT in higher education: An extended unified theory of acceptance and use of technology,” Innovative Higher Education, vol. 49, no. 2, p. 223, 2023.

[18] V. Venkatesh, M. Morris, G. Davis, and F. Davis, “User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view,” MIS Quarterly, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 425–478, 2003.

[19] V. Venkatesh, J. Thong, & X. Xu, “Unified theory of acceptance and use of technology: A synthesis and the road ahead”, Journal of the Association for Information Systems, Vol. 17, No. 5, pp. 328–376, 2016.

[20] H. Wang, A. K. Dang, Z. Wu, and S. Mac, “Generative AI in higher education: Seeing ChatGPT through universities’ policies, resources, and guidelines,” Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, p. 100326, 2024.

[21] D. Wood and S. H. Moss, “Evaluating the impact of students' generative AI use in educational contexts,” Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 152–167, 2024.

[22] A. Yusuf, N. Pervin, and M. R. González, “Generative AI and the future of higher education: A threat to academic integrity or reformation? Evidence from multicultural perspectives,” International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, vol. 21, no. 1, 2024.

[23] L. Zhao, M. Rahman, W. Yeoh, S. Wang, & K. Ooi, “Examining factors influencing university students’ adoption of generative artificial intelligence: a cross-country study”, Studies in Higher Education, 1-23, 2024.