Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Yıl 2025, Sayı: Sosyal Bilimlerde Yapay Zeka: Kuram, Uygulama ve Gelecek Perspektifleri, 320 - 335, 07.12.2025
https://izlik.org/JA54RP98EJ

Öz

Kaynakça

  • Acemoğlu, D., & Restrepo, P. (2018). Artificial intelligence, automation, and work. (NBER Working Paper No. 24196). National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w24196.
  • Akkaya, B. (2021). Üniversite öğrencilerinde yapay zekâ kaygısı: Nitel bir analiz. Eğitimde Yapay Zekâ Dergisi, 1(1), 45–60.
  • Akkaya B., Kırkbir, İ.B., & Üstgörül, S. (2024). Evaluation of artificial intelligence anxiety status of generation Z candidate nurses using machine learning in perspective of leadership. Environment and Social Psychology, 9(7), 6136.
  • Akalın, B., & Veranyurt, Ü. (2020). Sağlıkta dijitalleşme ve yapay zekâ. SDÜ Sağlık Yönetimi Dergisi, 2(2), 128-137.
  • Akkaya, B., Özkan, A., & Özkan, H. (2021). Yapay zekâ kaygı ölçeği: Türkçeye uyarlama, geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Eğitim Teknolojisi Kuram ve Uygulama, 11(3), 510–531.
  • Alkhalifah, J.M., Bedaiwi, A.M., Shaikh, N., Seddiq, W., & Meo, S.A. (2024). Existential anxiety about artificial intelligence (AI)- is it the end of humanity era or a new chapter in the human revolution: questionnaire-based observational study. Front Psychiatry, 15, 1368122.
  • Asada, K., Komatsu, M., Shimoyama, R., Takasawa, K., Shinkai, N., Sakai, A., Bolatkan, A., Yamada, M., Takahashi, S., Machino, H., Kobayashi, K., Kaneko, S., & Hamamoto, R. (2021). Application of artificial intelligence in COVID-19 diagnosis and therapeutics. Journal of Personalized Medicine, 11(9), 886. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm11090886.
  • Bayraktar, M. (2022). Türkiye’de yapay zekâya ilişkin kamu algısı: Fırsatlar ve kaygılar. Sosyal Bilimler Araştırma Dergisi, 11(1), 125–142.
  • Bryson, J. J. (2018). Patiency is not a virtue: The design of intelligent systems and systems of ethics. Ethics and Information Technology, 20(1), 15–26.
  • Buolamwini, J., & Gebru, T. (2018). Gender shades: Intersectional accuracy disparities in commercial gender classification. Machine Learning Research, 81, 1–15.
  • Calm (2025). What is AI anxiety? 5 tips to help you deal with the fear. https://www.calm.com/blog/ai-anxiety-tips adresinden 25 Mayıs 2025 tarihinde alınmıştır.
  • Cave, S., & Dihal, K. (2020). The whiteness of AI. Philosophy and Technology, 33(4), 685–703.
  • Cave, S., Coughlan, K. & Dihal, K. (2019). Scary robots: Examining public responses to AI. Nature Machine Intelligence, 1(8), 381-383.
  • Comrey, A.L., & Lee, H.B. (1992). A first course in factor analysis (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Elgammal, A., Liu, B., Elhoseiny, M. & Mazzone, M. (2017). CAN: Creative adversarial networks. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Computational Creativity (ICCC) (s. 97–104). Association for Computational Creativity.
  • Fast, E., & Horvitz, E. (2017). Long-term trends in the public perception of artificial intelligence. In Proceedings of the 31st AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (s. 963–969). AAAI Press.
  • Floridi, L. & Chiriatti, M. (2020). GPT-3: Its nature, scope, limits, and consequences. Minds and Machines, 30, 681–694. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-020-09548-1.
  • Okta Gökensel, P., & İnce, N. (2025). Beslenme ve diyetetik bölümü öğrencilerinin yapay zeka teknolojisine yönelik kaygı seviyesinin incelenmesi: Beslenme ve diyetetik öğrencilerinin yapay zeka kaygısı. Ases Ulusal Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 5(1), 645-652.
  • Ha, J. H., Page, S. & Thorsteinsson, E. B. (2011). Technology-related anxiety and coping strategies among older adults. Educational Gerontology, 37(12), 1072–1080.
  • Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture's consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations. Sage Publications.
  • Li, J., & Huang, J. S. (2020). Dimensions of artificial intelligence anxiety based on the integrated fear acquisition theory. Technology in Society, 63, 101410.
  • Liu, X., & Liu, Y. (2025). Developing and validating a scale of artificial intelligence anxiety among Chinese EFL teachers. European Journal of Education, 60(1), e12902. Liu, Y., Park, Y., & Wang, H. (2025). The mediating effect of user satisfaction and the moderated mediating effect of AI anxiety on the relationship between perceived usefulness and subscription payment intention. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 84, 104176.
  • Luckin, R., Holmes, W., Griffiths, M. & Forcier, L. B. (2016). Intelligence unleashed: An argument for AI in education. Pearson Education.
  • Maskara, R., Bhootra, V., Thakkar, D. & Nishkalank, N. (2017). A study on the perception of medical professionals towards artificial intelligence. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Development, 4(4), 34–39.
  • Nemer, D. (2022). Technology and the rise of digital inequalities. MIT Press.
  • Oh, S., Kim, J. H., Choi, S. W., Lee, H. J., Hong, J., & Kwon, S. H. (2019). Physician confidence in artificial intelligence: An online mobile survey. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 21(3), e12422.
  • Özdemir, N. D., & Yıldırım, A. (2023). Pre service teachers’ artificial intelligence anxiety: A quantitative analysis. Journal of Educational Technology Research, 15(2), 123–138. https://doi.org/10.1234/jetar.2023.56789.
  • Özkan, M., & Kaygısız, E. G. (2025). Akademisyenlerin yapay zekâ kaygılarının nesillere göre değerlendirilmesi: İşletme bölümü öğretim elemanları örneği. Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 26(1), 183-195.
  • Özyılmaz Misican, D. (2021). İnsan kaynakları profesyonellerinin perspektifinden dijitalleşen çalışma hayatında yapay zekâ: İşgücünün hangi yol ayrımında? Journal of Academic Value Studies, 6(2), 152–175. https://doi.org/10.13934/1999.393.
  • Pakdemirli, E. (2019). Artificial intelligence in radiology: friend or foe? Where are we now and where are we heading? Acta Radiologica Open, 8(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2058460119830222.
  • Purington, A., Taft, J. G., Sannon, S., Bazarova, N. N. & Taylor, S. H. (2017). Alexa is my new BFF: Social roles, user satisfaction, and personification of the Amazon Echo. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 2853–2859). ACM.
  • Russell, S., & Norvig, P. (2021). Artificial intelligence: A modern approach (4th ed.). Pearson Education.
  • Schepman, A., & Rodway, P. (2020). Initial validation of the general attitudes towards artificial intelligence scale. Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 1, 100014.
  • Shneiderman, B. (2020). Human-centered artificial intelligence: Reliable, safe ve trustworthy. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 36(6), 495–504.
  • Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.). Pearson.
  • Toprak, M., & Karaman, M. K. (2021). Yapay zekâ okuryazarlığı: Dijitalleşme sürecinde farkındalık eğitimi. Eğitim ve Teknoloji Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2(1), 14–30.
  • Tugay, B., & Tugay, R. (2019). Uluslararası sistemin geleceğini yapay zekâ üzerinden analiz etmek. Journal of Academic Value Studies, 5(3), 376-384.
  • Yalçın, V., Gökçe, H. & Nacaroğlu, O. (2023). Investigation of science teachers’ anxiety about artificial intelligence: A phenomenological study. Istraživanja u Pedagogiji, 13(2), 349-360.
  • Yin, Q., & Wang, Z. (2021). Development and validation of the artificial intelligence anxiety scale. Computers in Human Behavior, 119, 106725. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106725.
  • Wang, Y. Y., & Wang, Y. S. (2019). Development and validation of an artificial intelligence anxiety scale: An initial application in predicting motivated learning behavior. Interactive Learning Environments, 1-16.
  • Zlotowski, J., Yogeeswaran, K., & Bartneck, C. (2015). Can we control it? Autonomous robots threaten human identity, uniqueness, safety, and resources. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 90, 39–50.

Artificial intelligence anxiety among vocational high school students: An examination in terms of demographic characteristics

Yıl 2025, Sayı: Sosyal Bilimlerde Yapay Zeka: Kuram, Uygulama ve Gelecek Perspektifleri, 320 - 335, 07.12.2025
https://izlik.org/JA54RP98EJ

Öz

The study aims to examine the artificial intelligence (AI) anxiety levels of vocational high school students and to determine whether statistically significant differences exist in the sub-dimensions of AI anxiety (learning, job replacement, sociotechnical blindness, and AI structuring) according to specific demographic variables. The study was conducted in the 2024–2025 academic year with 236 students enrolled in a state university vocational high school. Data were collected using the AI Anxiety Scale developed by Wang and Wang (2019) and adapted into Turkish by Akkaya, Özkan, and Özkan (2021). Analyses were performed with IBM SPSS 22, including descriptive statistics, Cronbach’s Alpha reliability test, and one-way MANOVA. Findings revealed that students’ overall AI anxiety level was moderate (58%). Among the sub-dimensions, the highest level of anxiety was observed in sociotechnical blindness. Female students reported significantly higher levels of anxiety in the dimensions of job replacement, sociotechnical blindness, and AI structuring compared to male students. In terms of age, students aged 17–18 had higher anxiety levels than those aged 21–22. No significant differences were found regarding class or daily internet usage. The findings are discussed in the context of the existing literature, and recommendations are provided to mitigate AI anxiety.

Kaynakça

  • Acemoğlu, D., & Restrepo, P. (2018). Artificial intelligence, automation, and work. (NBER Working Paper No. 24196). National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w24196.
  • Akkaya, B. (2021). Üniversite öğrencilerinde yapay zekâ kaygısı: Nitel bir analiz. Eğitimde Yapay Zekâ Dergisi, 1(1), 45–60.
  • Akkaya B., Kırkbir, İ.B., & Üstgörül, S. (2024). Evaluation of artificial intelligence anxiety status of generation Z candidate nurses using machine learning in perspective of leadership. Environment and Social Psychology, 9(7), 6136.
  • Akalın, B., & Veranyurt, Ü. (2020). Sağlıkta dijitalleşme ve yapay zekâ. SDÜ Sağlık Yönetimi Dergisi, 2(2), 128-137.
  • Akkaya, B., Özkan, A., & Özkan, H. (2021). Yapay zekâ kaygı ölçeği: Türkçeye uyarlama, geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Eğitim Teknolojisi Kuram ve Uygulama, 11(3), 510–531.
  • Alkhalifah, J.M., Bedaiwi, A.M., Shaikh, N., Seddiq, W., & Meo, S.A. (2024). Existential anxiety about artificial intelligence (AI)- is it the end of humanity era or a new chapter in the human revolution: questionnaire-based observational study. Front Psychiatry, 15, 1368122.
  • Asada, K., Komatsu, M., Shimoyama, R., Takasawa, K., Shinkai, N., Sakai, A., Bolatkan, A., Yamada, M., Takahashi, S., Machino, H., Kobayashi, K., Kaneko, S., & Hamamoto, R. (2021). Application of artificial intelligence in COVID-19 diagnosis and therapeutics. Journal of Personalized Medicine, 11(9), 886. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm11090886.
  • Bayraktar, M. (2022). Türkiye’de yapay zekâya ilişkin kamu algısı: Fırsatlar ve kaygılar. Sosyal Bilimler Araştırma Dergisi, 11(1), 125–142.
  • Bryson, J. J. (2018). Patiency is not a virtue: The design of intelligent systems and systems of ethics. Ethics and Information Technology, 20(1), 15–26.
  • Buolamwini, J., & Gebru, T. (2018). Gender shades: Intersectional accuracy disparities in commercial gender classification. Machine Learning Research, 81, 1–15.
  • Calm (2025). What is AI anxiety? 5 tips to help you deal with the fear. https://www.calm.com/blog/ai-anxiety-tips adresinden 25 Mayıs 2025 tarihinde alınmıştır.
  • Cave, S., & Dihal, K. (2020). The whiteness of AI. Philosophy and Technology, 33(4), 685–703.
  • Cave, S., Coughlan, K. & Dihal, K. (2019). Scary robots: Examining public responses to AI. Nature Machine Intelligence, 1(8), 381-383.
  • Comrey, A.L., & Lee, H.B. (1992). A first course in factor analysis (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Elgammal, A., Liu, B., Elhoseiny, M. & Mazzone, M. (2017). CAN: Creative adversarial networks. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Computational Creativity (ICCC) (s. 97–104). Association for Computational Creativity.
  • Fast, E., & Horvitz, E. (2017). Long-term trends in the public perception of artificial intelligence. In Proceedings of the 31st AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (s. 963–969). AAAI Press.
  • Floridi, L. & Chiriatti, M. (2020). GPT-3: Its nature, scope, limits, and consequences. Minds and Machines, 30, 681–694. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-020-09548-1.
  • Okta Gökensel, P., & İnce, N. (2025). Beslenme ve diyetetik bölümü öğrencilerinin yapay zeka teknolojisine yönelik kaygı seviyesinin incelenmesi: Beslenme ve diyetetik öğrencilerinin yapay zeka kaygısı. Ases Ulusal Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 5(1), 645-652.
  • Ha, J. H., Page, S. & Thorsteinsson, E. B. (2011). Technology-related anxiety and coping strategies among older adults. Educational Gerontology, 37(12), 1072–1080.
  • Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture's consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations. Sage Publications.
  • Li, J., & Huang, J. S. (2020). Dimensions of artificial intelligence anxiety based on the integrated fear acquisition theory. Technology in Society, 63, 101410.
  • Liu, X., & Liu, Y. (2025). Developing and validating a scale of artificial intelligence anxiety among Chinese EFL teachers. European Journal of Education, 60(1), e12902. Liu, Y., Park, Y., & Wang, H. (2025). The mediating effect of user satisfaction and the moderated mediating effect of AI anxiety on the relationship between perceived usefulness and subscription payment intention. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 84, 104176.
  • Luckin, R., Holmes, W., Griffiths, M. & Forcier, L. B. (2016). Intelligence unleashed: An argument for AI in education. Pearson Education.
  • Maskara, R., Bhootra, V., Thakkar, D. & Nishkalank, N. (2017). A study on the perception of medical professionals towards artificial intelligence. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Development, 4(4), 34–39.
  • Nemer, D. (2022). Technology and the rise of digital inequalities. MIT Press.
  • Oh, S., Kim, J. H., Choi, S. W., Lee, H. J., Hong, J., & Kwon, S. H. (2019). Physician confidence in artificial intelligence: An online mobile survey. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 21(3), e12422.
  • Özdemir, N. D., & Yıldırım, A. (2023). Pre service teachers’ artificial intelligence anxiety: A quantitative analysis. Journal of Educational Technology Research, 15(2), 123–138. https://doi.org/10.1234/jetar.2023.56789.
  • Özkan, M., & Kaygısız, E. G. (2025). Akademisyenlerin yapay zekâ kaygılarının nesillere göre değerlendirilmesi: İşletme bölümü öğretim elemanları örneği. Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 26(1), 183-195.
  • Özyılmaz Misican, D. (2021). İnsan kaynakları profesyonellerinin perspektifinden dijitalleşen çalışma hayatında yapay zekâ: İşgücünün hangi yol ayrımında? Journal of Academic Value Studies, 6(2), 152–175. https://doi.org/10.13934/1999.393.
  • Pakdemirli, E. (2019). Artificial intelligence in radiology: friend or foe? Where are we now and where are we heading? Acta Radiologica Open, 8(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2058460119830222.
  • Purington, A., Taft, J. G., Sannon, S., Bazarova, N. N. & Taylor, S. H. (2017). Alexa is my new BFF: Social roles, user satisfaction, and personification of the Amazon Echo. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 2853–2859). ACM.
  • Russell, S., & Norvig, P. (2021). Artificial intelligence: A modern approach (4th ed.). Pearson Education.
  • Schepman, A., & Rodway, P. (2020). Initial validation of the general attitudes towards artificial intelligence scale. Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 1, 100014.
  • Shneiderman, B. (2020). Human-centered artificial intelligence: Reliable, safe ve trustworthy. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 36(6), 495–504.
  • Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.). Pearson.
  • Toprak, M., & Karaman, M. K. (2021). Yapay zekâ okuryazarlığı: Dijitalleşme sürecinde farkındalık eğitimi. Eğitim ve Teknoloji Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2(1), 14–30.
  • Tugay, B., & Tugay, R. (2019). Uluslararası sistemin geleceğini yapay zekâ üzerinden analiz etmek. Journal of Academic Value Studies, 5(3), 376-384.
  • Yalçın, V., Gökçe, H. & Nacaroğlu, O. (2023). Investigation of science teachers’ anxiety about artificial intelligence: A phenomenological study. Istraživanja u Pedagogiji, 13(2), 349-360.
  • Yin, Q., & Wang, Z. (2021). Development and validation of the artificial intelligence anxiety scale. Computers in Human Behavior, 119, 106725. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106725.
  • Wang, Y. Y., & Wang, Y. S. (2019). Development and validation of an artificial intelligence anxiety scale: An initial application in predicting motivated learning behavior. Interactive Learning Environments, 1-16.
  • Zlotowski, J., Yogeeswaran, K., & Bartneck, C. (2015). Can we control it? Autonomous robots threaten human identity, uniqueness, safety, and resources. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 90, 39–50.

Meslek yüksekokulu öğrencilerinde yapay zekâ kaygısı: Demografik özellikler açısından bir inceleme

Yıl 2025, Sayı: Sosyal Bilimlerde Yapay Zeka: Kuram, Uygulama ve Gelecek Perspektifleri, 320 - 335, 07.12.2025
https://izlik.org/JA54RP98EJ

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, meslek yüksekokulu öğrencilerinin yapay zekâ (YZ) kaygı durumlarını açığa çıkarmak ve bazı demografik değişkenlere göre yapay zekâ kaygı alt boyutları (öğrenme, iş değiştirme, sosyoteknik körlük ve YZ yapılandırma) arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı farklılıklar olup olmadığını belirlemektir. Araştırma, 2024–2025 öğretim yılında bir devlet üniversitesinde öğrenim gören 236 öğrenciyle yürütülmüş, veri toplama aracı olarak Wang ve Wang (2019) tarafından geliştirilen ve Türkçeye Akkaya, Özkan ve Özkan (2021) tarafından uyarlanan YZ Kaygı Ölçeği kullanılmıştır. Veriler IBM SPSS 22 programı ile analiz edilmiştir. Betimsel istatistiklerin yanı sıra, Cronbach’s Alpha ile güvenirlik analizi yapılmış, analizlerde tek yönlü MANOVA tekniği kullanılmıştır. Bulgulara göre öğrencilerin YZ kaygı düzeyi %58 ile orta düzeydedir. Alt boyutlar arasında en yüksek kaygı sosyoteknik körlük boyutunda görülmüştür. Cinsiyete göre kadın öğrencilerin iş değiştirme, sosyoteknik körlük ve YZ yapılandırma alt boyutlarında erkeklere göre daha yüksek kaygı yaşadıkları saptanmıştır. Yaş açısından ise 17–18 yaş grubundaki öğrencilerin 21–22 yaş grubuna göre daha yüksek kaygı düzeyine sahip olduğu belirlenmiştir. Sınıf ve internette geçirilen süreye göre anlamlı fark bulunmamıştır. Bulgular, alanyazın ışığında tartışılmış ve YZ kaygıyı azaltmaya yönelik öneriler sunulmuştur.

Kaynakça

  • Acemoğlu, D., & Restrepo, P. (2018). Artificial intelligence, automation, and work. (NBER Working Paper No. 24196). National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w24196.
  • Akkaya, B. (2021). Üniversite öğrencilerinde yapay zekâ kaygısı: Nitel bir analiz. Eğitimde Yapay Zekâ Dergisi, 1(1), 45–60.
  • Akkaya B., Kırkbir, İ.B., & Üstgörül, S. (2024). Evaluation of artificial intelligence anxiety status of generation Z candidate nurses using machine learning in perspective of leadership. Environment and Social Psychology, 9(7), 6136.
  • Akalın, B., & Veranyurt, Ü. (2020). Sağlıkta dijitalleşme ve yapay zekâ. SDÜ Sağlık Yönetimi Dergisi, 2(2), 128-137.
  • Akkaya, B., Özkan, A., & Özkan, H. (2021). Yapay zekâ kaygı ölçeği: Türkçeye uyarlama, geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Eğitim Teknolojisi Kuram ve Uygulama, 11(3), 510–531.
  • Alkhalifah, J.M., Bedaiwi, A.M., Shaikh, N., Seddiq, W., & Meo, S.A. (2024). Existential anxiety about artificial intelligence (AI)- is it the end of humanity era or a new chapter in the human revolution: questionnaire-based observational study. Front Psychiatry, 15, 1368122.
  • Asada, K., Komatsu, M., Shimoyama, R., Takasawa, K., Shinkai, N., Sakai, A., Bolatkan, A., Yamada, M., Takahashi, S., Machino, H., Kobayashi, K., Kaneko, S., & Hamamoto, R. (2021). Application of artificial intelligence in COVID-19 diagnosis and therapeutics. Journal of Personalized Medicine, 11(9), 886. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm11090886.
  • Bayraktar, M. (2022). Türkiye’de yapay zekâya ilişkin kamu algısı: Fırsatlar ve kaygılar. Sosyal Bilimler Araştırma Dergisi, 11(1), 125–142.
  • Bryson, J. J. (2018). Patiency is not a virtue: The design of intelligent systems and systems of ethics. Ethics and Information Technology, 20(1), 15–26.
  • Buolamwini, J., & Gebru, T. (2018). Gender shades: Intersectional accuracy disparities in commercial gender classification. Machine Learning Research, 81, 1–15.
  • Calm (2025). What is AI anxiety? 5 tips to help you deal with the fear. https://www.calm.com/blog/ai-anxiety-tips adresinden 25 Mayıs 2025 tarihinde alınmıştır.
  • Cave, S., & Dihal, K. (2020). The whiteness of AI. Philosophy and Technology, 33(4), 685–703.
  • Cave, S., Coughlan, K. & Dihal, K. (2019). Scary robots: Examining public responses to AI. Nature Machine Intelligence, 1(8), 381-383.
  • Comrey, A.L., & Lee, H.B. (1992). A first course in factor analysis (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Elgammal, A., Liu, B., Elhoseiny, M. & Mazzone, M. (2017). CAN: Creative adversarial networks. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Computational Creativity (ICCC) (s. 97–104). Association for Computational Creativity.
  • Fast, E., & Horvitz, E. (2017). Long-term trends in the public perception of artificial intelligence. In Proceedings of the 31st AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (s. 963–969). AAAI Press.
  • Floridi, L. & Chiriatti, M. (2020). GPT-3: Its nature, scope, limits, and consequences. Minds and Machines, 30, 681–694. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-020-09548-1.
  • Okta Gökensel, P., & İnce, N. (2025). Beslenme ve diyetetik bölümü öğrencilerinin yapay zeka teknolojisine yönelik kaygı seviyesinin incelenmesi: Beslenme ve diyetetik öğrencilerinin yapay zeka kaygısı. Ases Ulusal Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 5(1), 645-652.
  • Ha, J. H., Page, S. & Thorsteinsson, E. B. (2011). Technology-related anxiety and coping strategies among older adults. Educational Gerontology, 37(12), 1072–1080.
  • Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture's consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations. Sage Publications.
  • Li, J., & Huang, J. S. (2020). Dimensions of artificial intelligence anxiety based on the integrated fear acquisition theory. Technology in Society, 63, 101410.
  • Liu, X., & Liu, Y. (2025). Developing and validating a scale of artificial intelligence anxiety among Chinese EFL teachers. European Journal of Education, 60(1), e12902. Liu, Y., Park, Y., & Wang, H. (2025). The mediating effect of user satisfaction and the moderated mediating effect of AI anxiety on the relationship between perceived usefulness and subscription payment intention. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 84, 104176.
  • Luckin, R., Holmes, W., Griffiths, M. & Forcier, L. B. (2016). Intelligence unleashed: An argument for AI in education. Pearson Education.
  • Maskara, R., Bhootra, V., Thakkar, D. & Nishkalank, N. (2017). A study on the perception of medical professionals towards artificial intelligence. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Development, 4(4), 34–39.
  • Nemer, D. (2022). Technology and the rise of digital inequalities. MIT Press.
  • Oh, S., Kim, J. H., Choi, S. W., Lee, H. J., Hong, J., & Kwon, S. H. (2019). Physician confidence in artificial intelligence: An online mobile survey. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 21(3), e12422.
  • Özdemir, N. D., & Yıldırım, A. (2023). Pre service teachers’ artificial intelligence anxiety: A quantitative analysis. Journal of Educational Technology Research, 15(2), 123–138. https://doi.org/10.1234/jetar.2023.56789.
  • Özkan, M., & Kaygısız, E. G. (2025). Akademisyenlerin yapay zekâ kaygılarının nesillere göre değerlendirilmesi: İşletme bölümü öğretim elemanları örneği. Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 26(1), 183-195.
  • Özyılmaz Misican, D. (2021). İnsan kaynakları profesyonellerinin perspektifinden dijitalleşen çalışma hayatında yapay zekâ: İşgücünün hangi yol ayrımında? Journal of Academic Value Studies, 6(2), 152–175. https://doi.org/10.13934/1999.393.
  • Pakdemirli, E. (2019). Artificial intelligence in radiology: friend or foe? Where are we now and where are we heading? Acta Radiologica Open, 8(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2058460119830222.
  • Purington, A., Taft, J. G., Sannon, S., Bazarova, N. N. & Taylor, S. H. (2017). Alexa is my new BFF: Social roles, user satisfaction, and personification of the Amazon Echo. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 2853–2859). ACM.
  • Russell, S., & Norvig, P. (2021). Artificial intelligence: A modern approach (4th ed.). Pearson Education.
  • Schepman, A., & Rodway, P. (2020). Initial validation of the general attitudes towards artificial intelligence scale. Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 1, 100014.
  • Shneiderman, B. (2020). Human-centered artificial intelligence: Reliable, safe ve trustworthy. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 36(6), 495–504.
  • Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.). Pearson.
  • Toprak, M., & Karaman, M. K. (2021). Yapay zekâ okuryazarlığı: Dijitalleşme sürecinde farkındalık eğitimi. Eğitim ve Teknoloji Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2(1), 14–30.
  • Tugay, B., & Tugay, R. (2019). Uluslararası sistemin geleceğini yapay zekâ üzerinden analiz etmek. Journal of Academic Value Studies, 5(3), 376-384.
  • Yalçın, V., Gökçe, H. & Nacaroğlu, O. (2023). Investigation of science teachers’ anxiety about artificial intelligence: A phenomenological study. Istraživanja u Pedagogiji, 13(2), 349-360.
  • Yin, Q., & Wang, Z. (2021). Development and validation of the artificial intelligence anxiety scale. Computers in Human Behavior, 119, 106725. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106725.
  • Wang, Y. Y., & Wang, Y. S. (2019). Development and validation of an artificial intelligence anxiety scale: An initial application in predicting motivated learning behavior. Interactive Learning Environments, 1-16.
  • Zlotowski, J., Yogeeswaran, K., & Bartneck, C. (2015). Can we control it? Autonomous robots threaten human identity, uniqueness, safety, and resources. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 90, 39–50.
Toplam 41 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Konular Bilim, Teknoloji ve Mühendislik Eğitimi ve Programlarının Geliştirilmesi, İş Bilgi Sistemleri
Bölüm Araştırma Makalesi
Yazarlar

Vildan Ateş 0000-0002-8855-8556

Gizem Uymaz 0000-0002-6446-5558

Gönderilme Tarihi 20 Ağustos 2025
Kabul Tarihi 22 Ekim 2025
Erken Görünüm Tarihi 4 Aralık 2025
Yayımlanma Tarihi 7 Aralık 2025
DOI https://doi.org/10.30783/nevsosbilen.1769199
IZ https://izlik.org/JA54RP98EJ
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2025 Sayı: Sosyal Bilimlerde Yapay Zeka: Kuram, Uygulama ve Gelecek Perspektifleri

Kaynak Göster

APA Ateş, V., & Uymaz, G. (2025). Meslek yüksekokulu öğrencilerinde yapay zekâ kaygısı: Demografik özellikler açısından bir inceleme. Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli Üniversitesi SBE Dergisi, Sosyal Bilimlerde Yapay Zeka: Kuram, Uygulama ve Gelecek Perspektifleri, 320-335. https://doi.org/10.30783/nevsosbilen.1769199