AITAQS dimension reliabilities fall within 0.721–0.745 Cronbach's α, exceeding acceptability thresholds, with all CR values above 0.7 though some AVE values fall below 0.5.¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · design r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Cronbach's α for the four dimensions ranges 0.721–0.745, above the recommended critical values. → Zhang 2026 q3 i? Convergent validity is acceptable because CR exceeds 0.7 despite AVE values below 0.5. → Zhang 2026 (2)

Evidence¶

Zhang 2026¶

Zhang, Z., Katayoun, M., Tan, L., & Wei, G. (2026). Development and Validation of a Multidimensional Scale for AI Tutoring Acceptance in Higher Education. npj Science of Learning. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-026-00431-9

q3 · i? · design · r2

Internal consistency analysis (Table 8) of the four AITAQS subscales. All α values "remain within the range of 0.721 to 0.745", indicating acceptable internal consistency per the 0.70 criterion cited.

"the α coefficients of the four dimensions of feedback quality, instructional effectiveness, interaction experience, and user trust all remain within the range of 0.721 to 0.745, and all are higher than the recommended critical values."

Zhang 2026 (2)¶

Zhang, Z., Katayoun, M., Tan, L., & Wei, G. (2026). Development and Validation of a Multidimensional Scale for AI Tutoring Acceptance in Higher Education. npj Science of Learning. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-026-00431-9

q3 · i? · design · r2

Convergent validity analysis (Table 9). All CR values "exceed 0.7"; AVE values below 0.5 are judged acceptable given the loadings, with the authors noting future item refinement may further improve AVE values.

"the CR values of all items exceed 0.7 and all factor loadings exceeded 0.5. Therefore, even if the AVE value is lower than 0.5, this item is still within the acceptable range"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• All AITAQS items load above 0.50 on their target factor with cross-loadings below 0.30, in the hypothesized assignment (X1–X3 Feedback Quality through X10–X12 User Trust). — related
• The AITAQS item pool shows sampling adequacy for factor analysis, with KMO = 0.758 and a significant Bartlett test (χ² = 438.75, df = 66, p < 0.001). — related
• The GenAI-SRL scale shows satisfactory reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant validity across its six dimensions — related
• The survey instrument's nine constructs show convergent and discriminant validity in this sample — related
• TAILS dimensions show high internal consistency, with Cronbach's alpha values above 0.90 — related
• SFAILQ shows high reliability, convergent validity with digital literacy (r = 0.49–0.68), and discriminant validity (HTMT below 0.80) — related
• CTAT shows robust psychometric properties for higher education CS/AI students, with reliable internal consistency and adequate IRT item parameters — related
• The GAA-LS shows satisfactory-to-strong internal consistency and evidence of convergent and discriminant validity — related