IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0354305.html

Development of a scale for measuring the perception of artificial intelligence among mental health consumers

Author

Listed:
  • Reema Al-Daraiseh
  • Wafa’a Ta’an
  • Tareq Mukattash
  • Mohammed M Al-Hammouri
  • Rana Abu-Farha
  • Brett Williams

Abstract

Background: Artificial Intelligence (AI) has emerged as a transformative force revolutionizing various sectors, including healthcare, particularly the mental health field. However, the acceptance and integration of AI technologies in different healthcare systems can be influenced by various factors, including cultural, social, and individual aspects. Nevertheless, there is a need for a valid and reliable tool for assessing AI’s perception among healthcare consumers. Aim: To develop and validate a tool for the perception of AI among healthcare consumers and apply the tool to assess AI’s perception among mental health consumers in the Jordanian healthcare system. Method: A cross‐sectional descriptive correlational design was utilized in the study. Data was collected from a convenience sample of 431 mental health consumers visiting mental health clinics of the International Medical Corps and university hospitals in Jordan. Structured interviews were conducted using an AI Perception (AIP) questionnaire developed by the authors. The questionnaire’s content validity was assessed by an expert panel. Using Principal Component Analysis (PCA), the construct validity of the tool was evaluated, and its internal consistency was examined using Cronbach’s alpha. Descriptive statistics were used to assess the levels of AI perception among participants. Results: The final AIP tool consisted of 20 items across 4 domains and has demonstrated strong internal consistency across its four domains: AI acceptance and readiness (α = 0.92), AI perceived importance (α = 0.92), AI perceived risk (α = 0.9), and AI perceived challenges (α = 0.85). The construct validity of the four-domain structure of the tool was supported by PCA. Additionally, the mean scores for each domain indicated the average level of agreement with AI perception items among participants. Specifically, the mean score for AI acceptance and readiness was (2.7 ± 0.96). AI perceived importance was (2.18 ± 0.83), AI perceived risk was (2.58± 0.92), and AI perceived challenge was (2.78 ± 0.87). Conclusion: The findings of this study resulted in developing a valid and reliable 20-item tool to assess AI’s perception among mental health consumers. The tool can be used to assess the predictors of AI’s readiness among mental health consumers. Therefore, aiding policymakers and other stakeholders in understanding the AI adoption barriers from the perspective of end-users. In addition, this study developed the AIP tool that can be validated and used among other populations in future research.

Suggested Citation

  • Reema Al-Daraiseh & Wafa’a Ta’an & Tareq Mukattash & Mohammed M Al-Hammouri & Rana Abu-Farha & Brett Williams, 2026. "Development of a scale for measuring the perception of artificial intelligence among mental health consumers," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 21(7), pages 1-14, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0354305
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0354305
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0354305
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0354305&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0354305?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0354305. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.