Machiavellianisme dan Sikap terhadap AI Generatif pada Mahasiswa Sarjana di Indonesia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24127/gdn.v16i2.16404Keywords:
Machiavellianism, generative AI, AI attitude, undergraduate students, academic integrityAbstract
Generative artificial intelligence (Gen AI) has become increasingly integrated into higher education, offering academic benefits while also raising concerns about academic integrity. Although previous studies have examined students’ acceptance of Gen AI, the role of dark personality traits, particularly Machiavellianism, remains underexplored in the Indonesian higher education context. This study aimed to examine the relationship between Machiavellianism and attitudes toward Gen AI among Indonesian undergraduate students. A quantitative cross-sectional correlational design was employed. The participants consisted of 226 undergraduate students from universities in Java and Sumatra who had used or were familiar with Gen AI tools such as ChatGPT, Gemini, or Claude. Participants were recruited through convenience sampling via online survey distribution. Machiavellianism was measured using the four-item Machiavellianism subscale of the Indonesian-validated Dark Triad Dirty Dozen (DTDD), while attitudes toward Gen AI were assessed using an Indonesian adaptation of the four-item AI Attitude Scale (AIAS-4). Both instruments demonstrated satisfactory internal consistency, with Cronbach’s alpha values of 0.82 for Machiavellianism and 0.86 for attitudes toward Gen AI. Data were analyzed using Pearson product–moment correlation. The results revealed a significant positive relationship between Machiavellianism and favorable attitudes toward Gen AI, r(224) = 0.264, p < 0.001, indicating that students with stronger Machiavellian tendencies tended to evaluate Gen AI more positively. Although the effect size was modest, the finding suggests that strategic, manipulative, and utilitarian personality tendencies may shape how students perceive Gen AI as an academic tool. This study contributes to the literature on personality and technology acceptance in a collectivist educational context. The findings imply the need for AI literacy programs and academic integrity policies that address not only technological competence but also ethical reflection and responsible AI use among university students.
References
Abell, L., & Brewer, G. (2014). Machiavellianism, self-monitoring, self-promotion and relational aggression on Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior, 36, 258–262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.03.076
Barbaranelli, C., Farnese, M. L., Tramontano, C., Fida, R., Ghezzi, V., Paciello, M., & Long, P. (2018). Machiavellian ways to academic cheating: A mediational and interactional model. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, Article 695. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00695
Bartels, D. M., & Pizarro, D. A. (2011). The mismeasure of morals: Antisocial personality traits predict utilitarian responses to moral dilemmas. Cognition, 121(1), 154–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2011.05.010
Bereczkei, T. (2015). The manipulative skill: Cognitive devices and their neural correlates underlying Machiavellian’s decision making. Brain and Cognition, 99, 24–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2015.06.007
Brislin, R. W. (1970). Back-translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 1(3), 185–216. https://doi.org/10.1177/135910457000100301
Chan, C. K. Y., & Hu, W. (2023). Students’ voices on generative AI: Perceptions, benefits, and challenges in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20, Article 43. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00411-8
Christie, R., & Geis, F. L. (1970). Studies in Machiavellianism. Academic Press.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum.
Cotton, D. R. E., Cotton, P. A., & Shipway, J. R. (2024). Chatting and cheating: Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 61(2), 228–239. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2190148
Curtis, G. J., Correia, H. M., & Davis, M. C. (2022). Entitlement mediates the relationship between Dark Triad traits and academic misconduct. Personality and Individual Differences, 191, Article 111563. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2022.111563
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
de Winter, J. C. F., Dodou, D., & Eisma, Y. B. (2024). Personality and acceptance as predictors of ChatGPT use. Discover Psychology, 4(1), Article 57. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44202-024-00161-2
Devi, L., Natalya, L., Siaputra, I. B., & Jonason, P. K. (2024). Validity of the Dark Triad Dirty Dozen (DTDD) test–Indonesian version. Humanitas: Indonesian Psychological Journal, 21(2), 118–133. https://doi.org/10.26555/humanitas.v21i2.666
Esteves, G. G. L., Oliveira, L. S., de Andrade, J. M., & Menezes, M. P. (2021). Dark Triad predicts academic cheating. Personality and Individual Differences, 171, Article 110513. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110513
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A.-G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 1149–1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149
Furnham, A., Richards, S. C., & Paulhus, D. L. (2013). The Dark Triad of personality: A 10 year review. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 7(3), 199–216. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12018
George, D., & Mallery, P. (2019). IBM SPSS Statistics 25 step by step: A simple guide and reference (15th ed.). Routledge.
Grassini, S. (2023). Development and validation of the AI Attitude Scale (AIAS-4): A brief measure of general attitude toward artificial intelligence. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, Article 1191628. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1191628
Greitemeyer, T., & Kastenmüller, A. (2023). HEXACO, the Dark Triad, and ChatGPT: Who is willing to commit academic cheating? Heliyon, 9(9), Article e19909. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e19909
Habibi, A., Muhaimin, M., Danibao, B. K., Wibowo, Y. G., Wahyuni, S., & Octavia, A. b(2023). ChatGPT in higher education learning: Acceptance and use. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 5, Article 100190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100190
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with GUIDENA: Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan, Psikologi, Bimbingan dan Konseling agree to the following terms:
GUIDENA: Journal Of Guidance And Counseling, Psychology, And Education is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge. GUIDENA offers all authors of journal articles allows their research openly available, free access and time restrictions.
All articles published Open Access will be immediately and permanently free for everyone to read and download. Under the CC-BY license, authors retain ownership of the copyright for their article, but authors grant others permission to use the content of publications in GUIDENA in whole or in part provided that the original work is properly cited. Users (redistributors) of GUIDENA are required to cite the original source, including the author's names, GUIDENA as the initial source of publication, year of publication, volume number and DOI (if available).
