Artificial Intelligence (AI) literacy is crucial for informed and responsible engagement with AI technologies. While various questionnaires exist to assess AI literacy, they differ in how they conceptualize it. A key component—users’ ability to interact effectively with AI systems—is often overlooked or inconsistently addressed. This systematic literature review analyzes existing AI literacy questionnaires using the ABCE framework, which defines AI literacy across four dimensions: affective, behavioral, cognitive, and ethical. The review reveals a predominant focus on cognitive aspects, with affective and ethical dimensions receiving moderate attention, while behavioral aspects—critical for meaningful AI interaction—are frequently underrepresented. This imbalance points to a theoretical gap in current AI literacy assessments. Addressing this gap is essential for developing more comprehensive tools that reflect the full scope of AI literacy. The study’s findings contribute to ongoing discussions in AI education and offer guidance for designing more balanced evaluation instruments that better support individuals’ ability to navigate and critically engage with AI in diverse settings.

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Assessing AI Literacy: A Systematic Review of Questionnaires with Emphasis on Affective, Behavioral, Cognitive, and Ethical Aspects

  • Michael Lenke,
  • Nils Klowait,
  • Lea Biere,
  • Carsten Schulte

摘要

Artificial Intelligence (AI) literacy is crucial for informed and responsible engagement with AI technologies. While various questionnaires exist to assess AI literacy, they differ in how they conceptualize it. A key component—users’ ability to interact effectively with AI systems—is often overlooked or inconsistently addressed. This systematic literature review analyzes existing AI literacy questionnaires using the ABCE framework, which defines AI literacy across four dimensions: affective, behavioral, cognitive, and ethical. The review reveals a predominant focus on cognitive aspects, with affective and ethical dimensions receiving moderate attention, while behavioral aspects—critical for meaningful AI interaction—are frequently underrepresented. This imbalance points to a theoretical gap in current AI literacy assessments. Addressing this gap is essential for developing more comprehensive tools that reflect the full scope of AI literacy. The study’s findings contribute to ongoing discussions in AI education and offer guidance for designing more balanced evaluation instruments that better support individuals’ ability to navigate and critically engage with AI in diverse settings.