Test table variations

Frequencies of categorical variables

1. One variable: Frequency table of gender

Gender n p
female 40 40%
male 60 59%
diverse 1 1%
Total 101 100%
Missing 0

2. Multiple items: Frequency table of adoption factors

Expectations strongly disagree disagree neutral agree strongly agree Total
ChatGPT has clear advantages compared to similar offerings. 6% (6) 8% (8) 35% (34) 36% (35) 14% (14) 100% (97)
Using ChatGPT brings financial benefits. 22% (21) 22% (21) 30% (29) 21% (20) 6% (6) 100% (97)
Using ChatGPT is advantageous in many tasks. 6% (6) 10% (10) 21% (20) 46% (45) 16% (16) 100% (97)
Compared to other systems, using ChatGPT is more fun. 6% (6) 4% (4) 36% (35) 39% (38) 14% (14) 100% (97)
Much can go wrong when using ChatGPT. 6% (6) 27% (26) 32% (31) 22% (21) 13% (13) 100% (97)
There are legal issues with using ChatGPT. 10% (10) 19% (18) 41% (40) 14% (14) 15% (15) 100% (97)
The security of user data is not guaranteed with ChatGPT. 3% (3) 22% (21) 42% (41) 19% (18) 14% (14) 100% (97)
Using ChatGPT could bring personal disadvantages. 11% (11) 35% (34) 29% (28) 18% (17) 7% (7) 100% (97)
In my environment, using ChatGPT is standard. 20% (19) 34% (33) 26% (25) 15% (15) 5% (5) 100% (97)
Almost everyone in my environment uses ChatGPT. 27% (26) 31% (30) 26% (25) 10% (10) 6% (6) 100% (97)
Not using ChatGPT is considered being an outsider. 46% (45) 27% (26) 14% (14) 7% (7) 5% (5) 100% (97)
Using ChatGPT brings me recognition from my environment. 33% (32) 27% (26) 21% (20) 13% (13) 6% (6) 100% (97)

3. Two variables: Cross table of innovator type by gender

Gender Total I try new offers immediately I try new offers rather quickly I wait until offers establish themselves I only use new offers when I have no other choice
female 40%
(40) 		2%
(2) 		25%
(25) 		13%
(13) 		0%
(0)
male 59%
(60) 		12%
(12) 		38%
(38) 		9%
(9) 		1%
(1)
diverse 1%
(1) 		1%
(1) 		0%
(0) 		0%
(0) 		0%
(0)
Total 100%
(101) 		15%
(15) 		62%
(63) 		22%
(22) 		1%
(1)

Distributions of metric variables

Distribution table for one metric variable: Age

Age value
min 18
q1 27
median 38
q3 52
max 68
m 39.7
sd 13.8
missing 0
n 101

Distribution table for multiple metric items: Adoption factors

Expectations min q1 median q3 max m sd missing n
ChatGPT has clear advantages compared to similar offerings. 1 3 4 4 5 3.5 1.0 2 101
Using ChatGPT brings financial benefits. 1 2 3 4 5 2.7 1.2 0 101
Using ChatGPT is advantageous in many tasks. 1 3 4 4 5 3.6 1.1 0 101
Compared to other systems, using ChatGPT is more fun. 1 3 4 4 5 3.5 1.0 0 101
Much can go wrong when using ChatGPT. 1 2 3 4 5 3.1 1.1 0 101
There are legal issues with using ChatGPT. 1 2 3 4 5 3.1 1.2 0 101
The security of user data is not guaranteed with ChatGPT. 1 3 3 4 5 3.2 1.0 1 101
Using ChatGPT could bring personal disadvantages. 1 2 3 3 5 2.7 1.1 0 101
In my environment, using ChatGPT is standard. 1 2 2 3 5 2.5 1.1 1 101
Almost everyone in my environment uses ChatGPT. 1 1 2 3 5 2.4 1.2 0 101
Not using ChatGPT is considered being an outsider. 1 1 2 3 5 2.0 1.2 1 101
Using ChatGPT brings me recognition from my environment. 1 1 2 3 5 2.3 1.2 0 101

Group comparison of a metric variable: Age by gender

Gender min q1 median q3 max m sd missing n
female 18 25.8 38.0 44.2 63 37.5 13.4 0 40
male 19 32.5 38.5 52.0 68 41.2 14.0 0 60
diverse 33 33.0 33.0 33.0 33 33.0 NA 0 1
Total 18 27.0 38.0 52.0 68 39.7 13.8 0 101

Multiple metric variables

Compare means of multiple items: Adoption factors by gender

Expectations Total female male diverse
ChatGPT has clear advantages compared to similar offerings. 3.4
(1.0) 		3.6
(1.0) 		3.3
(1.0) 		4.0
(NA)
Using ChatGPT brings financial benefits. 2.7
(1.2) 		2.6
(1.2) 		2.7
(1.2) 		3.0
(NA)
Using ChatGPT is advantageous in many tasks. 3.6
(1.1) 		3.7
(1.0) 		3.5
(1.1) 		4.0
(NA)
Compared to other systems, using ChatGPT is more fun. 3.5
(1.0) 		3.6
(1.0) 		3.5
(1.0) 		3.0
(NA)
Much can go wrong when using ChatGPT. 3.1
(1.1) 		3.1
(1.0) 		3.1
(1.2) 		3.0
(NA)
There are legal issues with using ChatGPT. 3.1
(1.2) 		3.0
(1.0) 		3.1
(1.3) 		3.0
(NA)
The security of user data is not guaranteed with ChatGPT. 3.2
(1.0) 		3.0
(1.0) 		3.3
(1.1) 		3.0
(NA)
Using ChatGPT could bring personal disadvantages. 2.7
(1.1) 		2.5
(0.9) 		2.8
(1.2) 		4.0
(NA)
In my environment, using ChatGPT is standard. 2.5
(1.1) 		2.5
(0.9) 		2.5
(1.3) 		4.0
(NA)
Almost everyone in my environment uses ChatGPT. 2.4
(1.2) 		2.4
(1.0) 		2.3
(1.3) 		4.0
(NA)
Not using ChatGPT is considered being an outsider. 2.0
(1.2) 		1.8
(1.0) 		2.1
(1.3) 		4.0
(NA)
Using ChatGPT brings me recognition from my environment. 2.3
(1.2) 		2.4
(1.2) 		2.3
(1.3) 		3.0
(NA)

Correlation of items: Adoption factors

Item 1 2 3 4
1 1*** 0.36*** 0.63*** 0.61***
2 0.36*** 1*** 0.47*** 0.4***
3 0.63*** 0.47*** 1*** 0.45***
4 0.61*** 0.4*** 0.45*** 1***
Item private work
1 0.5*** 0.27**
2 0.18. 0.54***
3 0.34*** 0.36***
4 0.48*** 0.27**

Scales

Index: cg_adoption value
min 1
q1 2.5
median 2.8
q3 3.2
max 5
m 2.9
sd 0.6
missing 0
n 101
items 12
alpha 0.81
Innovator type min q1 median q3 max m sd missing n items alpha
I try new offers immediately 1.5 3.2 3.3 4.1 5.0 3.5 0.9 0 15 12 0.81
I try new offers rather quickly 1.8 2.5 2.8 3.1 3.8 2.8 0.5 0 63 12 0.81
I wait until offers establish themselves 1.0 2.4 2.8 3.1 3.8 2.7 0.6 0 22 12 0.81
I only use new offers when I have no other choice 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 NA 0 1 12 0.81
Total 1.0 2.5 2.8 3.2 5.0 2.9 0.6 0 101 12 0.81
Index: cg_adoption min q1 median q3 max m sd missing n
Index: cg_adoption 1 2.5 2.8 3.2 5 2.9 0.6 0 101
_advantage 1 3.0 3.5 3.8 5 3.3 0.8 0 101
_fearofuse 1 2.5 3.0 3.5 5 3.0 0.8 0 101
_social 1 1.5 2.0 2.8 5 2.3 1.0 0 101

Labels

Set custom item labels

Item strongly disagree disagree neutral agree strongly agree Total
Allgemeine Vorteile 6% (6) 8% (8) 34% (34) 37% (37) 14% (14) 100% (99)
Finanzielle Vorteile 22% (22) 21% (21) 29% (29) 21% (21) 6% (6) 100% (99)
Vorteile bei der Arbeit 6% (6) 10% (10) 21% (21) 45% (45) 17% (17) 100% (99)
Macht mehr Spaß 6% (6) 4% (4) 35% (35) 39% (39) 15% (15) 100% (99)

Remove labels

cg_adoption_advantage_0 1 2 3 4 5 Total
1 6% (6) 8% (8) 34% (34) 37% (37) 14% (14) 100% (99)
2 22% (22) 21% (21) 29% (29) 21% (21) 6% (6) 100% (99)
3 6% (6) 10% (10) 21% (21) 45% (45) 17% (17) 100% (99)
4 6% (6) 4% (4) 35% (35) 39% (39) 15% (15) 100% (99)