Table A1. To what extent do the...

Table A1.

To what extent do the following factors influence your decision not to use AI applications in your work? 0 (no effect), 1 (slight effect), 2 (moderate effect) and 3 (very strong effect)

Code	Item (abbreviated)	AMO dimension	Classification rationale	Indicative sources
A1	Uncertainty about one’s own competence	Ability	Self-efficacy beliefs operate as a capability barrier independently of objective skill	Bandura (1997); Ahmed et al. (2023)
A2	Limited knowledge of available applications	Ability	Awareness of task-relevant tools is an individual knowledge resource, a precondition for use	Schedler et al. (2019)
A3	Perceived difficulty of use	Ability	Perceived ease of use reflects the individual’s capability to operate the tool	Davis (1989); Schedler et al. (2019)
A4	Previous negative experiences	Ability	Prior mastery experiences shape capability beliefs and learning readiness	Bandura (1997)
M1	Unclear concrete benefits	Motivation	Perceived usefulness drives the willingness to invest effort; the item measures perceived value, separate from whether suitable tools exist (O3)	Davis (1989); Pandey (2026)
M2	Doubts about accuracy and reliability	Motivation	Trust in output quality conditions the inclination to engage	Gefen et al. (2003); Liebig et al. (2024)
M3	Security and privacy concerns	Motivation	Perceived risk reduces willingness to act, even when use is possible	Sun and Medaglia (2019); Apell and Eriksson (2023)
M4	Ethical concerns	Motivation	Reservations about justifiability reduce the inclination to use AI in one’s own tasks	Ahmed et al. (2023); Sun and Medaglia (2019)
M5	Concern about substantial task change	Motivation	Anticipated disruption to one’s work weakens the desire to engage	Bullock et al. (2020)
M6	Fear of expertise devaluation	Motivation	Threats to professional identity act as a motivational inhibitor	Ahmed et al. (2023); Bullock et al. (2020)
O1	Insufficient time to learn	Opportunity	Time allocation is an organizational resource decision outside the individual’s control	Ahmed et al. (2023); Gullmark (2021)
O2	Absence of organizational guidelines	Opportunity	Formal policies constitute an institutional permission structure	Clarke (2020); Eneman et al. (2022)
O3	Lack of suitable applications in the organization	Opportunity	Tool provision is an organizational resource condition; the item concerns availability, separate from the individual’s awareness of tools (A2)	Gullmark (2021); Madan and Ashok (2023)
O4	Inadequate training	Opportunity	Training provision is an organizational support structure; the resulting skill, in contrast to the provision, belongs to ability	Bernhard and Wihlborg (2022); Bannykh and Kostina (2021)
O5	Limited colleague or supervisor encouragement	Opportunity	Social endorsement in the work environment enables or withholds occasions for use	Graf-Vlachy et al. (2018); Van der Voet et al. (2016)
O6	Inadequate peer support	Opportunity	Peer-based support structures are an organizational learning condition	Bernhard and Wihlborg (2022); Lidman et al. (2022)
O7	Materials not in digital format	Opportunity	Data infrastructure is an organizational precondition for the use of AI	Madan and Ashok (2023); Sun and Medaglia (2019)
O8	Lack of technical IT support	Opportunity	Technical support functions are enabling conditions provided by the organization	Alshahrani et al. (2025); Van der Voet et al. (2016)
O9	Uncertainty about accountability	Opportunity	Accountability allocation is a governance condition set by the institutional environment, beyond the reach of individual disposition	Bannister and Connolly (2020); Liebig et al. (2024)

Code	Item (abbreviated)	AMO dimension	Classification rationale	Indicative sources
A1	Uncertainty about one’s own competence	Ability	Self-efficacy beliefs operate as a capability barrier independently of objective skill	Bandura (1997); Ahmed et al. (2023)
A2	Limited knowledge of available applications	Ability	Awareness of task-relevant tools is an individual knowledge resource, a precondition for use	Schedler et al. (2019)
A3	Perceived difficulty of use	Ability	Perceived ease of use reflects the individual’s capability to operate the tool	Davis (1989); Schedler et al. (2019)
A4	Previous negative experiences	Ability	Prior mastery experiences shape capability beliefs and learning readiness	Bandura (1997)
M1	Unclear concrete benefits	Motivation	Perceived usefulness drives the willingness to invest effort; the item measures perceived value, separate from whether suitable tools exist (O3)	Davis (1989); Pandey (2026)
M2	Doubts about accuracy and reliability	Motivation	Trust in output quality conditions the inclination to engage	Gefen et al. (2003); Liebig et al. (2024)
M3	Security and privacy concerns	Motivation	Perceived risk reduces willingness to act, even when use is possible	Sun and Medaglia (2019); Apell and Eriksson (2023)
M4	Ethical concerns	Motivation	Reservations about justifiability reduce the inclination to use AI in one’s own tasks	Ahmed et al. (2023); Sun and Medaglia (2019)
M5	Concern about substantial task change	Motivation	Anticipated disruption to one’s work weakens the desire to engage	Bullock et al. (2020)
M6	Fear of expertise devaluation	Motivation	Threats to professional identity act as a motivational inhibitor	Ahmed et al. (2023); Bullock et al. (2020)
O1	Insufficient time to learn	Opportunity	Time allocation is an organizational resource decision outside the individual’s control	Ahmed et al. (2023); Gullmark (2021)
O2	Absence of organizational guidelines	Opportunity	Formal policies constitute an institutional permission structure	Clarke (2020); Eneman et al. (2022)
O3	Lack of suitable applications in the organization	Opportunity	Tool provision is an organizational resource condition; the item concerns availability, separate from the individual’s awareness of tools (A2)	Gullmark (2021); Madan and Ashok (2023)
O4	Inadequate training	Opportunity	Training provision is an organizational support structure; the resulting skill, in contrast to the provision, belongs to ability	Bernhard and Wihlborg (2022); Bannykh and Kostina (2021)
O5	Limited colleague or supervisor encouragement	Opportunity	Social endorsement in the work environment enables or withholds occasions for use	Graf-Vlachy et al. (2018); Van der Voet et al. (2016)
O6	Inadequate peer support	Opportunity	Peer-based support structures are an organizational learning condition	Bernhard and Wihlborg (2022); Lidman et al. (2022)
O7	Materials not in digital format	Opportunity	Data infrastructure is an organizational precondition for the use of AI	Madan and Ashok (2023); Sun and Medaglia (2019)
O8	Lack of technical IT support	Opportunity	Technical support functions are enabling conditions provided by the organization	Alshahrani et al. (2025); Van der Voet et al. (2016)
O9	Uncertainty about accountability	Opportunity	Accountability allocation is a governance condition set by the institutional environment, beyond the reach of individual disposition	Bannister and Connolly (2020); Liebig et al. (2024)

Note.

The classification follows published AMO practice, in which opportunity denotes the work environment as perceived by the employee (Bos-Nehles et al., 2023; Marin-Garcia and Tomas, 2016). For borderline items, the rationale column states the distinction applied

Source(s): Authors’ own work

[ViewLarge]

Sharing Unavailable