Hypotheses are as follows: Convergent validity hypothesis 1: Higher scores on the new measure of trustworthiness of genAI for study are expected to be at least moderately

Hypotheses are as follows: Convergent validity hypothesis 1: Higher scores on the new measure of trustworthiness of genAI for study are expected to be at least moderately correlated with higher scores on perceived ease of use. Reason: Choi et al. (2023) found a relationship between perceived ease of use of AI and greater trust. Convergent validity hypothesis 2: Higher scores on the new measure of trustworthiness of genAI for study are expected to be at least moderately correlated with higher scores on intention to use genAI. Reason: Choi et al. (2023, 2024) found that higher levels of trust were associated with greater intention to use AI. Discriminant validity hypothesis: Scores on the new measure of trustworthiness of genAI are not expected to be significantly correlated with scores on the personality trait of extraversion. Reason: It is unlikely that someone’s willingness to use genAI would be based on how outgoing they are. Concurrent validity hypothesis: Higher scores on the new measure of trustworthiness of genAI are expected to be associated with greater frequency of having used genAI in university study. Reason: Given that trust and intention to use are correlated, it is likely that someone who is more trusting of genAI for use in their studies will be more likely to have actually used genAI in their studies. 1) Title Page (in APA style) 2) Hypotheses • Include your hypotheses in dot point form to give the marker context for your Method, Results, and Discussion. o You can change your hypotheses from Assignment 1 if the feedback from your tutor recommended it. ▪ If the hypotheses are not updated, it may result in doing analyses which do not adequately assess the validity of the new measure. This will lead to losing marks in your Results section and potentially also in your Discussion. 3) Method • Describe the sample, provide details on the newly developed items, and the measures used to provide evidence of validity. Do not include measures that are not relevant to your hypotheses and analyses. o NOTE: A separate document will be made available when the data for the assignment is released. This will include basic demographic information for the Participants section. • You can include the following statement under the Procedure sub-section of the Method: “An online survey was completed by undergraduate psychology students at an Australian university at a time and place of their choosing. The study was approved and conducted in accordance with Swinburne University’s ethical guidelines.” 4) Results This section should describe: • The results from your factor analyses, including: o A justification for the extraction and rotation method used o Relevant factor analysis statistics (i.e., KMO, Bartlett’s test, factor loadings from the final analysis) o If items were removed, describe the process through which the decision was made to exclude these items • A reliability analysis, including Cronbach’s alpha and related item statistics (e.g., alpha if item deleted). • Descriptive statistics for all measures used. • Correlations that address your validation hypotheses. o NOTE: The Assignment 2 Table Guide document shows how to present these results. 5) Discussion This section aligns with what is expected in a Discussion from any other lab report. The Assignment 1 handout includes a brief literature review, so it will be possible to relate your findings to those from previous studies. It is important that the Discussion provides an evaluation of your final measure, including: 2 • Statements about the factor structure – the extent to which the factors align with the underlying dimensions (i.e., Functionality, Helpfulness, Reliability) that McKnight et al. (2001) considered to be relevant when evaluating the trustworthiness of technology. Any issues may have implications for how the measure was conceptualised and/or items were developed. • A discussion of the evidence for the validity of the new measure. • A discussion of the reliability of the new measure, and if relevant the validating measures. • Limitations and implications, including any potential future revisions to the new measure or how it should be validated. 6) References • In-text referencing, presentation of the results, and the reference list should be in APA 7th or 8th ed. format