Pemetaan riset pengukuran literasi digital dan literasi kecerdasan buatan

  • Yulian Hermanus Wenno 
    Universitas Pattimura, Ambon
    Indonesia
  • Archristhea Amahoru
    Universitas Islam Negeri Abdul Muthalib Sangadji, Ambon
    Indonesia

Abstract

Literasi kecerdasan buatan (AI) lazim digambarkan sebagai perluasan literasi digital, tetapi belum jelas seberapa sering hubungan itu benar-benar diuji dan bukan sekadar dinyatakan. Studi pemetaan bibliometrik ini, yang bukan merupakan tinjauan sistematis, memetakan lanskap riset tempat kedua konstruk bertemu dan menemukan titik ketika buktinya menipis. Pencarian dilakukan pada Scopus dan ERIC tanggal 19 Oktober 2026 dengan empat string pelengkap, dibatasi pada artikel berbahasa Inggris terbitan 2015–2026, dan menghasilkan 1.131 catatan serta 943 catatan unik setelah deduplikasi. Setiap catatan diklasifikasikan melalui pencocokan istilah pada judul, abstrak, dan kata kunci, bukan melalui penapisan naskah lengkap, sehingga angka yang dilaporkan bersifat indikatif; catatan yang tertandai melaporkan validitas diskriminan diverifikasi dengan membaca abstraknya. Jaringan ko-okurensi kata kunci dibangun menggunakan VOSviewer. Korpusnya sangat muda: 756 catatan (80,2%) terbit pada 2025 atau 2026, dan catatan yang menyebut kedua konstruk tumbuh dari sembilan pada 2023 menjadi 251 pada 2026. Bukti menyusut tajam di sepanjang korpus. Meskipun 436 catatan (46,2%) menyebut kedua konstruk, hanya 169 (17,9%) memadukannya dengan kosakata instrumen, 34 (3,6%) dengan statistik validasi, dan 27 (2,9%) dengan statistik validasi pada populasi peserta didik. Tiga catatan tertandai melaporkan validitas diskriminan, dan verifikasi abstrak menunjukkan hanya satu yang benar-benar menguji literasi AI terhadap alat ukur literasi digital; studi itu pun memakai peserta vokasional dewasa, bukan peserta didik sekolah. Pengembangan instrumen berjalan aktif dengan 84 studi teridentifikasi, 70 di antaranya sejak 2025. Jarak antara penyebutan bersama dan validasi bersama menunjukkan bahwa bidang ini membangun instrumen lebih cepat daripada mengujinya.

Keywords
  • Instrumen pengukuran
  • Literasi AI
  • Literasi digital
  • Pemetaan bibliometrik
  • Validitas diskriminan
Lisensing Information
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

How to Cite
Wenno, Y. H., & Archristhea Amahoru. (2026). Pemetaan riset pengukuran literasi digital dan literasi kecerdasan buatan. Southeast Asian Journal of Technology and Science, 7(2), 16–25. https://doi.org/10.29210/810713300
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS) BibTeX
References
  1. Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56(2), 81–105. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0046016
  2. Guo, Z., Li, W., Chen, L. L., Liang, Q., & Wu, Y. (2026). Reconceptualizing digital literacy in the AI era: A systematic review of validated frameworks from an ecological perspective. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, Article 100679. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2026.100679
  3. Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
  4. Kundu, A., & Bej, T. (2026). Measuring AI literacy in elementary students: Development and validation of a psychometric instrument. Education and Information Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-026-14022-z
  5. Lin, S., & Zhengtang, T. (2026). AI literacy scale for undergraduate design students: Development and validation. SAGE Open. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440261463131
  6. Lintner, T. (2024). A systematic review of AI literacy scales. npj Science of Learning, 9, Article 50. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-024-00264-4
  7. Long, D., & Magerko, B. (2020). What is AI literacy? Competencies and design considerations. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1–16). https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376727
  8. Mokkink, L. B., de Vet, H. C. W., Prinsen, C. A. C., Patrick, D. L., Alonso, J., Bouter, L. M., & Terwee, C. B. (2018). COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures. Quality of Life Research, 27(5), 1171–1179. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-017-1765-4
  9. Ng, D. T. K., Leung, J. K. L., Chu, S. K. W., & Qiao, M. S. (2021). Conceptualizing AI literacy: An exploratory review. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 2, Article 100041. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2021.100041
  10. Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., . . . Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
  11. Petersen, K., Vakkalanka, S., & Kuzniarz, L. (2015). Guidelines for conducting systematic mapping studies in software engineering: An update. Information and Software Technology, 64, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2015.03.007
  12. Polomoshnov, J., Masso, A., & Lobanova, K. (2026). Comparing digital, data, and AI literacy: A narrative review. Information Polity. https://doi.org/10.1177/15701255251401863
  13. Rethlefsen, M. L., Kirtley, S., Waffenschmidt, S., Ayala, A. P., Moher, D., Page, M. J., Koffel, J. B., & PRISMA-S Group. (2021). PRISMA-S: An extension to the PRISMA statement for reporting literature searches in systematic reviews. Systematic Reviews, 10, Article 39. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-020-01542-z
  14. Rodríguez-Torres, Á.-F., Treviño-Villarreal, D. C., Hidalgo-Montesinos, K. P., & Marín-Marín, J.-A. (2026). Validation of the Meta AI Literacy Scale (MAILS) in Ecuadorian high school students: Evidence of validity, measurement invariance, and latent profiles. Education Sciences, 16(7), Article 1058. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci16071058
  15. Scheibenzuber, C., Chernikova, O., Vejvoda, J., Sailer, M., & Fischer, F. (2026). Scenario-Based AI Literacy Scale (SAILS): Evidence for distinct instrumental and critical-reflective AI skills and their difference from traditional digital skills. British Journal of Educational Technology. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.70065
  16. Stockwell, G. (2026). Confidence is not competence: Self-report and the measurement of AI literacy. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmal.2026.100364
  17. UNESCO. (2024). AI competency framework for students. UNESCO.
  18. van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84(2), 523–538. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3
  19. Vuorikari, R., Kluzer, S., & Punie, Y. (2022). DigComp 2.2: The Digital Competence Framework for Citizens. Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2760/115376
  20. Wang, B., Rau, P.-L. P., & Yuan, T. (2023). Measuring user competence in using artificial intelligence: Validity and reliability of artificial intelligence literacy scale. Behaviour & Information Technology, 42(9), 1324–1337. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2022.2072768
  21. Xie, X., Ma, P., Li, Y., Fu, Z., Zhao, Y., Du, Z., & Zhang, W. (2026). Development and validation of the Adolescent Artificial Intelligence Literacy Scales. Education and Information Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-026-14136-4

Similar Articles

1 2 3 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.

Downloads

PDF

Statistic

Abstract Views
: 46 times
PDF
: 10 times