Cited by 57Artificial Intelligence in EducationArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationAcademic integrity and plagiarism

Navigating Generative AI (ChatGPT) in Higher Education: Opportunities and Challenges

Wang, Tianchong·2023·Lecture Notes in Educational Technology

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/978-981-99-5961-7_28

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wang, T.
Affiliations
Swinburne University of Technology (AU)
Corresponding author
Wang, Tianchong
Venue
Lecture Notes in Educational Technology
Published
2023
Pages
215-225
ISSN
  • 2196-4963 (ISSN-L)
  • 2196-4971
OpenAlex
W4386612257
Cited by
56
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 1
FWCI
14.41
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Lecture notes in educational technology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Academic integrity and plagiarism
Keywords
generative AI, ChatGPT, higher education, academic integrity, student motivation, AI in teaching and learning

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review