CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 252Artificial Intelligence in EducationEFL/ESL Teaching and LearningEnglish Language Learning and Teaching

Incorporating AI in foreign language education: An investigation into ChatGPT’s effect on foreign language learners

Open access
Karataş, Fatih, Abedi, Faramarz Yaşar, Ozek Gunyel, Filiz, Karadeniz, Derya, Kuzgun, Yasemin·2024·Education and Information Technologies
DOI 10.1007/s10639-024-12574-6
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

ChatGPT, an artificial intelligence application, has emerged as a promising educational tool with a wide range of applications, attracting the attention of researchers and educators. This qualitative case study, chosen for its ability to provide an in-depth exploration of the nuanced effects of AI on the foreign language learning process within its real-world educational context, aimed to utilize ChatGPT in foreign language education, addressing a gap in existing research by offering insights into the potential, benefits, and drawbacks of this innovative approach. The study involved 13 preparatory class students studying at the School of Foreign Languages at a university in Turkey. The students were introduced to ChatGPT through learning experiences over a span of four weeks by the researcher as a language teacher. The qualitative data collected from the interviews were analysed using thematic analysis. The findings suggest that ChatGPT positively affects students’ learning experiences, especially in writing, grammar, and vocabulary acquisition, and enhances motivation and engagement through its versatile and accessible nature in various learning activities. These insights contribute to understanding the utility and constraints of employing ChatGPT technology in foreign language instruction and can inform educators and researchers in developing effective teaching strategies and in designing curricula.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10639-024-12574-6

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • GenAI facilitates intercultural competence by incorporating diverse cultural contents into language learning.

    “Furthermore, GenAI facilitates intercultural competence by incorporating diverse cultural contents into language learning.”

    From Generative AI in Language Education: Bridging Divide and Fostering Inclusivity (2025) · cites this paper as Karataş et al., 2024

    Section 4.4 says ChatGPT’s varied content can give students insights into different cultures, and the Conclusion reports that it broadened participants’ views of diverse cultures. Section 4.1 discusses its potential to develop intercultural communicative competence, but the paper does not establish that competence improved; the claim states that effect more definitively than the source does. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • GenAI enhances learning motivation and confidence through its ability to provide instant feedback to learners.

    “GenAI's role in enhancing learning motivation and confidence is marked by its ability to provide instant feedback to learners.”

    From Generative AI in Language Education: Bridging Divide and Fostering Inclusivity (2025) · cites this paper as Karataş et al., 2024

    Section 3.1 reports that participants perceived greater motivation and valued ChatGPT’s instant feedback. Section 4.1 mentions increased confidence in findings from other studies, but does not establish that instant feedback enhanced confidence. The claimed feedback-to-confidence link is therefore unsupported by this copy. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Immediate feedback from GenAI can address learners' errors, boosting their motivation and reducing language learning anxiety.

    “As demonstrated by Karataş et al. (2024), this immediate response system can address learners' errors, boosting their motivation and reducing language learning anxiety, as in the findings of Jeon (2024).”

    From Generative AI in Language Education: Bridging Divide and Fostering Inclusivity (2025) · cites this paper as Karataş et al., 2024

    Section 3.1 reports a student's account that ChatGPT corrected word usage instantly and says participants associated ChatGPT with greater motivation and engagement. The paper does not establish that immediate error correction itself boosted motivation, and the passages do not report reduced language-learning anxiety (searched: anxiety, instant feedback and error correction). (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • ChatGPT supports vocabulary acquisition by presenting language in authentic, meaningful contexts and offering cultural insights, which can enhance retention and learner engagement.

    “ChatGPT also supports vocabulary acquisition by presenting language in authentic, meaningful contexts and offering cultural insights, which can enhance retention and learner engagement (Karataş et al., 2024;Kohnke et al., 2023).”

    From Integrating ChatGPT for vocabulary learning and retention: A classroom-based study of Saudi EFL learners (2025) · cites this paper as Karataş et al., 2024

    In §3.1, a student says ChatGPT helped them learn words in context and remember them, and participants report greater engagement and opportunities to explore cultures. Section 4.4 says its materials can offer cultural insights, but recommends that teachers ensure exposure to authentic, real-life communicative practice; it does not establish that ChatGPT itself provides that practice. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • ChatGPT is not confined to pre-programmed responses and adapts flexibly to learner input, making it well-suited for vocabulary development through dynamic and personalized interactions.

    “Unlike many purpose-built AI language applications, ChatGPT is not confined to pre-programmed responses; instead, it adapts flexibly to learner input, making it particularly well-suited for promoting vocabulary development through dynamic and personalized interactions (Karataş et al., 2024).”

    From Integrating ChatGPT for vocabulary learning and retention: A classroom-based study of Saudi EFL learners (2025) · cites this paper as Karataş et al., 2024

    Section 4.5 says ChatGPT tailors responses to individual prompts and offers interactive, personalized feedback; section 3.1 reports perceived benefits for new vocabulary acquisition. The paper does not establish the claimed contrast with purpose-built language applications or show that their responses are pre-programmed. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 49

  1. Akhmad, N. W., & Munawir, A. (2022). Improving the students' pronunciation ability by using Elsa Speak App. Ideas: Journal on English Language and Learning Linguistics and Literature, 10(1), 846-857. https:// doi. org/ 10. 24256/ ideas. v10i1. 2868 · DOI
  2. Akopiants, N. (2023). Using Chatgpt in the process of learning English: Advantages and opportunities. Actual Problems of Ukrainian Society Development, 1, 69-72. https:// doi. org/ 10. 20998/ 2227-6890. 2023.1. 13 · DOI
  3. Al-Obaydi, L. H., Pikhart, M., & Klímová, B. (2023). ChatGPT and the general concepts of education: Can Artificial Intelligence-Driven Chatbots support the process of language learning? International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (Ijet), 18(21), 39-50. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3991/ ijet. v18i21. 42593 · DOI
  4. AlAfnan, M., Dishari, S., Jovic, M., & Lomidze, K. (2023). ChatGPT as an educational tool: Oppor- tunities, challenges, and recommendations for communication, business writing, and composition courses. Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Technology. https:// doi. org/ 10. 37965/ jait. 2023. 0184 · DOI · Paper page
  5. Algaraady, J., & Mahyoob, M. (2023). ChatGPT's capabilities in spotting and analyzing writing errors experienced by EFL learners. Arab World English Journal, 9, 3-17. https:// doi. org/ 10. 24093/ awej/ call9. · DOI
  6. Alsadoon, R. (2021). Chatting with AI Bot: Vocabulary learning assistant for Saudi EFL learners. Eng- lish Language Teaching, 14(6), 135. https:// doi. org/ 10. 5539/ elt. v14n6 p135 · DOI
  7. Ayotunde, O. O., Jamil, D. I., & Çavuş, N. (2023). The impact of artificial intelligence in foreign lan- guage learning using learning management systems: a systematic literature review. Information Technologies and Learning Tools, 95(3), 215-228. https:// doi. org/ 10. 33407/ itlt. v95i3. 5233 · DOI
  8. Bao, Y., & Li, B. (2023). A preliminary study on graduate student instructors' exploration, perception, and use of ChatGPT. International Journal of Computer-assisted Language Learning and Teaching, 13(1), 1-23. https:// doi. org/ 10. 4018/ ijcal lt. 332873 · DOI
  9. Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2006). Qualitative research for education. Pearson.
  10. Brown, T. B., Mann, B. F., Ryder, N. C., Subbiah, M., Kaplan, J., Dhariwal, P., Neelakantan, A., Shyam, P., Sastry, G., Askell, A., Agarwal, S., Herbert-Voss, A., Krueger, G., Henighan, T., Child, R., Ramesh, A., Ziegler, D. M., Wu, J. C., Winter, C., & Amodei, D. (2020). Language models are few- shot learners. ArXiv (Cornell University). https:// doi. org/ 10. 48550/ arxiv. 2005. 14165 · DOI · Paper page
  11. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2017). Research Methods in Education (8th ed.). Routledge. https:// doi. org/ 10. 4324/ 97813 15456 539 · DOI · Paper page
  12. De Vicente Yagüe Jara, M., Martínez, O. L., Navarro-Navarro, V., & Cuéllar-Santiago, F. (2023). Writ- ing, creativity, and artificial intelligence. ChatGPT in the university context. Comunicar, 31(77). https:// doi. org/ 10. 3916/ c77-2023-04 · DOI
  13. Farrokhnia, M., Banihashem, S. K., Noroozi, O., & Wals, A. (2023). A SWOT analysis of ChatGPT: Implications for educational practice and research. Innovations in Education and Teaching Interna- tional, 1-15, 1. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 14703 297. 2023. 21958 · DOI · Paper page
  14. Graves, B. C. (2023). Specifications grading to promote student engagement, motivation and learn- ing: Possibilities and cautions. Assessing Writing, 57, 100754. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. asw. 2023. 100754 · DOI
  15. Huang, W., Hew, K. F., & Fryer, L. K. (2022). Chatbots for language learning-are they really useful? A systematic review of chatbot-supported language learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 38(1), 237-257. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/ jcal. 12610 · DOI · Paper page
  16. Kearsley, G., & Shneiderman, B. (1998). Engagement theory: A framework for technology-based teach- ing and learning. Educational Technology, 38(5), 20-23.
  17. Khan, R. A., Jawaid, M., Khan, A. R., & Sajjad, M. (2023). ChatGPT -reshaping medical education and clini- cal management. Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences, 39(2). https:// doi. org/ 10. 12669/ pjms. 39.2. 7653 · DOI · Paper page
  18. Kim, S., & Lee, Y. (2023). Investigation into the influence of socio-cultural factors on attitudes toward artificial intelligence. Education and Information Technologies. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s10639-023-12172-y · DOI
  19. Kim, S., Shim, J., & Shim, J. (2023). A study on the utilization of OpenAI ChatGPT as a second language learning tool. Journal of Multimedia Information System, 10(1), 79-88. https:// doi. org/ 10. 33851/ jmis. 2023. 10.1. 79 · DOI
  20. Klayklung, P., Chocksathaporn, P., Limna, P., Kraiwanit, T., & Jangjarat, K. (2023). Revolutionizing edu- cation with ChatGPT: Enhancing learning through conversational AI. Universal Journal of Educa- tional Research, 2(3), 217-225. https:// doi. org/ 10. 5281/ zenodo. 83529 65 · DOI
  21. Kung, T. H., Cheatham, M., Medenilla, A., Sillos, C., De Leon, L., Elepaño, C., Madriaga, M., Aggabao, R., Diaz-Candido, G., Maningo, J., & Tseng, V. (2023). Performance of ChatGPT on USMLE: Potential for AI-assisted medical education using large language models. PLOS Digital Health, 2(2). https:// doi. org/ 10. 1371/ journ al. pdig. 00001 98 · DOI · Paper page
  22. Leunard, H., Rachmawati, R., Zani, B., & Maharjan, K. (2023). GPT Chat: Opportunities and challenges in the learning process of arabic language in higher education. Journal International of Lingua and Technology, 2(1), 10-22. https:// doi. org/ 10. 55849/ jilte ch. v2i1. 439 · DOI
  23. Lucas, J. W. (2003). Theory-testing, generalization, and the problem of external validity. Sociological Theory, 21(3), 236-253. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/ 1467-9558. 00187 · DOI
  24. McCallum, L. (2023). New takes on developing intercultural communicative competence: Using AI tools in telecollaboration task design and task completion. Journal for Multicultural Education. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1108/ jme-06-2023-0043 · DOI
  25. Michalon, B., & Camacho-Zúñiga, C. (2023). ChatGPT, a brand-new tool to strengthen timeless compe- tencies. Frontiers in Education, 8, 1251163. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3389/ feduc. 2023. 12511 63 · DOI
  26. Miles, M., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2019). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook. Sage Publications.
  27. Mohamed, A. M. (2023). Exploring the potential of an AI-based Chatbot (ChatGPT) in enhancing Eng- lish as a Foreign Language (EFL) teaching: Perceptions of EFL Faculty members. Education and Information Technologies. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s10639-023-11917-z · DOI · Paper page
  28. Moorhouse, B. L. (2024). Beginning and first-year language teachers' readiness for the generative AI age. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 6, 100201. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. caeai. 2024. 100201 · DOI
  29. Moshayedi, A., Roy, A., Kolahdooz, A., & Shuxin, Y. (2022). Deep learning application pros and cons over algorithm. EAI Endorsed Transactions on AI and Robotics. https:// doi. org/ 10. 4108/ airo. v1i. 19 · DOI
  30. Niyozov, N., Bijanov, A., Ganiyev, S., & Kurbonova, R. (2023). The pedagogical principles and effective- ness of utilizing ChatGPT for language learning. E3S Web of Conferences, 461, 01093. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1051/ e3sco nf/ 20234 61010 93 · DOI
  31. Nugroho, A., Putro, N. H. P. S., & Syamsi, K. (2023). The potentials of ChatGPT for language learning: Unpacking its benefits and limitations. Register Journal, 16(2), 224-247. https:// doi. org/ 10. 18326/ regis ter. v16i2. 224-247 · DOI
  32. Pack, A., & Maloney, J. (2023). Using generative artificial intelligence for language education research: Insights from using OpenAI's ChatGPT. TESOL Quarterly, 57(4), 1571-1582. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1002/ tesq. 3253 · DOI
  33. Rawas, S. (2023). ChatGPT: Empowering lifelong learning in the digital age of higher education. Education and Information Technologies. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s10639-023-12114-8 · DOI · Paper page
  34. Rizk, Y., Hajj, N., Mitri, N., & Awad, M. (2019). Deep belief networks and cortical algorithms: A comparative study for supervised classification. Applied Computing and Informatics, 15(2), 81-93. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. aci. 2018. 01. 004 · DOI
  35. Sampson, R. J., & Yoshida, R. (2020). L2 feelings through interaction in a japanese-english online chat exchange. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 15(2), 131-142. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 17501 229. 2019. 17105 · DOI
  36. Shadiev, R., & Liang, Q. (2023). A review of research on AR-supported language learning. Innova- tion in Language Learning and Teaching, 1-23. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 17501 229. 2023. 22298 · DOI
  37. Shen, Y., Heacock, L., Elias, J., Hentel, K., Reig, B., Shih, G., & Moy, L. (2023). ChatGPT and other large language models are double-edged swords. Radiology, 307(2). https:// doi. org/ 10. 1148/ radiol. 230163 · DOI · Paper page
  38. Stepanechko, O., & Kozub, L. (2023). English teachers' concerns about the ethical use of ChatGPT by university students. Grail of Science, 25, 297-302. https:// doi. org/ 10. 36074/ grail-of-scien ce. 17. 03. 2023. 051 · DOI
  39. Sun, G., & Hoelscher, S. H. (2023). The CHATGPT storm and what faculty can do. Nurse Educator, 48(3), 119-124. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1097/ nne. 00000 00000 001390 · DOI
  40. Tavares, C., Oliveira, L., Duarte, P., & Da Silva, M. M. (2023). Artificial intelligence: A blessing or a threat for language service providers in Portugal. Informatics (Basel), 10(4), 81. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ infor matic s1004 0081 · DOI
  41. Tipayavaravan, N., Sirichokcharoenkun, Y., & Cao, L. (2023). ChatGPT: A New Tool for English Language Teaching and Learning at Vietnamese High Schools. EdArXiv. Preprint. Retrieved January 18 2024, from https:// doi. org/ 10. 35542/ osf. io/ m7k4y · DOI
  42. Topsakal, O., & Topsakal, E. (2022). Framework for a foreign language teaching software for children utilizing AR, voicebots and ChatGPT (large language models). The Journal of Cognitive Sys- tems, 7(2), 33-38. https:// doi. org/ 10. 52876/ jcs. 12273 92 · DOI
  43. Vaccino-Salvadore, S. (2023). Exploring the ethical dimensions of using ChatGPT in language learn- ing and beyond. Languages, 8(3), 191. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ langu ages8 030191 · DOI
  44. Walkington, C., & Bernacki, M. L. (2020). Appraising research on personalized learning: Definitions, theoretical alignment, advancements, and future directions. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 52(3), 235-252. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 15391 523. 2020. 17477 57 · DOI
  45. Wenzlaff, K., & Spaeth, S. (2022). Smarter than humans? Validating how OpenAI's ChatGPT Model explains Crowdfunding, Alternative Finance and Community Finance. SSRN Electronic Journal. https:// doi. org/ 10. 2139/ ssrn. 43024 43 · DOI
  46. Yang, H., & Kyun, S. (2022). The current research trend of artificial intelligence in language learning: A systematic empirical literature review from an activity theory perspective. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 180-210. https:// doi. org/ 10. 14742/ ajet. 7492 · DOI
  47. Yang, H., Gao, C., & Shen, H. (2023). Learner interaction with, and response to, AI-programmed auto- mated writing evaluation feedback in EFL writing: An exploratory study. Education and Informa- tion Technologies. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s10639-023-11991-3 · DOI
  48. Zaki, N., Turaev, S., Shuaib, K., Krishnan, A., & Mohamed, E. (2023). Automating the mapping of course learning outcomes to program learning outcomes using natural language processing for accurate educational program evaluation. Education and Information Technologies, 28(12), 16723- 16742. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s10639-023-11877-4 · DOI
  49. Zimmerman, B. J., & Pons, M. M. (1986). Development of a structured interview for assessing student use of self-regulated learning strategies. American Educational Research Journal, 23(4), 614. https:// doi. org/ 10. 2307/ 11630 93 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Karataş, F., Abedi, F. Y., Ozek Gunyel, F., Karadeniz, D., & Kuzgun, Y.
Affiliations
  • Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli University (TR)
  • Ankara Medipol Üniversitesi (TR)
  • Inonu University (TR)
  • Bilkent University (TR)
Corresponding author
Karataş, Fatih
ORCID
Venue
Education and Information Technologies
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2024-03-19
Volume
29
Issue
15
Pages
19343-19366
ISSN
  • 1360-2357 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-7608
DOI
10.1007/s10639-024-12574-6
OpenAlex
W4392964630
Cited by
252
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 103 · 2025: 111 · 2024: 38
FWCI
94.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Education and Information Technologies (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Bilkent University Institutional Repository (Bilkent University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Nevsehir Haci Bektas Veli University
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › English Language Learning and Teaching
Keywords
ChatGPT, artificial intelligence in education, foreign language learning, preparatory class students, student motivation, student engagement, writing instruction, grammar instruction, vocabulary acquisition, artificial intelligence in language teaching

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