CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 208Artificial Intelligence in EducationAcademic integrity and plagiarismArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 75 of the 75 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

ChatGPT in higher education - a synthesis of the literature and a future research agenda

Open access
Bhullar, Pritpal Singh, Joshi, Mahesh, Chugh, Ritesh·2024·Education and Information Technologies
DOI 10.1007/s10639-024-12723-x
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

ChatGPT has emerged as a significant subject of research and exploration, casting a critical spotlight on teaching and learning practices in the higher education domain. This study examines the most influential articles, leading journals, and productive countries concerning citations and publications related to ChatGPT in higher education, while also shedding light on emerging thematic and geographic clusters within research on ChatGPT’s role and challenges in teaching and learning at higher education institutions. Forty-seven research papers from the Scopus database were shortlisted for bibliometric analysis. The findings indicate that the use of ChatGPT in higher education, particularly issues of academic integrity and research, has been studied extensively by scholars in the United States, who have produced the largest volume of publications, alongside the highest number of citations. This study uncovers four distinct thematic clusters (academic integrity, learning environment, student engagement, and scholarly research) and highlights the predominant areas of focus in research related to ChatGPT in higher education, including student examinations, academic integrity, student learning, and field-specific research, through a country-based bibliographic analysis. Plagiarism is a significant concern in the use of ChatGPT, which may reduce students’ ability to produce imaginative, inventive, and original material. This study offers valuable insights into the current state of ChatGPT in higher education literature, providing essential guidance for scholars, researchers, and policymakers.

Overview

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/s10639-024-12723-x

Cites

75 of 75 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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?

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 73 references

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Bajaj, Y., Kashiramka, S., & Singh, S. (2020). Application of capital structure theories: A systematic review. Journal of Advances in Management Research, 18(2), 173–199. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAMR-01-2020-001. · DOI
  2. Gupta, R., Pandey, R., & Sebastian, V. J. (2021). International entrepreneurial orientation (IEO): A bibliometric overview of scholarly research. Journal of Business Research, 125, 74–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.12.00. · DOI
  3. Neumann, M., Rauschenberger, M., & Schon, E-M. (2023). 2023 IEEE/ACM 5th International Workshop on Software Engineering Education for the Next Generation (SEENG), Melbourne, Australia, 2023, pp. 29–32, https://doi.org/10.1109/SEENG59157.2023.00010. · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Bhullar, P. S., Joshi, M., & Chugh, R.
Affiliations
  • Maharaja Ranjit Singh Punjab Technical University (IN)
  • Central Queensland University (AU)
Corresponding author
Chugh, Ritesh
ORCID
Venue
Education and Information Technologies
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2024-05-02
Volume
29
Issue
16
Pages
21501-21522
ISSN
  • 1360-2357 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-7608
DOI
10.1007/s10639-024-12723-x
OpenAlex
W4396592436
Cited by
139
References
73
Citations by year
2026: 67 · 2025: 59 · 2024: 13
FWCI
52.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Education and Information Technologies (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Central Queensland University
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Artificial Intelligence in Education
  • Social Sciences › Education › Academic integrity and plagiarism
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Keywords
ChatGPT, generative AI in education, higher education teaching and learning, academic integrity, plagiarism, student engagement, learning environment, student examinations, research agenda

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