Integrating the adapted UTAUT model with moral obligation, trust and perceived risk to predict ChatGPT adoption for assessment support: A survey with students
Open accessAbstract
• Trust is the strongest predictor of ChatGPT adoption in assessments • Moral obligation is the strongest barrier of ChatGPT acceptance for assessment support • Perceived risk is a significant demotivator of ChatGPT acceptance but not a mediator between trust and use intention of ChatGPT in assessment • Recommending clear guidelines on responsible use of ChatGPT and university workshops about ethical AI adoption in assessments
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
AI struggles to assess creativity, critical thinking, and ethical reasoning, favouring structured and standardised responses over original and interpretative work.
“One of the primary issues is that AI struggles to assess creativity, critical thinking, and ethical reasoning, favour -ing structured and standardised responses over original and interpretative work [ 63 ].”
From Redefining student assessment in AI-infused learning environments: a systematic review of challenges and strategies for academic integrity (2026) · cites this paper as [63]
Cites
The theory of planned behavior
Ajzen, I. (1991) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-t · Cited by 90,587 · see citing works
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879 · Cited by 82,194 · see citing works
Common Method Bias in PLS-SEM: A Full Collinearity Assessment Approach
Kock, N. (2015) · International Journal of e-Collaboration · doi:10.4018/ijec.2015100101 · Cited by 10,215 · see citing works
Trust and TAM in Online Shopping: An Integrated Model1
Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., & Straub, D. W. (2003) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/30036519 · Cited by 8,635 · see citing works
Chatting and cheating: Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT
Cotton, D. R. E., Cotton, P. A., & Shipway, J. R. (2024) · Innovations in Education and Teaching International · doi:10.1080/14703297.2023.2190148 · Cited by 3,087 · see citing works
Chatting and Cheating. Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT
Cotton, D., Cotton, P., & Shipway, J. R. (2023) · doi:10.35542/osf.io/mrz8h · Cited by 3,079 · see citing works
Scaling Laws for Neural Language Models
Kaplan, J., McCandlish, S., Henighan, T., Brown, T. B., Chess, B., Child, R., Gray, S., Radford, A., Wu, J., & Amodei, D. (2020) · arXiv · Cited by 1,749 · see citing works
ChatGPT for Language Teaching and Learning
Kohnke, L., Moorhouse, B. L., & Zou, D. (2023) · RELC Journal · doi:10.1177/00336882231162868 · Cited by 1,371 · see citing works
Predicting dishonest actions using the theory of planned behavior
Beck, L., & Ajzen, I. (1991) · Journal of Research in Personality · doi:10.1016/0092-6566(91)90021-h · Cited by 1,325 · see citing works
Chao, C.-M. (2019) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01652 · Cited by 1,041 · see citing works
Interacting with educational chatbots: A systematic review
Kuhail, M. A., Alturki, N., Alramlawi, S., & Alhejori, K. (2023) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-022-11177-3 · Cited by 841 · see citing works
Strzelecki, A. (2024) · Interactive Learning Environments · doi:10.1080/10494820.2023.2209881 · Cited by 807 · see citing works
ChatGPT in education: Strategies for responsible implementation
Halaweh, M. (2023) · Contemporary Educational Technology · doi:10.30935/cedtech/13036 · Cited by 607 · see citing works
Memarian, B., & Doleck, T. (2023) · Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100152 · Cited by 416 · see citing works
ChatGPT: The End of Online Exam Integrity?
Susnjak, T. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2212.09292 · Cited by 370 · see citing works
Zhou, J., Zhang, Y., Luo, Q., Parker, A. G., & De Choudhury, M. (2023) · Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3544548.3581318 · Cited by 288 · see citing works
ChatGPT in education: Methods, potentials, and limitations
Memarian, B., & Doleck, T. (2023) · Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans · doi:10.1016/j.chbah.2023.100022 · Cited by 266 · see citing works
Gravel, J., D’Amours-Gravel, M., & Osmanlliu, E. (2023) · Mayo Clinic Proceedings: Digital Health · doi:10.1016/j.mcpdig.2023.05.004 · Cited by 222 · see citing works
Ibrahim, H., Liu, F., Asim, R., Battu, B., Benabderrahmane, S., Alhafni, B., Adnan, W., Alhanai, T., AlShebli, B., Baghdadi, R., et al. (2023) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-023-38964-3 · Cited by 154 · see citing works
Singh, H., Tayarani-Najaran, M.-H., & Yaqoob, M. (2023) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci13090924 · Cited by 150 · see citing works
Can language models automate data wrangling?
Jaimovitch-López, G., Ferri, C., Hernández-Orallo, J., Martínez-Plumed, F., & Ramírez-Quintana, M. J. (2023) · Machine Learning · doi:10.1007/s10994-022-06259-9 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
AI chatbots: A disguised enemy for academic integrity?
Niloy, A. C., Hafiz, R., Hossain, B. M., Gulmeher, F., Sultana, N., Islam, K. F., Bushra, F., Islam, S., Hoque, S. I., Rahman, M., et al. (2024) · International Journal of Educational Research Open · doi:10.1016/j.ijedro.2024.100396 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
Ncube, P. D. N., Dzvapatsva, G. P., Matobobo, C., & Ranga, M. M. (2026) · AI and Ethics · doi:10.1007/s43681-025-00871-w · Cited by 31 · see citing works
- Authors
- Lai, C. Y., Cheung, K. Y., Chan, C. S., & Law, K. K.
- Affiliations
- Hong Kong Metropolitan University (HK)
- Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (HK)
- Nagoya University of Commerce and Business (JP)
- Corresponding author
- Lai, Chung Yee
- Venue
- Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2024-06
- Volume
- 6
- Pages
- 100246
- ISSN
- 2666-920X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4399040283
- Cited by
- 122
- References
- 22
- Citations by year
- 2026: 47 · 2025: 65 · 2024: 10
- FWCI
- 33.85
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Rare & Special e-Zone (The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Hong Kong University of Science and Technology
- University Grants Committee
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Academic integrity and plagiarism
- Keywords
- ChatGPT adoption, assessment support, UTAUT, moral obligation, trust, risk perception, technology acceptance, intention to use, responsible AI use, ethical AI adoption, students
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
