CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 397Artificial Intelligence in EducationArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationIntelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning

The Influence of ChatGPT on Student Engagement: A Systematic Review and Future Research Agenda

Open access
Lo, Chung Kwan, Hew, Khe Foon, Jong, Morris Siu-yung·2024·Computers & Education
DOI 10.1016/j.compedu.2024.105100
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

ChatGPT, a state-of-the-art artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot, has gained considerable attention as a transformative yet controversial tool for enhancing teaching and learning experiences. Several reviews and numerous articles have been written about harnessing ChatGPT in education since its release on November 30, 2022. Besides summarising its strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) as identified in previous systematic reviews of ChatGPT research, this systematic review aims to develop a new understanding of its influence on student engagement by synthesising the existing related research using a three-dimensional framework comprising behavioural, emotional, and cognitive aspects. We searched relevant databases and included 72 empirical studies published within one year of ChatGPT's initial release. The findings reveal robust but narrowly focused evidence related to behavioural engagement (i.e., work with ChatGPT) and disengagement (i.e., academic dishonesty). The evidence related to the emotional aspect is mixed, with instances of both engagement (e.g., satisfaction and interest/fun) and disengagement (e.g., disappointment and worry/anxiety). There is broad but weak evidence regarding cognitive engagement (e.g., increased understanding and positive self-perception) and disengagement (e.g., reduced critical thinking and overreliance). Our review uncovers several under-explored indicators of student engagement, pointing to the need for further research. Specifically, future studies could focus on students' study habits and attendance (behavioural engagement), social interaction (emotional engagement), and self-regulation and critical thinking (cognitive engagement) in ChatGPT-supported learning environments.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.compedu.2024.105100

Cites

107 of 107 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?

  • The spike in research in 2023 likely correlates with the widespread release and adoption of generative AI tools, such as ChatGPT.

    “This spike likely correlates with the widespread release and adoption of generative AI tools, such as ChatGPT, which induced academic interest and application development [40,41].”

    From Systematic review of artificial intelligence in education: trends, benefits, and challenges (2025) · cites this paper as [40]

  • Recent literature indicates a surge in generative AI adoption in education due to its versatility in producing personalized content and feedback.

    “This aligns with recent literature indicating a surge in generative AI adoption in education due to its versatility in producing personalized content and feedback [40,41].”

    From Systematic review of artificial intelligence in education: trends, benefits, and challenges (2025) · cites this paper as [40]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 108 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Lo, C. K., Hew, K. F., & Jong, M. S.-Y.
Affiliations
  • Education University of Hong Kong (HK)
  • University of Hong Kong (HK)
  • Chinese University of Hong Kong (HK)
Corresponding author
Lo, Chung Kwan
ORCID
Venue
Computers & Education
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2024-10
Volume
219
Pages
105100
ISSN
0360-1315 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.compedu.2024.105100
OpenAlex
W4399455976
Semantic Scholar
e407f4afa951efeb990ac543e22a83d48fd0a915
Cited by
392
References
108
Citations by year
2026: 190 · 2025: 176 · 2024: 26
FWCI
23.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Computers & Education (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • The HKU Scholars Hub (University of Hong Kong) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
Keywords
ChatGPT, student engagement, AI chatbots in education, academic dishonesty, behavioral engagement, emotional engagement, cognitive engagement, student satisfaction, critical thinking, overreliance on AI, self-regulation, study habits, student attendance, social interaction

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