The DOI matches its Crossref record; 80 of the 80 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
ChatGPT in the higher education: A systematic literature review and research challenges
Open accessAbstract
ChatGPT has gained significant attention in the higher education sector as it can be applied across a wide range of topics. Despite ChatGPT's versatility in offering support across various educational disciplines, it is still in its early stages and requires further exploration to be fully utilized effectively in education. This systematic literature review aims to explore the trends, adoption measures, diverse applications, and current limitations of ChatGPT research in higher education. This review systematically analyzed 57 research articles published between 2023 and 2024. This study identified trends in ChatGPT in higher education by providing temporal views, geographical locations, and research methods used. Furthermore, this study explored users’ intention to adopt and use ChatGPT in higher education by focusing on post-adoption, intention to use, and acceptance stages. Considering the extensive advantages ChatGPT brings to the academic community, this review explores its diverse applications in educational settings for academic staff, students, researchers, and non-academic users. Finally, this study outlined the current limitations in ChatGPT research within higher education and proposed future research directions, aiming for continuous improvement in the field. This study can benefit higher education by providing valuable insights into the effective utilization of ChatGPT.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
In the citing paper
“Baig and Yadegaridehkordi (2024) synthesized 57 studies of ChatGPT in higher education.”
From From Assistance to Substitution: Generative AI and Undergraduate Research Skills (2026) · cites this paper as Baig & Yadegaridehkordi, 2024
In the citing paper
“Recent reviews show that this is no longer a marginal use of technology: research has expanded across disciplines, with ChatGPT examined as an assistance for learning and writing, feedback tool, and source of personalized support (Baig & Yadegaridehkordi, 2024; Lo et al., 2024).”
From From Assistance to Substitution: Generative AI and Undergraduate Research Skills (2026) · cites this paper as Baig & Yadegaridehkordi, 2024
Citations
Cites
Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology
Davis, F. D. (1989) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/249008 · Cited by 68,483
User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward A Unified View1
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/30036540 · Cited by 45,035
From Intentions to Actions: A Theory of Planned Behavior
Ajzen, I. (1985) · Action Control · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-69746-3_2 · Cited by 19,057
The DeLone and McLean Model of Information Systems Success: A Ten-Year Update
(2003) · Journal of Management Information Systems · doi:10.1080/07421222.2003.11045748 · Cited by 11,791
Task-Technology Fit and Individual Performance
Goodhue, D. L., & Thompson, R. L. (1995) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/249689 · Cited by 6,006
Action control : from cognition to behavior
Kühl, J., & Beckmann, J. (1985) · Cited by 3,444
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
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
Drazin, R. (1991) · The Journal of Technology Transfer · doi:10.1007/bf02371446 · Cited by 2,122
ChatGPT: Bullshit spewer or the end of traditional assessments in higher education?
(2023) · Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching · doi:10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.9 · Cited by 1,806
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- Chukwuere, 2023, ChatGPT: The game changer for higher education institutions, Jozac Academic Voice, 3, 22
- Kitchenham, 2004, 33, 1
- Kitchenham, 2007, Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering version 2.3, Engineering, 45, 13
- Kolade, O., Owoseni, A., & Egbetokun, A. (2023). Assessment on trial? ChatGPT and the new frontiers of learning and assessment in higher education. doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.32665.4976.. · DOI
- Shaengchart, 2023, Factors influencing theacceptance of ChatGPT usage among higher education students in Bangkok, Thailand, Advance Knowledge for Executives, 2, 1
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Does ChatGPT enhance student learning? A systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental studies
Deng, R., Jiang, M., Yu, X., Lu, Y., & Liu, S. (2025) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2024.105224 · Cited by 531
Wang, J., & Fan, W. (2025) · Humanities and Social Sciences Communications · doi:10.1057/s41599-025-04787-y · Cited by 322
“Most review studies have examined the effectiveness of ChatGPT in education (Ansari et al. 2024; Baig and Yadegaridehkordi, 2024; Chen et al. 2024; Grassini, 2023).”
RetractedBatista, J., Mesquita, A., & Carnaz, G. (2024) · Information · doi:10.3390/info15110676 · Cited by 256
Møgelvang, A., Bjelland, C., Grassini, S., & Ludvigsen, K. (2024) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci14121363 · Cited by 157
“Despite their hazards and limitations, genAI chatbots offer many possibilities in higher education [3] and are already used extensively in many arenas outside of academia.”
Naznin, K., Mahmud, A. A., Nguyen, M. T., & Chua, C. (2025) · Computers · doi:10.3390/computers14020053 · Cited by 123
Balaskas, S., Tsiantos, V., Chatzifotiou, S., & Rigou, M. (2025) · Information · doi:10.3390/info16020082 · Cited by 81
“Its application further complicates the ability to introduce biases or inaccuracies in AI-generated content, probably misleading students or reinforcing inequalities [2,14,15].”
Black, R. W., & Tomlinson, B. (2025) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-92937-2 · Cited by 134
Liu, X., & Zhong, B. (2025) · Educational Research Review · doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2025.100741 · Cited by 78
Ethical Challenges Associated with the Use of Artificial Intelligence in University Education
Marín, Y. R., Caro, O. C., Rituay, A. M. C., Llanos, K. A. G., Perez, D. T., Bardales, E. S., Tuesta, J. N. A., & Santos, R. C. (2025) · Journal of Academic Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10805-025-09660-w · Cited by 157
“It also simplifies academic writing tasks for students (Baig & Yadegaridehkordi, 2024 ; Sun & Zhou, 2024) and enables personalized learning approaches (Holmes et al., 2022).”
Abdallah, N., Katmah, R., Khalaf, K., & Jelinek, H. F. (2025) · Social Sciences & Humanities Open · doi:10.1016/j.ssaho.2025.101866 · Cited by 55
Blahopoulou, J., & Ortiz-Bonnin, S. (2025) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-025-13575-9 · Cited by 50
“Given this trend, outright bans may not be practical or effective (Baig, 2024).”
Garcia, M. B. (2025) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-025-13452-5 · Cited by 54
Deroncele-Acosta, Á., Sayán-Rivera, R. M. E., López, Á. D. M., & Norabuena-Figueroa, E. (2025) · Applied System Innovation · doi:10.3390/asi8030083 · Cited by 67
Alwakid, W. N., Dahri, N. A., Humayun, M., & Alwakid, G. N. (2025) · Systems · doi:10.3390/systems13070517 · Cited by 62
Uludağ, F., Kılıç, E., & Çelik, H. E. (2025) · Humanities and Social Sciences Communications · doi:10.1057/s41599-025-05641-x · Cited by 41
“Therefore, the extended TAM framework has been used in many studies to predict student acceptance of AI technologies and ChatGPT (Al-Adwan et al. 2023; Baig and Yadegaridehkordi, 2024; Saihi et al. 2024).”
Lelescu, A., Sava, S., Grosseck, G., & Maliţa, L. (2025) · Humanities and Social Sciences Communications · doi:10.1057/s41599-025-06253-1 · Cited by 43
“Furthermore, our fi ndings show that trust propensity , a key psychological factor, differs among educators, with tech-savvy individuals and those with positive prior experiences showing a higher propensity to trust (Baig & Yadegaridehkordi, 2024; Wölfel et al., 2023).”
InfluentialAcut, D. P., Malabago, N. K., Malicoban, E. V., Galamiton, N. S., & Garcia, M. B. (2024) · Internet Reference Services Quarterly · doi:10.1080/10875301.2024.2426793 · Cited by 28
“Given that content generation and writing assistance are commonly cited as key potentials of ChatGPT (Baig & Yadegaridehkordi, 2024), the frequent generation of non-existent references raises serious concerns about its reliability in academic and professional contexts.”
A Meta-Survey of Generative AI in Education: Trends, Challenges, and Research Directions
Bouguettaya, S., Pupo, F., Chen, M., & Fortino, G. (2025) · Big Data and Cognitive Computing · doi:10.3390/bdcc9090237 · Cited by 39
“Baig and Mittal [26,32] argue that students may begin to delegate cognitive tasks to AI systems, limiting their engagement in deep problem-solving processes unless educators purposefully design learning activities that promote active learning and critical analysis.”
InfluentialAbdi, A.-N. M., Omar, A. M., Ahmed, M. H., & Ahmed, A. A. (2025) · Cogent Education · doi:10.1080/2331186x.2025.2460250 · Cited by 30
“The TAM has been generally used in tertiary education research to explore users ’ intentions, behavior, and acceptance of ChatGPT (Baig & Yadegaridehkordi, 2024).”
Beyond hype: Is ChatGPT-generated content effective in class preparation among academic instructors?
Bin-Nashwan, S. A., Bouteraa, M., Benlahcene, A., & Sadallah, M. (2025) · The Internet and Higher Education · doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2025.101016 · Cited by 21
Academics as adopters of generative AI: an application of diffusion of innovations theory
Singh, S., & Strzelecki, A. (2025) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-025-13835-8 · Cited by 36
“Additionally, systematic literature reviews have examined many avail‑ able articles written based on student samples using various theories, mainly UTAUT or TAM and their extended variants (Baig & Yadegaridehkordi, 2024; Chen et al., 2024; Lo et al., 2024).”
Dai, K., Liu, Y., & Zhang, X. (2026) · Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2026.100544 · Cited by 42
ChatGPT Interventions in Higher Education: A Systematic Review of Experimental Studies
Jin, Y., & Sercu, L. (2025) · Journal of Computer Assisted Learning · doi:10.1111/jcal.70072 · Cited by 21
Examining Generative AI User Discontinuance from a Dual Perspective of Enablers and Inhibitors
Zhou, T., & Wang, M. (2025) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2025.2470280 · Cited by 18
“…& Bang, 2023; Menon & Shilpa, 2023; Yang et al., 2024), continuance intention (Jo, 2022; Pham et al., 2024; Yu et al., 2024), application contexts (Baig & Yadegaridehkordi, 2024; Chen et al., 2023; Shao et al., 2024), and the potential risks (Fui-Hoon Nah et al., 2023; Guleria et al., 2023; Guo…”
Gong, Y., Xu, C., Luo, S., & Lin, J. (2025) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-03298-9 · Cited by 32
“Baig and Yadegaridehkordi 26 conducted a systematic review of 57 studies and found that scholars primarily use LLMs such as ChatGPT for assignments, assessments, exam design, student guidance, curriculum planning, and teaching, as well as course and syllabus design.”
Yang, Y. (2025) · Asia Pacific Journal of Education · doi:10.1080/02188791.2025.2505664 · Cited by 19
Adoption of artificial intelligence in higher education: a diffusion of innovation approach
Gutiérrez-Leefmans, M., Picazo-Vela, S., & Kareem, O. (2026) · The TQM Journal · doi:10.1108/tqm-12-2024-0523 · Cited by 16
Milakis, E. D., Argyrakou, C. C., Melidis, A., & Vrettaros, J. (2025) · International Journal of Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.46300/9109.2025.19.11 · Cited by 28
Sifat, M. S. I., Kabir, M. A., Islam, M. M. M., Rehman, A. U., & Bermak, A. (2025) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2025.3600235 · Cited by 15
“Inspired by the studies of [63], [64], and [65], this screening process is adopted.”
Bernuy, J. B. V., Nolasco-Mamani, M. A., Rodríguez, N. C. V., Quelopana, R. L. G., Valdivia, A. N. M., & Vidaurre, S. M. E. (2025) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su17188329 · Cited by 17
Understanding management educators’ perspectives on AI adoption: A qualitative study
Shahzad, F., Avunduk, Z. B., Ullah, Z., & Arslan, A. (2025) · The International Journal of Management Education · doi:10.1016/j.ijme.2025.101274 · Cited by 20
How ephemeral content marketing fosters brand love and customer engagement
Nguyen, K. M., Nguyen, N. T., Pham, T. T. X., Tran, N. H. M., Cap, N. C. B., & Nguyen, V. K. (2025) · Spanish Journal of Marketing - ESIC · doi:10.1108/sjme-04-2024-0089 · Cited by 14
Nikolic, S., Quince, Z., Lindqvist, A. L., Neal, P. R., Grundy, S., Lim, M., Tahmasebinia, F., Rios, S., Burridge, J., Petkoff, K., et al. (2025) · STEM Education · doi:10.3934/steme.2025016 · Cited by 24
“Most literature surveys, such as those by Liu et al. [23] and Baig and Yadegaridehkordi [13], highlight that many concerns arise regarding its integration; at the same time, its potential to enhance learning is appreciated.”
Physics instructors’ acceptance and implementation of generative AI
Wattanakasiwich, P., Kaewkhong, K., & Katwibun, D. (2025) · Physical Review Physics Education Research · doi:10.1103/r2fn-kdy4 · Cited by 19
Fazackerley, L. A., Perrin, D., & Minett, G. M. (2025) · AJP Advances in Physiology Education · doi:10.1152/advan.00249.2024 · Cited by 10
Eddine, R. J., Gide, E., & Al-Sabbagh, A. (2025) · STEM Education · doi:10.3934/steme.2025035 · Cited by 13
Shaping the future of education: a cluster analysis of generative AI’s transformative impact
Issa, H.-E. A., & Maheshwari, G. (2025) · Interactive Technology and Smart Education · doi:10.1108/itse-01-2025-0013 · Cited by 17
Mariñas, K. A., Saflor, C. S., Alvarado, P., Uminga, J. M., & Verde, N. A. (2025) · Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100435 · Cited by 18
Boon or Bane? Evaluating AI-driven learning assistance in higher education professional coursework
Sun, Y., Yang, H., Yu, H. K., & Suen, R. (2025) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-025-13642-1 · Cited by 12
“Despite these concerns, the transformative potential of LLMs in reshap - ing educational practices and enhancing learning experiences cannot be disregarded (Acosta-Enriquez et al., 2024; Ali et al., 2024; Baig and Yadegaridehkordi, 2024).”
Souza, M. E. C., de Sousa, R. R., & Gonçalves, S. M. N. (2025) · RECIMA21 - Revista Científica Multidisciplinar · doi:10.47820/recima21.v6i7.6611 · Cited by 12
Generative AI in Action: Acceptance and Use Among Higher Education Staff Pre- and Post-training
Møgelvang, A., Cipriani, E., & Grassini, S. (2025) · Technology Knowledge and Learning · doi:10.1007/s10758-025-09915-w · Cited by 20
A Meta-Review of Generative AI in Education: Synthesizing Findings from Systematic Reviews
Zhang, L., Deng, X., & Shadiev, R. (2026) · Journal of Educational Computing Research · doi:10.1177/07356331261419689 · Cited by 17
“In terms of academic level, for instance, Baig and Yadegaridehkordi (2024) conducted a systematic review of 57 studies in higher education, highlighting ChatGPT ’ s diverse applications, adoption trends, and current limitations.”
Amin, M. A., Noh, M., Haque, A., Rupa, R. A., & Kim, Y. S. (2026) · Beijing international review of education · doi:10.1177/25902547261421646 · Cited by 8
“In addition, the use of ChatGPT entails the risk of generating biased or inaccurate content, which may not only mislead students but also exacerbate existing educational disparities (Baig & Yadegaridehkordi, 2024).”
Assessing Biases in the Names Generated by Generative Artificial Intelligence Chatbots
Mirowsky, J. E. (2024) · Journal of Chemical Education · doi:10.1021/acs.jchemed.4c00844 · Cited by 9
Guo, R., Pang, Y., Xu, Y., Liu, Z., Chen, Y., & Guo, Y. (2025) · The Electronic Library · doi:10.1108/el-12-2024-0386 · Cited by 7
Chan, N. N., Bailey, R. P., Tan, M. H. J., Dipolog-Ubanan, G. F., Tan, G. W., Motevalli, S., Samsudin, N., & Ang, C. (2025) · International Journal of Educational Research · doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2025.102733 · Cited by 7
Luo, Y., Zhou, G., & Cui, Y. (2026) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-025-13885-y · Cited by 14
ChatGPT-assisted EFL learning beyond the classroom: impact on oral proficiency, enjoyment, and grit
Tai, T. (2026) · Computer Assisted Language Learning · doi:10.1080/09588221.2026.2640087 · Cited by 10
Chau, M. T., Arruzza, E. S., & Spuur, K. M. (2024) · Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions · doi:10.3352/jeehp.2024.21.34 · Cited by 6
“It is a versatile tool for various educational tasks, including personalized tutoring, content generation, and academic writing support [9].”
Susanto, H., Mutalif, A. Q., Setiana, D., & Besar, N. (2026) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2025.1699827 · Cited by 6
Simatupang, E. C., Ismail, I., Waluyo, B., & Panmei, B. (2025) · Internet Reference Services Quarterly · doi:10.1080/10875301.2025.2461476 · Cited by 8
“…when these factors are misaligned—such as when resources are available but social support is lacking or when strong peer endorsement exists without adequate resources—the adoption of technologies may be impeded (Baig & Yadegaridehkordi, 2024; Tram & Tran-Thanh, 2024; Waluyo & Apridayani, 2024).”
Kavitha, K., & Joshith, V. P. (2025) · Journal of Educational Technology Systems · doi:10.1177/00472395251380294 · Cited by 5
“…examined determinants affecting students ’ behavioral intentions for using ChatGPT in higher education, often applying theoretical frameworks, such as the Uni fi ed Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT), UTAUT2, and the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) (Baig & Yadegaridehkordi, 2024).”
Li, C., & Long, J. (2025) · Information · doi:10.3390/info16100895 · Cited by 16
“With the increasingly widespread use of large language models such as ChatGPT and DeepSeek, the educational field is undergoing a paradigm shift from “tool-assisted” instruction to “intelligent sym-biosis” [4–6].”
Impact of prompt sophistication on ChatGPT’s output for automated written corrective feedback
Luo, N., Wang, Y., Zhang, Z. (., Zhou, Y., & Zhao, R. (2025) · ReCALL · doi:10.1017/s095834402510044x · Cited by 10
“5 in 2022, educators immediately realized that LLMs like ChatGPT would reshape education, including language teaching and learning, by offering tutoring, creating educational materials, answering subject-specific questions and providing automated feedback (Baig & Yadegaridehkordi, 2024).”
Juárez, R., Fernández, A. H., Camargo, C. D. B., & López-Barajas, D. M. (2026) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su18020656 · Cited by 8
Jogezai, N., Baloch, F. A., Jaffar, M., & Khilji, G. (2025) · Quality Assurance in Education · doi:10.1108/qae-12-2024-0255 · Cited by 5
Ni, W., & Li, J. (2026) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1856854 · Cited by 6
Kumar, V. (2025) · International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education · doi:10.1177/03064190251374463 · Cited by 6
Wani, T. A., Liem, M. K., Prasad, N., Robinson, K. M., Nexhip, A., Tassos, M., Gjorgioski, S., Khan, U. R., Boyd, J., & Riley, M. M. (2026) · JMIR Medical Education · doi:10.2196/82988 · Cited by 4
“In higher education, LLMs have rapidly gained attention among academics and students [8,12-14], supporting assessment design, automated marking, and curriculum development [14-17], improving feedback timeliness and reducing grading errors [14,18,19].”
Ram, A. M., Saravi, S., Yang, Y., Batmaz, F., Derakhshan, P., Nevisi, H., & Storey, G. (2026) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-026-13934-0 · Cited by 7
Sáez, Y., Garcia, L. M., Mochón, A., & Isasi, P. (2026) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-026-48656-3 · Cited by 7
“…beyond exact word matching, word and sentence embedding techniques using Natural Language Toolkit (NLTK) and pre-trained models have been used: • Word embedding similarity ( Word emb ): Each word in the text is mapped to a continuous vector space using a pre-trained word embedding model 10 .”
Xu, B., Li, W., Yuan, Y., Xian, L., & Wang, W. (2025) · Safety Emergency Science · doi:10.26599/ses.2025.9590013 · Cited by 4
From credibility to reliance: Trust in generative AI as an academic information source.
Pudasaini, S. (2026) · Information Development · doi:10.1177/02666669261468286 · Cited by 3
Assessing Institutional Reputation Beyond Quality Rankings
Haddad-Adaimi, M., Daou, R. A. Z., & Ducq, Y. (2025) · Corporate Reputation Review · doi:10.1057/s41299-025-00219-4 · Cited by 3
“As an example, excellent faculty members complement an institution’s physical resources and they both create an improved student experience and contribute to the overall institutional reputation (Plewa et al. 2016; Baig & Yadegaridehkordi 2024).”
Espartinez, A. S. (2025) · Journal of Information Technology Education Innovations in Practice · doi:10.28945/5526 · Cited by 9
Jamil, H. M. (2025) · ACM Transactions on Computing Education · doi:10.1145/3785369 · Cited by 3
Sharma, K., & Rai, P. (2026) · American Journal of Distance Education · doi:10.1080/08923647.2026.2627737 · Cited by 4
Xiao, S., & Hu, B. (2026) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-026-13909-1 · Cited by 3
“…was developed based on established instruments reported in prior studies and consisted of four dimensions: frequency of ChatGPT use, problem-solving skills, critical thinking, and creativity (Baig & Yadegaridehkordi, 2024; Strzelecki, 2023; Hwang et al., 2018; Li et al., 2023; Shen et al., 2023).”
Day, M. J. (2026) · Journal of ICT and Education · doi:10.69739/jicte.v1i1.1626 · Cited by 4
Wu, H., Ni, H., He, J., & Wee, E. H. (2026) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1884382 · Cited by 9
Mapping the complexity of learners’ attitudes toward ChatGPT: preliminary validation of a new scale
Zhang, Y.-C., Xue, X., Ding, M., & Yang, X.-M. (2025) · Behavior and Information Technology · doi:10.1080/0144929x.2025.2520595 · Cited by 2
“The emergence of generative artificial intelligence, exemplified by ChatGPT, in recent years has sparked extensive research and practice in the field of education (Abdaljaleel et al. 2024; Baig and Yadegaridehkordi 2024; Jeon and Lee 2023; Samala et al. 2024; Samala et al. 2025).”
Kurdi, G. R., Alsubait, T., & Bati, G. F. (2025) · Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering · doi:10.1007/s13369-025-10626-8 · Cited by 2
den Hollander, N., Struyf, A., Georgiou, D., & Wong, J. (2025) · International Journal of Educational Management · doi:10.1108/ijem-12-2024-0842 · Cited by 9
Yetişensoy, O. (2025) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-025-13814-z · Cited by 3
Plagge, E., & Jucks, R. (2025) · Journal of Media Psychology Theories Methods and Applications · doi:10.1027/1864-1105/a000499 · Cited by 2
Ada, M. B. (2025) · ACM Transactions on Computing Education · doi:10.1145/3777904 · Cited by 3
Yang, M., Luo, T., Herman, K., Li, B., Chappell, S., Glaser, N. J., & Jiang, S. (2025) · Journal of Computing in Higher Education · doi:10.1007/s12528-025-09476-y · Cited by 3
“It has emerged as an innovative and disruptive tool with the potential to per - sonalize learning and shift the traditional paradigm of teaching and learning (Baig & Yadegaridehkordi, 2024 ; Glaser, 2023 ; Tlili et al., 2023 ).”
Unlocking medical students’ adoption of AIGC tools: a multi-theory perspective
Zhou, Z., Li, Z., Li, Z., Wang, C., Qi, H., & Guo, L. (2025) · Humanities and Social Sciences Communications · doi:10.1057/s41599-025-06078-y · Cited by 2
Fadillah, M. A., Husin, M., Usmeldi, U., & Asrizal, A. (2026) · International Journal of Educational Reform · doi:10.1177/10567879261464157 · Cited by 3
Amin, M. A., Noh, M., & Kim, Y. S. (2026) · Quality & Quantity · doi:10.1007/s11135-026-02940-6 · Cited by 2
ChatGPT as an Assessment and Feedback Tool in Higher Education: Opportunities, Challenges and Ethics
Castillo, V. S., & Maldonado, E. (2025) · Lecture notes on data engineering and communications technologies · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-98476-1_18 · Cited by 2
Long, Y., & Yang, Y. (2025) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2025.1483964 · Cited by 2
Chaudhry, G. M., Gide, E., Yadegaridehkordi, E., & Tumpa, R. J. (2025) · Lecture notes in networks and systems · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-04728-1_9 · Cited by 2
Self-citationCharting the ChatGPT landscape: Insights from academic discourse on Twitter
Gonda, R., & Park, J. (2025) · Technology in Society · doi:10.1016/j.techsoc.2025.103199 · Cited by 3
The “TOP” drivers of academics’ adoption of ChatGPT in teaching
Haddoud, M. Y., Nowiński, W., Kuyini, A. B., Issa, J., & Dyszkiewicz-Konwińska, M. (2025) · Journal of Information Communication and Ethics in Society · doi:10.1108/jices-10-2025-0282 · Cited by 1
ChatGPT Satisfaction in Higher Education: Survey in a Private University in Malaysia
Zakaria, S. K., Sani, R. M., Rahman, N. I. A., Daud, M. N., & Saro, N. (2026) · Studies in systems, decision and control · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-10016-0_51 · Cited by 2
Xiao, W., & Lu, X. (2026) · Journal of Educational Computing Research · doi:10.1177/07356331261424733 · Cited by 1
“This is highly consistent with the results of our study: the primary role of AI assistants is to support students ’ personalized learning, timely assessment, and intelligent tutoring (Bahroun et al., 2023; Baig & Yadegaridehkordi, 2024).”
Faculty and Staff Education Program on Generative AI
Sugio, N., Akihiro, S., & Wada, N. (2025) · International Workshop on Artificial Intelligence and Education (WAIE) · doi:10.1109/waie67422.2025.11381140 · Cited by 1
Artificial Intelligence in Gifted STEAM Education
Milakis, E. D., Argyrakou, C. C., & Samala, A. D. (2026) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-2600-0101-1.ch008 · Cited by 2
Nakaziba, S., Abong, K., Namuguzi, M., Namugera, L., Tamale, D., Namukasa, S., Nayebare, D., Mwanzu, A., Namukwaya, C., & Sarki, A. (2026) · Discover Education · doi:10.1007/s44217-026-01308-0 · Cited by 2
Are university teachers ready for AI under anxiety? Self-efficacy mediation and gender moderation
Wu, H., Wenfu, L., He, J., & Wu, T. (2026) · Interactive Learning Environments · doi:10.1080/10494820.2026.2643795 · Cited by 3
“Universities are increasingly experimenting with large language models and other AI systems to support lesson planning, feedback generation, and administrative tasks (Baig & Yadegaridehkordi, 2024; T. Wang et al., 2023).”
Shehata, B., Huang, R., Kanwar, A. S., Liu, D., Zheng, L., & Liu, Z. (2026) · Smart Learning Environments · doi:10.1186/s40561-026-00449-x · Cited by 2
Moya, E. C., Sánchez, V. M. G., Checa-Domene, L., & López, M. A. R. (2026) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci16040591 · Cited by 1
Xu, Z. (2026) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-026-14013-0 · Cited by 1
“…as saving time, finishing assignments quickly, programming assistance, translating, and literature searching, is a main motivation for university students’ AI use (Abdaljaleel et al., 2024; Yurt & Kasarci, 2024; Baig & Yadegaridehkordi, 2024; Morell-Mengual et al., 2025; Black & Tomlinson, 2025).”
Rashid, S., & Malik, S. (2026) · Cogent Education · doi:10.1080/2331186x.2026.2661437 · Cited by 1
Jović, J. L., Domazet, D. S., Vesić, N. O., Ranđelović, B. M., & Simjanović, D. J. (2026) · Mathematics · doi:10.3390/math14101637 · Cited by 1
Ouaazki, A., Shibani, A., Knight, S., & Holzer, A. (2026) · Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2026.100608 · Cited by 1
Alvero, J. C., & Saldua, M. (2026) · Journal of interdisciplinary perspectives · doi:10.69569/jip.2026.150 · Cited by 3
Li, W., & Wang, S. (2026) · International Journal of Distance Education Technologies · doi:10.4018/ijdet.411905 · Cited by 2
Kazykhankyzy, L., Khalmatova, Z., Seıtova, M., Kılıç, E., & Çelik, H. E. (2026) · European Journal of Education · doi:10.1111/ejed.70746 · Cited by 1
Metadata
- Authors
- Baig, M. I., & Yadegaridehkordi, E.
- Affiliations
- University of Malaya (MY)
- Central Queensland University (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Yadegaridehkordi, Elaheh
- Venue
- International Journal of Educational Research
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2024
- Volume
- 127
- Pages
- 102411
- ISSN
- 0883-0355 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4400721580
- Semantic Scholar
- 160c16073d2a7c361947d885411108f5eb900506
- Cited by
- 208
- References
- 79
- Citations by year
- 2026: 126 · 2025: 76 · 2024: 6
- FWCI
- 11.98
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- International Journal of Educational Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Artificial Intelligence in Education
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › AI in Service Interactions
- Keywords
- ChatGPT, large language models, higher education, technology adoption, intention to use, technology acceptance, research trends, research limitations
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
