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
Items 201–207 of 207
Rodriguez, J. A., Castro, J. D. P., Tapayuri, A. L. B., del Águila, Í. A., & Serrano, J. F. (2026) · Arcana Scientific Journal · doi:10.65305/asj.v4n1.2026.97
Bradley, L., Karlén, J., Segergren, N., von Feilitzen, M., & Johansson, D. (2026) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci16101722
Ramos, A. A. G. (2026) · Lecture notes in networks and systems · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-27544-8_39
ugli, Q. B. U. (2026) · Buxoro xalqaro universiteti ilmiy axborotnomasi · doi:10.67780/buxoro-xalqaro-universiteti-ilmiy-axborotnomasi.2026.2673c555
Beyond AI skills: Understanding generative AI engagement in graduate business education
Fernández, R. C., & Lazarte-Aguirre, A. (2026) · The International Journal of Management Education · doi:10.1016/j.ijme.2026.101568
Dehouche, N., & Wei, X. (2026) · Heliyon · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2026.e45640
Designing Digital Writing Pedagogy: An SFL-Informed Genre-Based Framework for Higher Education
Agustina, E., Munir, A., & Setiawan, S. (2026) · International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology (IJISRT) · doi:10.38124/ijisrt/26oct125
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