The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
ChatGPT and academia on accounting assessments
Abstract
ChatGPT is considered a risk and an opportunity for academia. An area of threat in contemporary settings is whether it can become a student agent for assessments in academia. This study determines how ChatGPT can become a human agent for students on two financial accounting course units, multiple choice question assessments. The study provided five numerical-based and five narrative-based multiple choice questions. There were ten questions for the Introductory Financial Accounting and 10 for the Advanced Financial Accounting course units. ChatGPT received one question at a time requesting a solution. In the Introductory Financial Accounting section, ChatGPT produced incorrect answers because it incorrectly assumed the underlying assumptions contained in those questions. In Advanced Financial Accounting, ChatGPT presented incorrect answers because of the complexity of the task contained in those questions. ChatGPT demonstrated similar competencies in providing solutions to numerical-based and narrative-based questions. ChatGPT obtained the correct answers to sit in the 80th percentile in the Introductory Financial Accounting course unit assessment and the 50th percentile in the Advanced Financial course unit assessment. ChatGPT4 showed improved performance, with the 90th percentile for Introductory Financial Accounting and the 70th percentile for Advanced Financial Accounting. The findings indicate that the knowledge construct requires reflective thinking with ChatGPT in the e…
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
“The use of multimodal assess -ment techniques, including project-based assessments, live problem-solving activities, and peer evaluations, has also been identified as an effective strategy for fostering student accountability and reducing AI misuse [ 85, 103 ].”
From Redefining student assessment in AI-infused learning environments: a systematic review of challenges and strategies for academic integrity (2026) · cites this paper as [103]
Citations
Cites
Dwivedi, Y. K., Kshetri, N., Hughes, L., Slade, E. L., Jeyaraj, A., Kar, A. K., Baabdullah, A. M., Koohang, A., Raghavan, V., Ahuja, M., et al. (2023) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102642 · Cited by 4,584
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
Ray, P. P. (2023) · Internet of Things and Cyber-Physical Systems · doi:10.1016/j.iotcps.2023.04.003 · Cited by 2,463 · cited 1×
“But for now, ChatGPT has highlighted the benefits of open innovation for academia to facilitate student learning, where academia stands to benefit from decreased administrative, teaching, learning, and research costs by gaining access to vast knowledge (Ray, 2022).”
BackgroundRise of Machine Agency: A Framework for Studying the Psychology of Human–AI Interaction (HAII)
Sundar, S. S. (2020) · Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication · doi:10.1093/jcmc/zmz026 · Cited by 871
Unlocking the opportunities through ChatGPT Tool towards ameliorating the education system
Javaid, M., Haleem, A., Singh, R. P., Khan, S., & Khan, I. H. (2023) · BenchCouncil Transactions on Benchmarks, Standards and Evaluations · doi:10.1016/j.tbench.2023.100115 · Cited by 535 · cited 1×
“For example, it can provide per-sonalised learning by creating educational content that is accessible to meet students ’ interests, skills and learning goals (Javaid et al., 2023).”
BackgroundThe impact of ChatGPT on higher education
Dempere, J., Modugu, K., Hesham, A., & Ramasamy, L. K. (2023) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2023.1206936 · Cited by 519 · cited 1×
“It reached 100 million active users in two months, making it the fastest-growing consumer application (Dempere et al., 2023).”
BackgroundYu, H. (2023) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1181712 · Cited by 409 · cited 2×
“ChatGPT, a Generative Pre-trained Transformer, is a large language model developed by the Open Artificial Intelligence (OpenAI) company, the same organisation partnered with Microsoft and is part of the larger family of GPT (Yu, 2023).”
MethodChatGPT for Education and Research: A Review of Benefits and Risks
Sok, S., & Heng, K. (2023) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4378735 · Cited by 386
van de Pol, J., Volman, M., Oort, F., & Beishuizen, J. (2015) · Instructional Science · doi:10.1007/s11251-015-9351-z · Cited by 220
Research works printed but not linked: 31
- Abeysekera, 2006, Designing a Work-Integrated Learning (WIL) programme in an undergraduate accounting degree programme and its implications for the curriculum, Asia-Pac. J. Coop. Educ., 7, 7
- Abeysekera, 2021, Intellectual capital and knowledge management research towards value creation. from the past to the future, J. Risk Financ. Manag., 14, 238, 10.3390/jrfm14060238 · DOI
- Adams, 2015, Bloom’s taxonomy of cognitive learning objectives, J. Med. Libr. Assoc.: JMLA, 103, 152, 10.3163/1536-5050.103.3.010 · DOI · Paper page
- Almirall, 2010, Open versus closed innovation: a model of discovery and divergence, Acad. Manag. Rev., 35, 27
- Atkinson, 2005, Fostering social agency in multimedia learning: examining the impact of an animated agent's voice, Contemp. Educ. Psychol., 30, 117, 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2004.07.001 · DOI · Paper page
- Bandura, 2006, Toward a psychology of human agency, Perspect. Psychol. Sci., 10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00011.x · DOI · Paper page
- Barrie, 2006, Understanding what we mean by the generic attributes of graduates, High. Educ., 51, 215, 10.1007/s10734-004-6384-7 · DOI
- Billett, 2008, Learning throughout working life: a relational interdependence between personal and social agency, Br. J. Educ. Stud., 56, 39, 10.1111/j.1467-8527.2007.00394.x · DOI
- Deegan, C., 2019. Financial Accounting 9e. Australia: McGraw-Hill Education (Australia) Pty Limited.
- Dowker, 2016, Mathematics anxiety: what have we learned in 60 years?, Front. Psychol., 7
- Dreger, 1957, The identification of number anxiety in a college population, J. Educ. Psychol., 48, 344, 10.1037/h0045894 · DOI
- Edwards, 2011, Moral agency as enacted justice: a clinical and ethical decision-making framework for responding to health inequities and social injustice, Phys. Ther., 91, 1653, 10.2522/ptj.20100351.20 · DOI
- Everwijn, 1993, Ability- or competence-based education: bridging the gap between knowledge acquisition and ability to apply, High. Educ., 25, 425, 10.1007/BF01383845 · DOI
- Gardner, A. 2016. Agency Uncovered: Archaeological Perspectives on Social agency, Power, and Being Human. New York: Routledge.
- Haleem, 2022, An era of ChatGPT as a significant futuristic support tool: a study on features, abilities, and challenges, BenchCouncil Trans. Benchmarks, Stand. Eval., 2
- James, 2005, The global digital divide in the internet: developed countries constructs and third world realities, J. Inf. Sci., 10.1177/0165551505050788 · DOI
- Kim, 2023, ChatGPT impacts on academia, Proc. 2023 Int. Conf. Syst. Sci. Eng. (ICSSE), 422, 10.1109/ICSSE58758.2023.10227188 · DOI
- Korkmaz, 2022, Internet access and its role on educational inequality during the COVID-19 pandemic, Telecommun. Policy, 46, 10.1016/j.telpol.2022.102353 · DOI
- Lee, 2023, Can an artificial intelligence chatbot be the author of a scholarly article?, J. Educ. Eval. Health Prof., 20
- Lin, 2022, A review of AI-driven conversational chatbots implementation methodologies and challenges (1999–2022), Sustainability, 15, 4012, 10.3390/su15054012 · DOI
- Mellemvik, 1987, Functions of accounting — a discussion, Scand. J. Manag., 4, 101, 10.1016/0956-5221(88)90003-6 · DOI
- Misselbrook, 2013, Duty, kant, and deontology, Br. J. Gen. Pract., 63, 211, 10.3399/bjgp13X665422 · DOI
- Radford, 2018, Improving language understanding by generative pre-training, Preprint, 1
- Robertson, 1946, A note on the classical origin of ' circumstances ' in the medieval confessional, Stud. Philol., 43, 9
- Sangster, 2016, The genesis of double entry bookkeeping, Account. Rev., 91, 299, 10.2308/accr-51115 · DOI
- Sangster, 2022, The business needs that drove the emergence of double entry: in defense of pacioli, again … it is time to remove those dark glasses, Account. Hist. J., 49, 93, 10.2308/AAHJ-2021-022 · DOI
- Shafer, 2005, The power of business models, Bus. Horiz., 48, 199, 10.1016/j.bushor.2004.10.014 · DOI
- Socea, 2012, Managerial decision-making and financial accounting information, Procedia - Soc. Behav. Sci., 58, 47, 10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.977 · DOI
- Stone, 2021, Luca Pacioli, algebra, and double entry, De. Comput. - Rev. Esp. De. Hist. De. laContabilidad, 18, 31
- Van de Pol, 2011, Patterns of contingent teaching in teacher-student interaction, Learn. Instr., 21, 46, 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.10.004 · DOI
- Weygandt, J.J., Kimmel, P.D., Kieso, D.E., 2013. Financial Accounting. United Kingdom: Wiley.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Nikolic, S., Sandison, C., Haque, R., Daniel, S., Grundy, S., Belkina, M., Lyden, S., Hassan, G. M., & Neal, P. (2024) · Australasian Journal of Engineering Education · doi:10.1080/22054952.2024.2372154 · Cited by 98
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
Metadata
- Authors
- Abeysekera, I.
- ORCID
- Abeysekera, Indra
- Venue
- Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2024-03
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 100213
- ISSN
- 2199-8531
- Cited by
- 34
- References
- 14
- Language
- en
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
