CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 19Technology Adoption and User BehaviourArtificial Intelligence in EducationAI in Service Interactions

ChatGPT and generation 'Z': a study on the usage rates of ChatGPT

Open access
Babu, Md. Asaduzzaman, Yusuf, Kazi Md., Eni, Lima Nasrin, Jaman, Shekh Md. Sahiduj, Sharmin, Mst. Rasna·2024·Social Sciences & Humanities Open
DOI 10.1016/j.ssaho.2024.101163
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The objective of this study is to determine the influence of Generation 'Z', students' perspectives, and adoption tendencies on the rate of utilization of chatGPT. Moreover, the study identified the primary elements that have the greatest influence on students' usage of ChatGPT. The authors do an empirical analysis using a structural equation model (SEM) through Amos version 24. This study exclusively focuses on university students, yet it might yield significant findings if we also include academics. The study discovered a direct relationship among all variables. The views of students, Generation Z, and adoption tendencies all have a positive impact on chatGPT usage rates. Generation 'Z' had the greatest impact on the utilization of chatGPT among university students out of all three independent variables. This study aims to elucidate the prevailing patterns in the utilization of technology, specifically chatGPT. The scope of this study was limited to students who were specifically enrolled in public universities. Future research could investigate the demographics of students attending private universities, specifically focusing on those in the twelfth grade and academicians.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ssaho.2024.101163

Cites

19 of 19 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 Psychosocial Equity Nexus is a temporary, integrative framework that can describe the dynamic interplay between equity conditions and psychological processes in the formation of GenAI use in higher education.

    “This review is a synthesis of the literature that suggests the Psychosocial Equity Nexus as a temporary, integrative framework that can describe the dynamic interplay between equity conditions and psychological processes in the formation of generative AI (GenAI) use in higher education (Babu et al., 2024).”

    From Mapping the impact of generative AI in higher education: A scoping review of psychological and equity dimensions. (2026) · cites this paper as Babu et al., 2024

  • Unequal access to AI is associated with differences in self-efficacy, confidence, and learning scores, indicating an AI generation gap among users.

    “unequal access to AI self-efficacy where different levels of confidence and learning scores are related to unequal access proves existence of AI generation gap among the users (Chan and Lee, 2023; Babu et al., 2024).”

    From Mapping the impact of generative AI in higher education: A scoping review of psychological and equity dimensions. (2026) · cites this paper as Babu et al., 2024

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Babu, M. A., Yusuf, K. M., Eni, L. N., Jaman, S. M. S., & Sharmin, M. R.
Affiliations
Hajee Mohammad Danesh Science and Technology University (BD)
Corresponding author
Babu, Md. Asaduzzaman
ORCID
Babu, Md. Asaduzzaman
Venue
Social Sciences & Humanities Open
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2024
Volume
10
Pages
101163
ISSN
2590-2911 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.ssaho.2024.101163
OpenAlex
W4403361964
Cited by
19
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 1
FWCI
7.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Social Sciences & Humanities Open (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • SSRN Electronic Journal (acceptedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in Service Interactions
Keywords
ChatGPT, generative AI adoption, Generation Z, university students, student perceptions, technology adoption, public universities

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