Cited by 103Education and Critical Thinking DevelopmentEducational Strategies and EpistemologiesArtificial Intelligence in Education

Implementing a Proposed Framework for Enhancing Critical Thinking Skills in Synthesizing AI-Generated Texts

Yusuf, Abdullahi, Bello, Shamsudeen, Pervin, Nasrin, Tukur, Abdullahi Kadage·2024·Thinking Skills and Creativity

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.tsc.2024.101619

Cites

57 of 57 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 58 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Yusuf, A., Bello, S., Pervin, N., & Tukur, A. K.
Affiliations
  • Sokoto State University (NG)
  • North South University (BD)
  • Usmanu Danfodiyo University (NG)
Corresponding author
Yusuf, Abdullahi
Venue
Thinking Skills and Creativity
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2024-09
Volume
53
Pages
101619
ISSN
1871-1871 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4401418292
Cited by
102
References
58
Citations by year
2026: 53 · 2025: 44 · 2024: 5
FWCI
127.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Thinking Skills and Creativity (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Education and Critical Thinking Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Strategies and Epistemologies
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
Keywords
critical thinking, generative AI, AI-generated text, academic integrity, cheating, student self-regulation, graduate students, personality traits, artificial intelligence in higher education

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