The DOI matches its Crossref record; 34 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Leveraging ChatGPT for Enhancing Critical Thinking Skills
Open accessAbstract
High Resolution Image Download MS PowerPoint Slide This article presents a study conducted at Georgia Gwinnett College (GGC) to explore the use of ChatGPT, a large language model, for fostering critical thinking skills in higher education. The study implemented a ChatGPT-based activity in introductory chemistry courses, where students engaged with ChatGPT in three stages: account setup and orientation, essay creation, and output revision and validation. The results showed significant improvements in students’ confidence to ask insightful questions, analyze information, and comprehend complex concepts. Students reported that ChatGPT provided diverse perspectives and challenged their current ways of thinking. They also expressed an increased utilization of ChatGPT to enhance critical thinking skills and a willingness to recommend it to others. However, challenges included low-quality student comments and difficulties in validating information sources. The study highlights the importance of comprehensive training for educators and access to reliable resources. Future research should focus on training educators in integrating ChatGPT effectively and ensuring student awareness of privacy and security considerations. In conclusion, this study provides valuable insights for leveraging AI technologies like ChatGPT to foster critical thinking skills in higher education.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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 source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“The findings support the notion that LLMs, such as ChatGPT, have the potential to enhance students' critical thinking skills, including their understanding of complex concepts, engagement in critical thinking, and construction of well-reasoned arguments (Guo, 2023;Kasneci et al., 2023;Yang et al., 2022).”
From Investigating the Use of chatGPT as a Tool for Enhancing Critical Thinking and Argumentation Skills in International Relations Debates among Undergraduate Students (2024) · cites this paper as Guo, 2023
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The study concluded that ChatGPT could play a transformative role in education, offering new ways for students to develop critical thinking skills.”
From Investigating the Use of chatGPT as a Tool for Enhancing Critical Thinking and Argumentation Skills in International Relations Debates among Undergraduate Students (2024) · cites this paper as Guo, 2023
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“These findings extend this perspective to the specific domain of international relations, demonstrating that AI effectively challenges students' existing knowledge structures and encourages deeper analytical thinking in this field.”
From Investigating the Use of chatGPT as a Tool for Enhancing Critical Thinking and Argumentation Skills in International Relations Debates among Undergraduate Students (2024) · cites this paper as Guo (2023)
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
ChatGPT for Good? On Opportunities and Challenges of Large Language Models for Education
Kasneci, E., Seßler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., Gasser, U., Groh, G., Günnemann, S., Hüllermeier, E., et al. (2023) · doi:10.35542/osf.io/5er8f · Cited by 7,552
ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education
Kasneci, E., Sessler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., Gasser, U., Groh, G., Günnemann, S., Hüllermeier, E., et al. (2023) · Learning and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274 · Cited by 7,326
Sallam, M. (2023) · Healthcare · doi:10.3390/healthcare11060887 · Cited by 3,126
GPT-3: Its Nature, Scope, Limits, and Consequences
Floridi, L., & Chiriatti, M. (2020) · Minds and Machines · doi:10.1007/s11023-020-09548-1 · Cited by 2,519
Shipley, S. D., & Shipley, S. D. (2007) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-84628-317-8_10 · Cited by 2,384
A SWOT analysis of ChatGPT: Implications for educational practice and research
Farrokhnia, M., Banihashem, S. K., Noroozi, O., & Wals, A. (2024) · Innovations in Education and Teaching International · doi:10.1080/14703297.2023.2195846 · Cited by 1,384
Examining Science Education in ChatGPT: An Exploratory Study of Generative Artificial Intelligence
Cooper, G. (2023) · Journal of Science Education and Technology · doi:10.1007/s10956-023-10039-y · Cited by 1,263
Halpern, D. F. (1998) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.53.4.449 · Cited by 1,118
The impact of artificial intelligence in medicine on the future role of the physician
Ahuja, A. S. (2019) · PeerJ · doi:10.7717/peerj.7702 · Cited by 789
On Defining Artificial Intelligence
Wang, P. (2019) · Journal of Artificial General Intelligence · doi:10.2478/jagi-2019-0002 · Cited by 740
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- Facione P. A., 2011, Insight Assessment, 1, 1
- American Chemical Society. Committee on professional training chemical information skills . https://www.acs.org/content/dam/acsorg/about/governance/committees/training/acsapproved/degreeprogram/chemical-information-skills.pdf (accessed October 2023).
- Shukla Shubhendu S., 2013, Int. J. Sci. Eng. Res., 1, 28
- 10.1177/109821400102200303 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Zhai, C., Wibowo, S., & Li, L. D. (2024) · Smart Learning Environments · doi:10.1186/s40561-024-00316-7 · Cited by 1,567
Developing evaluative judgement for a time of generative artificial intelligence
Bearman, M., Tai, J., Dawson, P., Boud, D., & Ajjawi, R. (2024) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2024.2335321 · Cited by 312
“Some university educators are actively exploring how to employ generative AI to develop learner capabilities such as critical thinking (Guo and Lee 2023).”
Student Interaction with ChatGPT Can Promote Complex Critical Thinking Skills
Suriano, R., Plebe, A., Acciai, A., & Fabio, R. A. (2025) · Learning and Instruction · doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2024.102011 · Cited by 208
Role of activity-based learning and ChatGPT on students' performance in education
Al Shloul, T., Mazhar, T., Abbas, Q., Iqbal, M., Ghadi, Y. Y., Shahzad, T., Mallek, F., & Hamam, H. (2024) · Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100219 · Cited by 173
Design and assessment of AI-based learning tools in higher education: a systematic review
Luo, J., Zheng, C., Yin, J., & Teo, H. (2025) · International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education · doi:10.1186/s41239-025-00540-2 · Cited by 275
Metadata
- Authors
- Guo, Y., & Lee, D.
- Affiliations
- Georgia Gwinnett College (US)
- STEM Academy, George Walton Comprehensive High School, 1590 Bill Murdock Road, Marietta, Georgia 30062, United States
- Corresponding author
- Guo, Ying
- ORCID
- Venue
- Journal of Chemical Education
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2023-11-20
- Volume
- 100
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 4876-4883
- ISSN
- 0021-9584 (ISSN-L)
- 1938-1328
- OpenAlex
- W4388817079
- Cited by
- 250
- References
- 33
- Citations by year
- 2026: 72 · 2025: 107 · 2024: 70 · 2023: 1
- FWCI
- 58.67
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Chemical Education (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Artificial Intelligence in Education
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Social Sciences › Education › Education and Critical Thinking Development
- Keywords
- ChatGPT, large language models, critical thinking skills, general chemistry, student self-confidence, 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
