The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Generative AI in Education: A Bibliometric and Thematic Analysis
Abstract
This research paper uses the bibliometric analysis technique to find out the current stage and future scope of research in the field of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the education sector. Generative AI which is demonstrated by popular platforms like ChatGPT, has emerged as a transformative force. It has offered a personalized learning environment, adaptive instruction, and opportunities for creative exploration for the students. The analysis done in this research paper is based on the data collected from the Scopus database. It shows the publication trends, geographical distribution, citation patterns, and thematic clusters of published research articles and conference papers in the recent past. The findings of this study reveal that the countries like United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia have significant research contributions with research themes spanning student-centred learning, medical and science education, and computing and information systems education. This research paper has identified the direction for future research which focuses on ethical considerations, teacher training, interdisciplinary collaboration, and inclusiveness. This research provides valuable insights into the growing field of Generative AI in education and guides future endeavours aiming at optimizing the educational outcome with responsible AI integration into the educational sector.
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
“According to Vhatkar et al. (2024), GenAI fosters divergent thinking and supports multimodal creative tasks such as writing, music composition, and digital art, particularly in collaborative and project-based learning environments.”
From Generative AI in Design Thinking Pedagogy: Enhancing Creativity, Critical Thinking, and Ethical Reasoning in Higher Education (2025) · cites this paper as Vhatkar et al. (2024)
Citations
Cites
Still being checked.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Rana, V., Verhoeven, B., & Sharma, M. (2025) · Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice · doi:10.53761/tjse2f36 · Cited by 48
Vallejo, U. C., ROMANI, G., Inca, K. S. M., Zegel, I. D. E. S., Loza, G. E. S., Gonzaga, U. N. S. L., FRANCO, A. M., Gonzaga, U. N. S. L., Choque, M. K. O., & Gonzaga, U. N. S. L. (2025) · ESPACIOS · doi:10.48082/espacios-a25v46n03p02 · Cited by 32
Generative artificial intelligence in teacher training: a narrative scoping review
Kolhatin, A. O. (2025) · CTE Workshop Proceedings · doi:10.55056/cte.920 · Cited by 19
GenAI: a scientometric analysis of research trends using biblioshiny and VOSviewer
Pabreja, K., Verma, R., & Kumar, A. (2025) · Discover Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1007/s44163-025-00760-5 · Cited by 10
Assessing IS Learning Outcomes Effectively in the Age of GenAI
(2025) · Issues in Information Systems · doi:10.48009/2_iis_101 · Cited by 1
Metadata
- Authors
- Vhatkar, A., Pawar, V., & Chavan, P.
- Affiliations
- Dr. D.Y. Patil Vidyapeeth, Pune (IN)
- Venue
- 2024 8th International Conference on Computing, Communication, Control and Automation (ICCUBEA)
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2024-08-23
- Pages
- 1-6
- OpenAlex
- W4406263975
- Cited by
- 6
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 3
- FWCI
- 2.28
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Conference on Computing Communication Control and automation (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Artificial Intelligence in Education
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Social Sciences › Education › Educational Technology in Learning
- Keywords
- generative AI, artificial intelligence in education, ChatGPT, personalized learning, adaptive instruction, student-centered learning, medical education, science education, AI ethics, teacher professional development, research trends
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