Between shortcut and ethics: navigating the use of artificial intelligence in academic writing among Indonesian doctoral students
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) has emerged as a transformative tool in academic writing, leveraging advanced algorithms and natural language processing to significantly improve efficiency, quality and productivity. This study investigates the use of AI tools among Indonesian doctoral students, with a particular focus on ethical standards and their impact on critical thinking. Adopting a phenomenological approach, the research involved 81 participants who provided data through open‐ended questionnaires, which were analysed thematically. The findings reveal that AI tools—such as ChatGPT, Deepl, Zotero, Scite AI, Connected Papers and Humata—are extensively used for generating ideas, brainstorming, data analysis, drafting, grammar correction, translation and literature management. While students acknowledge the advantages of AI in enhancing speed and efficiency, they express concerns regarding its ethical implications and potential impact on critical thinking. Key ethical issues include maintaining academic integrity, ensuring manual verification of AI‐generated content and avoiding overreliance. The study underscores that, although AI facilitates idea generation and technical tasks, it may undermine critical thinking and analytical skills. To uphold ethical standards and preserve intellectual rigour, the study advocates for a balanced use of AI, positioning it as a complement to, rather than a replacement for, critical scholarly practices.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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?
Indonesian doctoral students in a phenomenological study described strategic engagement with AI tools accompanied by genuine ethical concern about the boundaries of acceptable assistance.
“Indonesian doctoral students who participated in a phenomenological study on AI use in academic writing described strategic engagement with AI tools accompanied by genuine ethical concern about the boundaries of acceptable assistance”
From ARE AI DETECTORS FAIR TO EFL LEARNERS? A LIBRARY RESEARCH ON DETECTION BIAS AND ACADEMIC INTEGRITY (2026) · cites this paper as Pratiwi et al., 2025
Cites
Using thematic analysis in psychology
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006) · Qualitative Research in Psychology · doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa · Cited by 194,414 · see citing works
Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches
ภู่พันธ์, ศ. (2018) · วารสารวิธีวิทยาการวิจัย (Journal of Research Methodology: JRM) · Cited by 12,777 · see citing works
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 · see citing works
Sallam, M. (2023) · Healthcare · doi:10.3390/healthcare11060887 · Cited by 3,126 · see citing works
ChatGPT in higher education: considerations for academic integrity and student learning
(2023) · Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching · doi:10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.17 · Cited by 853 · see citing works
Dergaa, I., Chamari, K., Zmijewski, P., & Ben Saad, H. (2023) · Biology of Sport · doi:10.5114/biolsport.2023.125623 · Cited by 796 · see citing works
Flanagin, A., Bibbins-Domingo, K., Berkwits, M., & Christiansen, S. L. (2023) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2023.1344 · Cited by 420 · see citing works
Zhang, H., Lee, I., Ali, S., DiPaola, D., Cheng, Y., & Breazeal, C. (2023) · International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education · doi:10.1007/s40593-022-00293-3 · Cited by 396 · see citing works
Ryan, M., & Stahl, B. C. (2021) · Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society · doi:10.1108/jices-12-2019-0138 · Cited by 310 · see citing works
Guo, Y., & Wang, Y. (2024) · European Journal of Education · doi:10.1111/ejed.12812 · Cited by 274 · see citing works
ChatGPT and Academic Research: A Review and Recommendations Based on Practical Examples
Rahman, M. M., Terano, H. J. R., Rahman, M. N., Salamzadeh, A., & Rahaman, M. S. (2023) · Journal of Education Management and Development Studies · doi:10.52631/jemds.v3i1.175 · Cited by 249 · see citing works
Bozkurt, A. (2024) · Open Praxis · doi:10.55982/openpraxis.16.1.654 · Cited by 215 · see citing works
Wang, X., & Reynolds, B. L. (2024) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci14050496 · Cited by 198 · see citing works
The Use of Artificial Intelligence in Writing Scientific Review Articles
Kacena, M. A., Plotkin, L. I., & Fehrenbacher, J. C. (2024) · Current Osteoporosis Reports · doi:10.1007/s11914-023-00852-0 · Cited by 193 · see citing works
Wu, H., Wang, Y., & Wang, Y. (2024) · The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning · doi:10.19173/irrodl.v25i3.7708 · Cited by 173 · see citing works
Tang, A., Li, K., Kwok, K. O., Cao, L., Luong, S., & Tam, W. (2024) · Journal of Nursing Scholarship · doi:10.1111/jnu.12938 · Cited by 159 · see citing works
Liu, W., & Wang, Y. (2024) · European Journal of Education · doi:10.1111/ejed.12804 · Cited by 153 · see citing works
Nam, B. H., & Bai, Q. (2023) · International Journal of STEM Education · doi:10.1186/s40594-023-00452-5 · Cited by 147 · see citing works
Artificial intelligence: threat or asset to academic integrity? A bibliometric analysis
Rodrigues, M. M. M., Silva, R., Borges, A. P., Franco, M., & Oliveira, C. (2024) · Kybernetes · doi:10.1108/k-09-2023-1666 · Cited by 142 · see citing works
Lund, B. D., & Naheem, K. T. (2023) · Learned Publishing · doi:10.1002/leap.1582 · Cited by 122 · see citing works
Miao, J., Thongprayoon, C., Suppadungsuk, S., Garcia Valencia, O. A., Qureshi, F., & Cheungpasitporn, W. (2023) · Clinics and Practice · doi:10.3390/clinpract14010008 · Cited by 111 · see citing works
Best Practices for Using AI When Writing Scientific Manuscripts
Buriak, J. M., Akinwande, D., Artzi, N., Brinker, C. J., Burrows, C. J., Chan, W. C. W., Chen, C., Chen, X., Chhowalla, M., Chi, L., et al. (2023) · ACS Nano · doi:10.1021/acsnano.3c01544 · Cited by 106 · see citing works
Zielinski, C., Winker, M. A., Aggarwal, R., Ferris, L. E., Heinemann, M., Lapeña, J. F., Pai, S. A., Ing, E., & Citrome, L. (2023) · National Medical Journal of India · doi:10.21608/aeji.2023.282936 · Cited by 97 · see citing works
A publishing infrastructure for AI-assisted academic authoring
Pividori, M., & Greene, C. S. (2023) · doi:10.1101/2023.01.21.525030 · Cited by 52 · see citing works
Artificial intelligence-powered tools and academic writing: to use or not to use ChatGPT
Al-Sofi, B. (2024) · Saudi Journal of Language Studies · doi:10.1108/sjls-06-2024-0029 · Cited by 45 · see citing works
Ethical Considerations in the Age of Artificial Intelligence: Balancing Innovation and Social Values
Hastuti, R., & Syafruddin, S. (2023) · West Science Social and Humanities Studies · doi:10.58812/wsshs.v1i02.191 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
Safrai, M., & Orwig, K. E. (2024) · Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics · doi:10.1007/s10815-024-03089-7 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
Slimi, Z., & Villarejo-Carballido, B. (2024) · European Journal of Educational Research · doi:10.12973/eu-jer.13.4.1477 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
Artificial Intelligence Tools in Scholarly Publishing: Guidance for Academic Medicine Authors
DeVilbiss, M. B., & Roberts, L. W. (2023) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/acm.0000000000005261 · Cited by 23 · see citing works
Thomas, R., Bhosale, U., Shukla, K., & Kapadia, A. (2023) · Science Editing · doi:10.6087/kcse.294 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
Shofiah, N., Putera, Z. F., & Solichah, N. (2023) · Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research/Advances in social science, education and humanities research · doi:10.2991/978-2-38476-188-3_20 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
Schmidt, P. G., & Meir, A. J. (2023) · Notices of the American Mathematical Society · doi:10.1090/noti2838 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
International disparities in open access practices in the Earth Sciences
Pourret, O., Hedding, D. W., Ibarra, D. E., Irawan, D. E., Liu, H., & Tennant, J. (2021) · European Science Editing · doi:10.3897/ese.2021.e63663 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Latan, H., Jabbour, C. J. C., Jabbour, A. B. L. D. S., & Ali, M. (2021) · Journal of Business Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10551-021-04961-7 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
The African Journal Partnership Program’s guidance on the use of AI in scholarly publishing
Wright, C. Y., Lartey, M. Y., Khomsi, K., Peres, F., Yilma, D., Kigera, J. W. M., Flanagin, A., Gbakima, A., Ofori‐Adjei, D., Ernest, S. K., et al. (2024) · Ghana Medical Journal · doi:10.4314/gmj.v58i1.1 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Navigating Ethical Frameworks to Mitigate Academic Misconduct While Leveraging Generative AIPreprint
Uddın, M. M., & Abu, S. (2024) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-4607113/v1 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Nazarovets, S. (2024) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-981-97-4060-4_14 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
AI in Academic Writing: Ally or Foe?
William, F. K. A. (2024) · International Journal of Research Publications · doi:10.47119/ijrp1001481520246427 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Towards an AI policy framework in scholarly publishingPreprint
Lin, Z. (2023) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/jgck4 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
Himawan, K. K. (2021) · ANIMA Indonesian Psychological Journal · doi:10.24123/aipj.v36i2.4059 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Library clinic services in avoiding transaction in the predatory journal
Wiratningsih, R. (2017) · Library Management · doi:10.1108/lm-02-2017-0023 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Abdellatif, M. S., Alshehri, M. A., Lamouchi, A., Rahmath, M., & Nemt-allah, M. A. (2026) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1809174
“Additionally, machine translation platforms including Google Translate and DeepL facilitate multilingual academic communication (Barrett and Pack, 2023; Ou et al., 2024; Pratiwi et al., 2025), while AI-enhanced reference management and literature mapping tools like Scite AI, Connected Papers, and Litmaps complement tr…”
ARE AI DETECTORS FAIR TO EFL LEARNERS? A LIBRARY RESEARCH ON DETECTION BIAS AND ACADEMIC INTEGRITY
Patty, J., & Matatula, M. Y. (2026) · J-Shelves of Indragiri (JSI) · doi:10.61672/jsi.v8i1.3557
“Indonesian doctoral students who participated in a phenomenological study on AI use in academic writing described strategic engagement with AI tools accompanied by genuine ethical concern about the boundaries of acceptable assistance (Pratiwi et al., 2025).”
- Authors
- Pratiwi, H., Suherman, Hasruddin, & Ridha, M.
- Affiliations
- Yogyakarta State University (ID)
- Universitas Islam Negeri Antasari Banjarmasin (ID)
- Corresponding author
- Pratiwi, Hardiyanti
- Venue
- European Journal of Education
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2025-03-31
- Volume
- 60
- Issue
- 2
- ISSN
- 0141-8211 (ISSN-L)
- 1465-3435
- OpenAlex
- W4409049806
- Cited by
- 31
- References
- 41
- Citations by year
- 2026: 24 · 2025: 7
- FWCI
- 32.23
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- European Journal of Education (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Academic integrity and plagiarism
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Keywords
- artificial intelligence in academic writing, doctoral students, AI ethics, critical thinking, academic integrity, ChatGPT, AI-generated content verification, overreliance on AI
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
