Cited by 10Artificial Intelligence in EducationArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationAI in Service Interactions

Understanding the Adoption of ChatGPT in Higher Education: A Comparative Study with Insights from STEM and Business Students

Open access
Kubullek, Ann-Kathrin, Kumaç, Nadire, Dogangün, Aysegül·2024·Proceedings of Mensch und Computer 2024

Abstract

Since ChatGPT’s introduction, generative artificial intelligence (AI) has significantly influenced the media, technological innovation, and educational discourse. Its increasing importance, especially in academia, necessitates a detailed examination of the impact of AI on higher education, particularly on how it changes teaching and learning processes. This study therefore looks at the factors affecting students’ attitudes towards AI technologies in the university setting, with a particular focus on the differences between business and STEM programmes. Using a mixed methods approach, the study combines surveys and interviews to collect data on students’ perceptions, attitudes and experiences with generative AI technology in academia. The data collected is analysed both quantitatively and qualitatively to reveal significant trends and insights into the adoption and use of generative AI tools in the university environment. The main objective of the study is to shed light on the determinants that determine the varying degrees of AI adoption in different academic disciplines. The findings have the potential to inform the implementation of educational technology and assist in the development of strategies for the effective integration of generative AI tools to meet the different needs and preferences of students in a range of academic contexts.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3670653.3677507

Cites

7 of 7 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?

  • Discipline affiliation substantially affects adoption patterns, with STEM and business students showing heightened engagement due to technical exposure and the direct relevance of AI to their academic tasks.

    “Empirical research demonstrates that discipline affiliation substantially affects adoption patterns, with STEM and business students showing heightened engagement due to technical exposure and the direct relevance of AI to their academic tasks (Kubullek et al., 2024).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kubullek, A.-K., Kumaç, N., & Dogangün, A.
Affiliations
  • Ruhr West University of Applied Sciences (DE)
  • Ruhr West University of Applied Sciences, Germany
Venue
Proceedings of Mensch und Computer 2024
Publisher
ACM
Published
2024-09
Pages
684-689
OpenAlex
W4401880874
Cited by
10
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 3
FWCI
3.22
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Mensch und Computer (MuC) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in Service Interactions
Keywords
ChatGPT, generative AI, AI adoption in higher education, student attitudes toward AI, STEM students, business students, academic disciplines, AI in teaching and learning, educational technology integration

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