Public opinions on ChatGPT: an analysis of reddit discussions by using sentiment analysis, topic modeling, and SWOT analysis
Open accessAbstract
ABSTRACT The sudden arrival of AI (Artificial Intelligence) into people's daily lives all around the world was marked by the introduction of ChatGPT, which was officially released on November 30, 2022. This AI invasion in our lives drew the attention of not only tech enthusiasts but also scholars from diverse fields, as its capacity extends across various fields. Consequently, numerous articles and journals have been discussing ChatGPT, making it a headline for several topics. However, it does not reflect most public opinion about the product. Therefore, this paper investigated the public's opinions on ChatGPT through topic modelling, Vader-based sentiment analysis and SWOT analysis. To gather data for this study, 202905 comments from the Reddit platform were collected between December 2022 and December 2023. The findings reveal that the Reddit community engaged in discussions related to ChatGPT, covering a range of topics including comparisons with traditional search engines, the impacts on software development, job market, and education industry, exploring ChatGPT's responses on entertainment and politics, the responses from Dan, the alter ego of ChatGPT, the ethical usage of user data as well as queries related to the AI-generated images. The sentiment analysis indicates that most people hold positive views towards this innovative technology across these several aspects. However, concerns also arise regarding the potential negative impacts associated with this product. The SWOT analysis of these results highlights both the strengths and pain points, market opportunities and threats associated with ChatGPT. This analysis also serves as a foundation for providing recommendations aimed at the product development and policy implementation in this paper.
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
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?
Concerns about AI replacing human interactions necessitate enhancing trust.
“Concerns about AI replacing human interactions necessitate enhancing trust (60).”
From Digital affordances of AI chatbots in nursing education: a systematic review of learning gains and gaps in the evidence (2026) · cites this paper as [60]
Section 5.3.3 reports concerns about AI replacing human jobs, not human interactions. The product-development discussion calls for restoring user trust, but in response to inaccurate and biased information—not concerns about replacing human interactions. No page numbers are available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.82)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
VADER: a parsimonious rule-based model for sentiment analysis of social media text
Hutto, C., & Gilbert, E. (2014) · Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media · doi:10.1609/icwsm.v8i1.14550 · Cited by 6,087 · see citing works
Kung, T. H., Cheatham, M., Medenilla, A., Sillos, C., De Leon, L., Elepaño, C., Madriaga, M., Aggabao, R., Diaz-Candido, G., Maningo, J., et al. (2023) · PLOS Digital Health · doi:10.1371/journal.pdig.0000198 · Cited by 4,115 · see citing works
ChatGPT is fun, but not an author
Thorp, H. H. (2023) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.adg7879 · Cited by 1,437 · see citing works
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 · see citing works
Gao, C. A., Howard, F. M., Markov, N. S., Dyer, E. C., Ramesh, S., Luo, Y., & Pearson, A. T. (2022) · doi:10.1101/2022.12.23.521610 · Cited by 1,099 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Another testing was made by Gao, C.A. et al. [14] to differentiate between human-generated and AI-generated written work by gathering ten research abstracts from medical journals and requesting ChatGPT to produce research abstracts corresponding to the titles and journals.”
BackgroundGao, C. A., Howard, F. M., Markov, N. S., Dyer, E. C., Ramesh, S., Luo, Y., & Pearson, A. T. (2023) · npj Digital Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41746-023-00819-6 · Cited by 1,099 · see citing works
ChatGPT User Experience: Implications for Education
Zhai, X. (2023) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4312418 · Cited by 935 · cited 1× · see citing works
“The study by Zhai, X. [7] reflects on the potential for AI applications to significantly impact academic literature by accelerating knowledge compilation and expression while reducing the reliance on human-driven procedures.”
BackgroundChatGPT listed as author on research papers: many scientists disapprove
Stokel-Walker, C. (2023) · Nature · doi:10.1038/d41586-023-00107-z · Cited by 868 · see citing works
Bang, Y., Cahyawijaya, S., Lee, N., Dai, W., Su, D., Wilie, B., Lovenia, H., Ji, Z., Yu, T., Chung, W., et al. (2023) · Proceedings of the 13th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing and the 3rd Conference of the Asia-Pacific Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.ijcnlp-main.45 · Cited by 682 · see citing works
Word Cloud Explorer: Text Analytics Based on Word Clouds
Heimerl, F., Lohmann, S., Lange, S., & Ertl, T. (2014) · Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) · doi:10.1109/hicss.2014.231 · Cited by 573 · see citing works
Is ChatGPT a General-Purpose Natural Language Processing Task Solver?
Qin, C., Zhang, A., Zhang, Z., Chen, J., Yasunaga, M., & Yang, D. (2023) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.emnlp-main.85 · Cited by 519 · see citing works
“What Can ChatGPT Do?” Analyzing Early Reactions to the Innovative AI Chatbot on Twitter
Taecharungroj, V. (2023) · Big Data and Cognitive Computing · doi:10.3390/bdcc7010035 · Cited by 489 · see citing works
ChatGPT: The End of Online Exam Integrity?
Susnjak, T. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2212.09292 · Cited by 370 · cited 1× · see citing works
“The study by Susnjak, T. [20] argued that since ChatGPT possesses the ability to demonstrate critical thinking abilities and generate highly authentic text with minimal guidance, it poses a significant risk to the integrity of online exams, particularly in higher education institutions where such…”
BackgroundBang, Y., Cahyawijaya, S., Lee, N., Dai, W., Su, D., Wilie, B., Lovenia, H., Ji, Z., Yu, T., Chung, W., et al. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2302.04023 · Cited by 337 · see citing works
How Close is ChatGPT to Human Experts? Comparison Corpus, Evaluation, and Detection
Guo, B., Zhang, X., Wang, Z., Jiang, M., Nie, J., Ding, Y., Yue, J., & Wu, Y. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2301.07597 · Cited by 318 · see citing works
Chatterjee, J., & Dethlefs, N. (2023) · Patterns · doi:10.1016/j.patter.2022.100676 · Cited by 263 · see citing works
Haque, M. U., Dharmadasa, I., Sworna, Z. T., Rajapakse, R. N., & Ahmad, H. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2212.05856 · Cited by 203 · see citing works
ChatGPT in education: a discourse analysis of worries and concerns on social media
Li, L., Ma, Z., Fan, L., Lee, S., Yu, H., & Hemphill, L. (2023) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-023-12256-9 · Cited by 201 · see citing works
DetectGPT: Zero-Shot Machine-Generated Text Detection using Probability Curvature
Mitchell, E., Lee, Y., Khazatsky, A., Manning, C. D., & Finn, C. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2301.11305 · Cited by 151 · see citing works
Are ChatGPT and AlphaCode going to replace programmers?
Castelvecchi, D. (2022) · Nature · doi:10.1038/d41586-022-04383-z · Cited by 138 · see citing works
Analyzing the User's Sentiments of ChatGPT Using Twitter Data
Korkmaz, A., Aktürk, C., & Talan, T. (2023) · Iraqi Journal for Computer Science and Mathematics · doi:10.52866/ijcsm.2023.02.02.018 · Cited by 64 · see citing works
Seeing ChatGPT Through Students’ Eyes: An Analysis of TikTok Data
Haensch, A., Ball, S. L., Herklotz, M., & Kreuter, F. (2023) · 2023 Big Data Meets Survey Science (BigSurv) · doi:10.1109/bigsurv59479.2023.10486710 · Cited by 62 · see citing works
Seeing ChatGPT Through Students' Eyes: An Analysis of TikTok Data
Haensch, A.-C., Ball, S., Herklotz, M., & Kreuter, F. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2303.05349 · Cited by 62 · see citing works
Computer Science & Information Technology
(2020) · doi:10.5121/csit.2020.1007 · Cited by 44 · see citing works
MGTBench: Benchmarking Machine-Generated Text DetectionPreprint
He, X., Shen, X., Chen, Z., Michael Backes, A., & Zhang, Y. (2023) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2303.14822 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
Feng, Y., Poralla, P., Dash, S., Li, K., Desai, V., & Meikang Qiu, A. (2023) · IEEE International Conference on Big Data Security on Cloud, IEEE International Conference on High Performance and Smart Computing, and IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Data and Security (BigDataSecurity/HPSC/IDS) · doi:10.1109/bigdatasecurity-hpsc-ids58521.2023.00046 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
ChatGPT in education: A discourse analysis of worries and concerns on social mediaPreprint
Li, L., Ma, Z., Fan, L., et al. (2023) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2305.02201 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
Evaluation on ChatGPT for Chinese Language Understanding
Li, L., Zhang, H., Li, C., You, H., & Cui, W. (2023) · Data Intelligence · doi:10.1162/dint_a_00232 · Cited by 17 · see citing works
Sentiment Analysis of Twitter Users’ Opinion Data Regarding the Use of ChatGPT in Education
Munggaran, J. P., Alhafidz, A. A., Taqy, M., Agustini, D. A. R., & Munawir, M. (2023) · Journal of Computer Engineering Electronics and Information Technology · doi:10.17509/coelite.v2i2.59645 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Is ChatGPT a General-Purpose Natural Language Processing Task Solver?
Qin, C., Zhang, A., Zhang, Z., Chen, J., Yasunaga, M., & Yang, D. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2302.06476
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Jiao, W., Wang, W., Huang, J., Wang, X., & Tu, Z.: Is ChatGPT A Good Translator? Yes, With GPT-4 As The Engine. arXiv preprint arXiv:2301.08745 (2023) · arXiv
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Wei, S., Wei, W., & Zou, G. (2026) · Frontiers in Medicine · doi:10.3389/fmed.2026.1832598 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
- Authors
- Naing, S. Z. S., & Udomwong, P.
- Affiliations
- Chiang Mai University (TH)
- Corresponding author
- Naing, Shwe Zin Su
- ORCID
- Udomwong, Piyachat
- Venue
- Data Intelligence
- Published
- 2024
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 344-374
- ISSN
- 2096-7004 (ISSN-L)
- 2641-435X
- OpenAlex
- W4393308654
- Cited by
- 15
- References
- 30
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 2
- FWCI
- 2.22
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Data Intelligence (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Sentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Social Sciences › General Social Sciences › Computational and Text Analysis Methods
- Keywords
- ChatGPT, public opinion, Reddit comments, sentiment analysis, topic modeling, SWOT analysis, large language models, AI ethics, user privacy, AI-generated images, AI policy
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
