Cited by 1,080Artificial Intelligence in EducationTeaching and Learning ProgrammingArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 71 of the 71 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 9 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

ChatGPT for Education and Research: Opportunities, Threats, and Strategies

Open access

Rahman, Md. Mostafizer, Watanobe, Yutaka·2023·Applied Sciences

DOI 10.3390/app13095783

Published version of a preprint

Open this paper in CoChat — free account Open PDF

Abstract

In recent years, the rise of advanced artificial intelligence technologies has had a profound impact on many fields, including education and research. One such technology is ChatGPT, a powerful large language model developed by OpenAI. This technology offers exciting opportunities for students and educators, including personalized feedback, increased accessibility, interactive conversations, lesson preparation, evaluation, and new ways to teach complex concepts. However, ChatGPT poses different threats to the traditional education and research system, including the possibility of cheating on online exams, human-like text generation, diminished critical thinking skills, and difficulties in evaluating information generated by ChatGPT. This study explores the potential opportunities and threats that ChatGPT poses to overall education from the perspective of students and educators. Furthermore, for programming learning, we explore how ChatGPT helps students improve their programming skills. To demonstrate this, we conducted different coding-related experiments with ChatGPT, including code generation from problem descriptions, pseudocode generation of algorithms from texts, and code correction. The generated codes are validated with an online judge system to evaluate their accuracy. In addition, we conducted several surveys with students and teachers to find out how ChatGPT supports programming learning and teaching. Finally, we present the survey results and analysis.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This paper examines ChatGPT’s opportunities and threats for education and research, with a focus on programming learning and teaching. It combines coding experiments on an online judge system with surveys of students and teachers, finding generally useful support but also accuracy, integrity, and over-reliance concerns.

Key findings

In code-generation experiments, ChatGPT’s generated code was correct about 95.83% of the time on a basic compiler and about 75% on the Aizu Online Judge (AOJ), with an average accuracy of 85.42%.
Among surveyed students, 78.8% had used ChatGPT for programming problems, 86.7% said its suggestions helped solve programming problems, and 92.9% found it useful for learning programming; most student satisfaction ratings were 4/5 (36.6%) or 5/5 (20%).
About 60% of surveyed teachers had used ChatGPT for teaching programming, but about 50% rated satisfaction as 3/5, suggesting limited trust; one teacher said ChatGPT “is still not perfect to answer some exams of my Java class.”
The paper identifies threats including cheating on online exams and assignments, diminished critical thinking, difficulty evaluating AI-generated text/code, ethical implications and bias, and blind reliance on generative AI; proposed strategies include clear assignment instructions, plagiarism detection, proctoring, comparing responses, and follow-up questions.

Methods

The authors conducted coding-related experiments with ChatGPT: code generation from problem descriptions, pseudocode generation, code correction/debugging, and code optimization.
For code generation, they used eight random “Algorithms and Data Structures” problems from AOJ, generated code three times per problem, and validated results on both a basic compiler and the AOJ platform.
They also conducted surveys with undergraduate, Master’s, and doctoral students and with teachers about ChatGPT’s support for programming learning and teaching; the paper reports percentages but not the total number of respondents.

Limitations

The paper states that experiments were conducted on ChatGPT during active development, so results may vary with new ChatGPT versions, different questions, different problem descriptions, and different solution codes for optimization.
The paper notes that although ChatGPT generated about 85.42% correct code on average, adjustments may still be necessary for error-free compilation and acceptance, and it failed an elementary counting task involving the digit “8.”
Evident from the text: the survey sample size is not reported, and the coding experiments are limited to eight AOJ problems with three generations each, which restricts generalizability.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/app13095783

Cites

71 of 71 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 9 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

Show all 33 claims

It may state two separate claims as one. 18
Probably not a substantial claim. 31

A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The suggestions proved to be interesting to the programmers and helpful in resolving the code errors.”
§ ChatGPT for Education and Research: Opportunities, Threats, and Strategies > 4.3. Error Checking and Debugging in Code
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The authors' assessment that ChatGPT's debugging suggestions were helpful reflects actual programmer benefit.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“it can be difficult to hold anyone accountable for the responses generated”
§ ChatGPT for Education and Research: Opportunities, Threats, and Strategies > Ethical implications and potential biases:
Strength:plain· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passes
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Rests on an assumption: ChatGPT generates responses without human intervention.
In the paper
“Cotton et al. [57] presented several strategies for recognizing texts from LLMs such as ChatGPT, including language inconsistencies, a lack of proper citations, factual errors, ambiguity, and poor context awareness.”
§ ChatGPT for Education and Research: Opportunities, Threats, and Strategies > -Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [57] Cotton, D.R., Cotton, P.A., and Shipway, J.R. (2023). Chatting and Cheating. Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT. Innov. Educ. Teach. Int., 1–12. source
Strength:plain· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passes
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The answers and texts generated by ChatGPT are becoming indistinguishable from human-generated answers and texts.”
§ ChatGPT for Education and Research: Opportunities, Threats, and Strategies > -Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [57] Cotton, D.R., Cotton, P.A., and Shipway, J.R. (2023). Chatting and Cheating. Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT. Innov. Educ. Teach. Int., 1–12. source
- Not checked yetcites [60] Elkins, 2020, Can GPT-3 pass a Writer’s turing test?, J. Cult. Anal.
- Not checked yetcites [61] Gao, C.A., Howard, F.M., Markov, N.S., Dyer, E.C., Ramesh, S., Luo, Y., and Pearson, A.T. (2022). Comparing scientific abstracts generated by ChatGPT to original abstracts using an artificial intelligence output detector, plagiarism detector, and blinded human reviewers. bioRxiv. source
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In short, ChatGPT threatens the fairness and validity of online exams and assignments.”
§ ChatGPT for Education and Research: Opportunities, Threats, and Strategies > 6. Threats and Strategies
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Rests on an assumption: ChatGPT can generate human-like text for academic topics.

40 of 40

The paper relies on this without support.
The eight randomly selected AOJ problems and three code generations per problem are representative of ChatGPT's general code-generation performance for programming learning.
“We leveraged the problem descriptions of eight random problems and generated codes three times for each problem on the basis of the same description.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The survey respondents are representative of students and teachers who use ChatGPT for programming learning and teaching.
“We conducted a comprehensive survey on how ChatGPT supports programming learning and teaching among undergraduate, Master's, and doctoral students and teachers.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Students' self-reported helpfulness of ChatGPT suggestions reflects actual improvement in solving programming problems.
“By asking the question “Do ChatGPT's suggestions help you in solving programming problems?”,we tried to assess how ChatGPT suggestions help students.We found that about 86.7% of the students answered “Yes”.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The authors' judgment that ChatGPT-generated explanations and pseudocode are easy to understand and useful reflects learners' actual understanding.
“The results demonstrate that ChatGPT can generate easy-to-understand explanations and pseudocode that are useful for learners to understand algorithmic concepts.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The authors' assessment that ChatGPT's debugging suggestions were helpful reflects actual programmer benefit.
“The suggestions proved to be interesting to the programmers and helpful in resolving the code errors.”
The paper relies on this without support.
ChatGPT can generate human-like text for academic topics.
“As ChatGPT can generate human-like text for academic topics”
The paper relies on this without support.
LLMs rely heavily on training data, and when the data contain biases or anomalies, it could lead to unfair results.
“Typically, LLMs rely heavily on training data, and when the data contain biases or anomalies, it could lead to unfair results.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The internal mechanisms and processes of ChatGPT are not sufficiently open and transparent to users about how they work.
“Furthermore, the internal mechanisms and processes are not sufficiently open and transparent to users about how they work.”
The paper relies on this without support.
ChatGPT generates responses without human intervention.
“Because ChatGPT generates responses without human intervention”

9 of 9

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

Table 1 names a different lead author for reference 25
Minor
Table 1 attributes reference 25 to Simon et al., while the reference list identifies Frieder as its lead author.

1 of 1

1 retracted

Retracted: Chat With ChatGPT on Intelligent Vehicles: An IEEE TIV Perspective
Du, H., Teng, S., Chen, H., Ma, J., Wang, X., Gou, C., Li, B., Ma, S., Miao, Q., Na, X., et al. (2023) · IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Vehicles · doi:10.1109/tiv.2023.3253281 · Cited by 164 · cited 1×
“Moreover, ChatGPT has recently been applied to tasks in different domains such as software engineering [36], medical education [37], data augmentation [38], ﬁfth industrial revolution [39], code generation [40], intelligent vehicles [41], and solving AI tasks [42].”
Method
Retracted
Attention Is All You Need
Vaswani, A., Shazeer, N., Parmar, N., Uszkoreit, J., Jones, L., Gomez, A. N., Kaiser, L., & Polosukhin, I. (2017) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1706.03762 · Cited by 120,404 · cited 1×
“Therefore, the Transformer architecture was introduced [4] to alleviate this problem.”
Method
Language Models are Few-Shot Learners
Brown, T. B., Mann, B., Ryder, N., Subbiah, M., Kaplan, J., Dhariwal, P., Neelakantan, A., Shyam, P., Sastry, G., Askell, A., et al. (2020) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2005.14165 · Cited by 23,372 · cited 1×
“Generative pretrained transformer (GPT)-3 is a large language model (LLM) based on the Transformer architecture [5,6] that has achieved signiﬁcant success in NLP tasks.”
Background
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 · cited 3×
“Furthermore, several studies [9–12 Frieder et al. [25] tested the mathematical capabilities of ChatGPT on GHOSTS and handcrafted datasets.”
BackgroundMethod
Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback
Ouyang, L., Wu, J., Jiang, X., Almeida, D., Wainwright, C. L., Mishkin, P., Zhang, C., Agarwal, S., Slama, K., Ray, A., et al. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2203.02155 · Cited by 4,208 · cited 2×
“Finally, the resulting model is called InstructGPT [8].”
BackgroundMethod
Performance of ChatGPT on USMLE: Potential for AI-Assisted Medical Education Using Large Language Models
Kung, T. H., Cheatham, M., ChatGPT, Medenilla, A., Sillos, C., De Leon, L., Elepaño, C., Madriaga, M., Aggabao, R., Diaz-Candido, G., et al. (2022) · doi:10.1101/2022.12.19.22283643 · Cited by 4,115
Performance of ChatGPT on USMLE: Potential for AI-assisted medical education using large language models
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 · cited 1×
“Kung et al. [26] evaluated the performance of ChatGPT on the US Medical Licensing Exam, which includes three exams: Step 1, Step 2CK, and Step 3.”
Background
Chatting and cheating: Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT
Cotton, D. R. E., Cotton, P. A., & Shipway, J. R. (2024) · Innovations in Education and Teaching International · doi:10.1080/14703297.2023.2190148 · Cited by 3,087 · cited 3×
“Students can be given clear instructions on assignments and online exams on how to structure their assignments and answer their questions online [57].”
Background
Chatting and Cheating. Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT
Cotton, D., Cotton, P., & Shipway, J. R. (2023) · doi:10.35542/osf.io/mrz8h · Cited by 3,079

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 58 references

Research works printed but not linked: 3

Rahman, M.M. (2022). Data Analysis and Code Assessment Using Machine Learning Techniques for Programming Activities. [Ph.D. Thesis, The University of Aizu].
Avila-Chauvet, L., Mejía, D., and Acosta Quiroz, C.O. (2023). Chatgpt as a Support Tool for Online Behavioral Task Programming. SSRN, Available online: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4329020.
Jiao, W., Wang, W., Huang, J.t., Wang, X., and Tu, Z. (2023). Is ChatGPT a good translator? A preliminary study. arXiv.

Sorted by citations

A survey on large language model (LLM) security and privacy: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly
Yao, Y., Duan, J., Xu, K., Cai, Y., Sun, Z., & Zhang, Y. (2024) · High-Confidence Computing · doi:10.1016/j.hcc.2024.100211 · Cited by 1,083
Shaping the Future of Education: Exploring the Potential and Consequences of AI and ChatGPT in Educational Settings
Grassini, S. (2023) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci13070692 · Cited by 1,048
“…authors have attempted to evaluate possible possibilities and problems related to the advent of AI technologies in the sphere of education [11,12,23–25], and the UNESCO has also published a report attempting to discuss the main challenges and the emerging ethical implications of AI in higher…”
Background
Challenges and Opportunities of Generative AI for Higher Education as Explained by ChatGPT
Michel-Villarreal, R., Vilalta-Perdomo, E., Salinas-Navarro, D. E., Thierry-Aguilera, R., & Gerardou, F. S. (2023) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci13090856 · Cited by 877
“In line with previou studi s, th resul s revealed t t ChatGPT h s the potential to revolutionize education in different ways [3,12,14,34].”
BackgroundResultInfluential
The impact of Generative AI (GenAI) on practices, policies and research direction in education: a case of ChatGPT and Midjourney
Chiu, T. K. F. (2024) · Interactive Learning Environments · doi:10.1080/10494820.2023.2253861 · Cited by 852
“Many educators and policymakers have questions about what GenAI is capable of, and what its limitations are (Rahman & Watanobe, 2023).”
Transforming Education: A Comprehensive Review of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Educational Settings through Bibliometric and Content Analysis
Bahroun, Z., Anane, C., Ahmed, V., & Zacca, A. (2023) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su151712983 · Cited by 784
Beware of metacognitive laziness: Effects of generative artificial intelligence on learning motivation, processes, and performance
Fan, Y., Tang, L., Le, H., Shen, K., Tan, S., Zhao, Y., Shen, Y., Li, X., & Gašević, D. (2025) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/bjet.13544 · Cited by 805
Impact of the Implementation of ChatGPT in Education: A Systematic Review
Montenegro-Rueda, M., Fernández-Cerero, J., Fernández-Batanero, J. M., & López-Meneses, E. (2023) · Computers · doi:10.3390/computers12080153 · Cited by 509
“Rahman and Watanobe (2023) [19] Quantitative Bangladesh, Asia • Very useful as a support for educational work.”
BackgroundInfluential
Future research recommendations for transforming higher education with generative AI
Chiu, T. K. F. (2024) · Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100197 · Cited by 511
Artificial intelligence in teaching and teacher professional development: A systematic review
Tan, X., Cheng, G., & Ling, M. H. (2025) · Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100355 · Cited by 420
Do you have AI dependency? The roles of academic self-efficacy, academic stress, and performance expectations on problematic AI usage behavior
Zhang, S., Zhao, X., Zhou, T., & Kim, J. H. (2024) · International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education · doi:10.1186/s41239-024-00467-0 · Cited by 409
“Using ChatGPT allows students to obtain quick and direct answers by simply asking questions, which may enhance their academic performance in the short term (Alshater, 2022; Rahman & Watanobe, 2023).”
Method
AI literacy and its implications for prompt engineering strategies
Knoth, N., Tolzin, A., Janson, A., & Leimeister, J. M. (2024) · Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100225 · Cited by 368
“…ChatGPT ’ s, capacity to enrich the educational experience by supporting a wide range of learning methodologies, including adaptive learning, personalized learning, and self-directed learning (Rahman & Watanobe, 2023; Rasul et al., 2023; Ruwe & Mayweg-Paus, 2023; Zhu, Sun, Luo, Li, & Wang, 2023).”
Background
Augmented intelligence in programming learning: Examining student views on the use of ChatGPT for programming learning
Yilmaz, R., & Karaoglan Yilmaz, F. G. (2023) · Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans · doi:10.1016/j.chbah.2023.100005 · Cited by 344
RETRACTED ARTICLE: The effect of ChatGPT on students’ learning performance, learning perception, and higher-order thinking: insights from a meta-analysis
Wang, J., & Fan, W. (2025) · Humanities and Social Sciences Communications · doi:10.1057/s41599-025-04787-y · Cited by 322
“Conversely, other scholars have argued that ChatGPT hinders students ’ learning performance, learning perception, and higher-order thinking (Hays et al. 2024; Rahman and Watanobe, 2023).”
Retracted
Perceptions and usage of AI chatbots among students in higher education across genders, academic levels and fields of study
Stöhr, C., Ou, A. W., & Malmström, H. (2024) · Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100259 · Cited by 319
“…students in acquiring information, answering questions (Chen et al., 2023), facilitating group discussions, and resolving problems instantaneously (Rahman & Watanobe, 2023), thereby enriching students ’ learning experiences, offering personalized support, and potentially boosting academic…”
Background
Future of education in the era of generative artificial intelligence: Consensus among Chinese scholars on applications of ChatGPT in schools
Liu, M., Ren, Y., Nyagoga, L. M., Stonier, F., Wu, Z., & Yu, L. (2023) · Future in Educational Research · doi:10.1002/fer3.10 · Cited by 267
Artificial Intelligence Alone Will Not Democratise Education: On Educational Inequality, Techno-Solutionism and Inclusive Tools
Bulathwela, S., Pérez-Ortiz, M., Holloway, C., Cukurova, M., & Shawe-Taylor, J. (2024) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su16020781 · Cited by 269
“Recent experiments show the viability of using LLMs as the base for building intelligent educational systems capable of question generation, question answering, learning content generation, and summarisation [41,45,106,107].”
Higher education students’ perceptions of ChatGPT: A global study of early reactions
Ravšelj, D., Keržič, D., Tomaževič, N., Umek, L., Brezovar, N., A. Iahad, N., Abdulla, A. A., Akopyan, A., Aldana Segura, M. W., AlHumaid, J., et al. (2025) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0315011 · Cited by 376
Drivers and Consequences of ChatGPT Use in Higher Education: Key Stakeholder Perspectives
Hasanein, A. M., & Sobaih, A. E. E. (2023) · European Journal of Investigation in Health Psychology and Education · doi:10.3390/ejihpe13110181 · Cited by 366
“…reliance on biased data [6], the limitation of knowledge to information available up to 2021 [7], relying on inaccurate or fabricated content, including ﬁctitious citations [8], and over-reliance on ChatGPT might have negative impact students’ critical thinking and problem-solving abilities [9].”
BackgroundInfluential
Performing an Inductive Thematic Analysis of Semi-Structured Interviews With a Large Language Model: An Exploration and Provocation on the Limits of the Approach
Paoli, S. D. (2023) · Social Science Computer Review · doi:10.1177/08944393231220483 · Cited by 357
“Others focused on the application of ChatGPT such as in marketing research (Peres et al., 2023), or education (Rahman & Watanobe, 2023).”
Method
Performance of ChatGPT Across Different Versions in Medical Licensing Examinations Worldwide: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Liu, M., Okuhara, T., Chang, X., Shirabe, R., Nishiie, Y., Okada, H., & Kiuchi, T. (2024) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/60807 · Cited by 241
Student perceptions of ChatGPT use in a college essay assignment: Implications for learning, grading, and trust in artificial intelligence
Tossell, C. C., Tenhundfeld, N. L., Momen, A., Cooley, K., & de Visser, E. J. (2024) · IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies · doi:10.1109/tlt.2024.3355015 · Cited by 218
“Beyond support in the traditional educational settings, there have been several applications of AI-based tools to enhance personalized learning, better support students with disabilities and inclusivity, and help to make teaching and grading more efﬁcient [10].”
Background
The Impact of Adaptive Learning Technologies, Personalized Feedback, and Interactive AI Tools on Student Engagement: The Moderating Role of Digital Literacy
Yaseen, H., Mohammad, A. S., Ashal, N. M., Abusaimeh, H., Ali, A. A. A., & Sharabati, A. A. (2025) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su17031133 · Cited by 392
Empowering education development through AIGC: A systematic literature review
Chen, X., Hu, Z., & Wang, C. (2024) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-024-12549-7 · Cited by 232
Educational Applications of the ChatGPT AI System: A Systematic Review Research
İPEK, Z. H., Gözüm, A. İ. C., Papadakis, S., & Kalogiannakis, M. (2023) · Educational Process International Journal · doi:10.22521/edupij.2023.123.2 · Cited by 215
“…can provide detailed answers to students preparing for tests and exams, providing them with guidance on exam scope and the necessary course content to be learned (Choi et al., 2023; Duong & Solomon, 2023; Huh, 2023; Nisar & Aslam, 2023; Qadir, 2022; Rahman & Watanobe, 2023; Sok & Heng, 2023).”
Background
Detection of GPT-4 generated text in higher education: Combining academic judgement and software to identify generative AI tool misuse
Perkins, M., Roe, J., Postma, D., McGaughran, J., & Hickerson, D. (2024) · Journal of Academic Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10805-023-09492-6 · Cited by 234
“This advancement in AI has sparked serious ethical concerns related to the potential misrepresentation of authorship and authenticity of academic work (Cotton et al., 2023 ; Perkins, 2023; Rahman & Watanobe, 2023 ; Rodgers et al., 2023 ; Rudolph et al., 2023).”
Mapping the global evidence around the use of ChatGPT in higher education: A systematic scoping review
Ansari, A. N., Ahmad, S., & Bhutta, S. M. (2024) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-023-12223-4 · Cited by 198
“The studies reported that teachers utilize ChatGPT for various purposes, including personal and professional learning, improving teaching practices and student outcomes, assessing students’ learning, and academic research (Annuš, 2023; Mhlanga, 2023; Rahman & Watanobe, 2023; Seetharaman, 2023).”
An Examination of the Use of Large Language Models to Aid Analysis of Textual Data
(2024) · doi:10.1177/16094069241231168 · Cited by 227
Decoding ChatGPT: A taxonomy of existing research, current challenges, and possible future directions
Sohail, S. S., Farhat, F., Himeur, Y., Nadeem, M., Madsen, D. Ø., Singh, Y., Atalla, S., & Mansoor, W. (2023) · Journal of King Saud University - Computer and Information Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.jksuci.2023.101675 · Cited by 192
“Rahman and Watanobe (2023) has experimentally shown that ChatGPT can be used to solve both technical problems, such as engineering and computer programming, and non-technical problems, such as language and literature.”
AI Chatbots in Chinese higher education: adoption, perception, and influence among graduate students—an integrated analysis utilizing UTAUT and ECM models
Tian, W., Ge, J., Zhao, Y., & Zheng, X. (2024) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1268549 · Cited by 258
Would ChatGPT-facilitated programming mode impact college students’ programming behaviors, performances, and perceptions? An empirical study
Sun, D., Boudouaia, A., Zhu, C., & Li, Y. (2024) · International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education · doi:10.1186/s41239-024-00446-5 · Cited by 190
“In their study, Rahman and Watanobe (2023) highlight the following drawbacks of ChatGPT in programming education: a lack of capability in reasoning through simple logic, potential biases, difficulties in complex logical reasoning, and an inability to process visual information.”
Background
A systematic literature review of empirical research on ChatGPT in education
Albadarin, Y., Saqr, M., Pope, N., & Tukiainen, M. (2024) · Discover Education · doi:10.1007/s44217-024-00138-2 · Cited by 191
Unveiling the landscape of generative artificial intelligence in education: A comprehensive taxonomy of applications, challenges, and future prospects
Samala, A. D., Rawas, S., Wang, T., Reed, J. M., Kim, J., Howard, N.-J., & Ertz, M. (2025) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-024-12936-0 · Cited by 229
“If the instructions are adequate, ChatGPT can produce abstracts for fictional scientific papers (Fergus et al., 2023; Rahman & Watanobe, 2023; Sedaghat, 2023).”
The impact of generative AI on academic integrity of authentic assessments within a higher education context
Kofinas, A. K., Tsay, C. H., & Pike, D. (2025) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/bjet.13585 · Cited by 207
AI to the rescue: Exploring the potential of ChatGPT as a teacher ally for workload relief and burnout prevention
Hashem, R., Ali, N., El Zein, F., Fidalgo, P., & Abu Khurma, O. (2023) · Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning · doi:10.58459/rptel.2024.19023 · Cited by 173
“…ChatGPT can swiftly generate lesson plans and educational materials of high quality that are customised to address the particularities of each class and student which is also confirmed by previous studies (Farrokhnia et al., 2023; Kasneci et al., 2023; Qadir, 2022; Rahman & Watanobe, 2023).”
Applying large language models and chain-of-thought for automatic scoring
Lee, G.-G., Latif, E., Wu, X., Liu, N., & Zhai, X. (2024) · Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100213 · Cited by 186
Bridging technology and pedagogy from a global lens: Teachers’ perspectives on integrating ChatGPT in English language teaching
Al-khresheh, M. H. (2024) · Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100218 · Cited by 333
ChatGPT—A Challenging Tool for the University Professors in Their Teaching Practice
Kiryakova, G., & Angelova, N. (2023) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci13101056 · Cited by 171
Supporting Teachers’ Professional Development with Generative AI: The Effects on Higher Order Thinking and Self-Efficacy
Lu, J., Zheng, R., Gong, Z., & Xu, H. (2024) · IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies · doi:10.1109/tlt.2024.3369690 · Cited by 144
“ThereisnodoubtthatAIGChasalso evokedpolarizedreactionsineducation,havingasigniﬁcant andfar-reachingimpactonschooleducationinashortperiod [7].”
Assessing AI adoption in developing country academia: A trust and privacy-augmented UTAUT framework
Rana, M. M., Siddiqee, M. S., Sakib, M. N., & Ahamed, M. R. (2024) · Heliyon · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e37569 · Cited by 143
ChatGPT in higher education - a synthesis of the literature and a future research agenda
Bhullar, P. S., Joshi, M., & Chugh, R. (2024) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-024-12723-x · Cited by 139
“Achieving a bal - ance between using AI and the advantages of human guidance and mentorship is a persistent challenge that requires attention (Neumann et al., 2023 ; Rahman et al., 2023 ).”
ChatGPT in Teaching and Learning: A Systematic Review
Ali, D., Fatemi, Y., Boskabadi, E., Nikfar, M., Ugwuoke, J., & Ali, H. (2024) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci14060643 · Cited by 146
Evaluation of ChatGPT’s Real-Life Implementation in Undergraduate Dental Education: Mixed Methods Study
Kavadella, A., da Silva, M. A. D., Kaklamanos, E. G., Stamatopoulos, V., & Giannakopoulos, K. (2023) · JMIR Medical Education · doi:10.2196/51344 · Cited by 175
“…perspective, students using LLMs have the potential to develop new competencies including 21st-century soft skills, such as self-reflection abilities, problem-solving skills, creative and critical thinking, and collaboration, thus becoming motivated and autonomous learners [3,4,16,33,49].”
Influential
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
“Students can collaborate and engage in communication through the utilization of ChatGPT, hence customizing their learning experience (Rahman et al., 2023).”
Background
A Study on ChatGPT-4 as an Innovative Approach to Enhancing English as a Foreign Language Writing Learning
Boudouaia, A., Mouas, S., & Kouider, B. (2024) · Journal of Educational Computing Research · doi:10.1177/07356331241247465 · Cited by 186
“According to Rahman and Watanobe (2023), ChatGPT-4 can generate human-like text based on the input it receives.”
The Educational Affordances and Challenges of ChatGPT: State of the Field
Crompton, H., & Burke, D. (2024) · TechTrends · doi:10.1007/s11528-024-00939-0 · Cited by 141
“One of the advantages of ChatGPT is that it can be used across all learner levels, from primary grades through higher education (Rahman & Watanobe, 2023).”
The future of grading programming assignments in education: The role of ChatGPT in automating the assessment and feedback process
Jukiewicz, M. (2024) · Thinking Skills and Creativity · doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2024.101522 · Cited by 132
Gemini versus ChatGPT: applications, performance, architecture, capabilities, and implementation
Rane, N., Choudhary, S., & Rane, J. (2024) · Journal of Applied Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.48185/jaai.v5i1.1052 · Cited by 172
ChatGPT in Learning: Assessing Students’ Use Intentions through the Lens of Perceived Value and the Influence of AI Literacy
Al-Abdullatif, A. M., & Alsubaie, M. A. (2024) · Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.3390/bs14090845 · Cited by 126
“Launched as a successor to earlier models, ChatGPT is designed to understand and generate human-like text based on the vast amount of information it has been trained on [3,4].”
Opportunities, Challenges, and Strategies for Using ChatGPT in Higher Education: A Literature Review
Sok, S., & Heng, K. (2024) · Journal of Digital Educational Technology · doi:10.30935/jdet/14027 · Cited by 120
“Given that ChatGPT could be leveraged to produce written assignments that are indistinguishable from humans (Rahman & Watanobe, 2023; Thurzo et al., 2023), it is hard, if not impossible, for lecturers to identify whether the work is written by students or ChatGPT.”
Background
Generative Artificial Intelligence in Education, Part One: the Dynamic Frontier
Hsu, Y.-C., & Ching, Y.-H. (2023) · TechTrends · doi:10.1007/s11528-023-00863-9 · Cited by 118
“…and smooth performance while interacting with users, people of all pro-fessions have leveraged this software tool for various tasks and purposes involving text generation, such as composing simple to relative complex textual codes of computer programming (professional) (Rahman & Watanobe, 2023).”
Method
Decoding Academic Integrity Policies: A Corpus Linguistics Investigation of AI and Other Technological Threats
(2023) · doi:10.1057/s41307-023-00323-2 · Cited by 115
“5 and GPT-4 models, which has been the subject of extensive discussion regarding its potential influence on academic integrity (Cotton et al. 2023; Perkins 2023; Rahman and Watanobe 2023; Rudolph et al. 2023; Uzun 2023).”
The Generative AI Landscape in Education: Mapping the Terrain of Opportunities, Challenges, and Student Perception
Ahmed, Z., Shanto, S. S., Rime, M. H. K., Morol, M. K., Fahad, N., Hossen, M. J., & Abdullah-Al-Jubair, M. (2024) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2024.3461874 · Cited by 123
“Several works have been depicted, providing an overall synopsis of the impact of ChatGPT in education [10], [11], [12].”
BackgroundInfluential
Scaffolding Computational Thinking With ChatGPT
Liao, J., Zhong, L., Zhe, L., Xu, H., Liu, M., & Xie, T. (2024) · IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies · doi:10.1109/tlt.2024.3392896 · Cited by 144
A systematic review of the early impact of artificial intelligence on higher education curriculum, instruction, and assessment
Liang, J., Stephens, J. M., & Brown, G. T. L. (2025) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2025.1522841 · Cited by 112
“Thus, AI has been found to bring beneﬁts to HE curriculum, instruction, and assessment, including generating new materials, alleviating faculty workloads, and automating or optimizing assessment, in alignment with progressive literature (Chou et al., 2011; Rahman and Watanobe, 2023).”
How understanding large language models can inform the use of ChatGPT in physics education
Polverini, G., & Gregorcic, B. (2023) · European Journal of Physics · doi:10.1088/1361-6404/ad1420 · Cited by 160
Critical Thinking in the Age of AI: A Systematic Review of AI’s Effects on Higher Education
Melisa, R., Ashadi, A., Triastuti, A., Hidayati, S., Salido, A., Ero, P. E. L., Marlini, C., Zefrin, Z., & Al Fuad, Z. (2025) · Educational Process International Journal · doi:10.22521/edupij.2025.14.31 · Cited by 117
“Rahman and Watanobe (2023) and Nikolic et al. (2023) addressed the challenges ChatGPT poses in terms of plagiarism and assessment authenticity, suggesting that the tool's capacity to produce near-perfect answers raises questions about its influence on fostering or hindering critical analysis.”
The mediating role of satisfaction in the relationship between perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and students’ behavioural intention to use ChatGPT
Alshammarı, S. H., & Babu, E. (2025) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-91634-4 · Cited by 161
“…educational needs thereby making them feel satisfied and encouraged to continue utilising in future 19 , better personalization of feedback and conversation, enhanced accessibility, better lesson planning, better integration of assessment and infusing new strategies in teaching and learning 46 .”
The impact of chatbots based on large language models on second language vocabulary acquisition
Zhang, Z., & Huang, X. (2024) · Heliyon · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e25370 · Cited by 107
“Researchers have expressed optimism about LLMs in education [24,37], highlighting their potential to enhance learning and teaching experiences, reduce anxiety, increase interest, and provide psychological satisfaction through interactions with AI chatbots.”
Background
Understanding EFL students’ use of self-made AI chatbots as personalized writing assistance tools: A mixed methods study
Guo, K., & Li, D. (2024) · System · doi:10.1016/j.system.2024.103362 · Cited by 140
A Systematic Review of the Limitations and Associated Opportunities of ChatGPT
Cong‐Lem, N., Soyoof, A., & Tsering, D. (2024) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2024.2344142 · Cited by 140
“Scholars have discussed various ways ChatGPT can support this domain, including creating course materials, designing lesson plans and assessments, providing feedback, explaining complex knowledge, and personalizing the learning experience (Clark, 2023; Rahman & Watanobe, 2023).”
AI hype as a cyber security risk: the moral responsibility of implementing generative AI in business
Humphreys, D., Koay, A., Desmond, D., & Mealy, E. (2024) · AI and Ethics · doi:10.1007/s43681-024-00443-4 · Cited by 123
“Some of this literature focuses on the threat which generative AI will have for jobs [46, 47 ], bias in training data affecting its output [ 48, 49], or a diminishing of critical thinking and problem-solving skills amongst users [50].”
ChatGPT and learning outcomes in tourism education: The role of digital literacy and individualized learning
Dalgıç, A., Yaşar, E., & Demir, M. (2024) · Journal of Hospitality Leisure Sport & Tourism Education · doi:10.1016/j.jhlste.2024.100481 · Cited by 138
Students’ Experiences of Using ChatGPT in an Undergraduate Programming Course
Haindl, P., & Weinberger, G. (2024) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2024.3380909 · Cited by 108
“Itcanbe summarized that only two studies [20], [21] incorporated students’ experiences about using ChatGPT in programming education.”
Background
Computer Science Education in ChatGPT Era: Experiences from an Experiment in a Programming Course for Novice Programmers
Kosar, T., Ostojić, D., Liu, Y. D., & Mernik, M. (2024) · Mathematics · doi:10.3390/math12050629 · Cited by 140
“On the positive side, the benefits of using ChatGPT in education are well argued for [7].”
Background
University Students’ Attitudes and Perceptions towards AI Tools: Implications for Sustainable Educational Practices
Fošner, A. (2024) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su16198668 · Cited by 98
Beyond the Hype: A Comprehensive Review of Current Trends in Generative AI Research, Teaching Practices, and Tools
Prather, J. E., Leinonen, J., Kiesler, N., Benario, J. G., Lau, S., MacNeil, S., Norouzi, N., Opel, S., Pettit, V., Porter, L., et al. (2025) · ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (ITiCSE) · doi:10.1145/3689187.3709614 · Cited by 167
‘ To generate or stop generating response’ : Exploring EFL teachers’ perspectives on ChatGPT in English language teaching in Thailand
Ulla, M. B., Perales, W. F., & Busbus, S. O. (2023) · Learning Research and Practice · doi:10.1080/23735082.2023.2257252 · Cited by 155
“Such drawbacks were also evident in previous studies by Jeon and Lee (2023), Kohnke et al. (2023), and Rahman and Watanobe (2023).”
BackgroundResultInfluential
Examining Students’ Acceptance and Use of ChatGPT in Saudi Arabian Higher Education
Sobaih, A. E. E., Elshaer, I. A., & Hasanein, A. M. (2024) · European Journal of Investigation in Health Psychology and Education · doi:10.3390/ejihpe14030047 · Cited by 123
“[2,6], to understand the adoption of AI, e.g., ChatGPT, in education.”
Background
A survey of emerging applications of large language models for problems in mechanics, product design, and manufacturing
Mustapha, K. B. (2024) · Advanced Engineering Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.aei.2024.103066 · Cited by 107
AI chatbots in programming education: Students’ use in a scientific computing course and consequences for learning
Groothuijsen, S., van den Beemt, A., Remmers, J. C., & van Meeuwen, L. W. (2024) · Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100290 · Cited by 92
Learning by playing with generative AI: design and evaluation of a role-playing educational game with generative AI as scaffolding for instant feedback interaction
Chien, C.-C., Chan, H.-Y., & Hou, H.-T. (2025) · Journal of Research on Technology in Education · doi:10.1080/15391523.2024.2338085 · Cited by 90
“Correct or partially correct feedback and suggestions can also be obtained based on the problem description, contextualization, and question and answer style (Rahman & Watanobe, 2023).”
Influential
Algorithmically-driven writing and academic integrity: exploring educators' practices, perceptions, and policies in AI era
Gustilo, L., Ong, E., & Lapinid, M. R. (2024) · International Journal for Educational Integrity · doi:10.1007/s40979-024-00153-8 · Cited by 89
“While they seem to be performing better and faster than their human counterparts, the output from AI systems is not perfect, as attested by previous studies (Lim et al. 2023; Rahman & Watanobe 2023) current findings.”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluential
The influence of sociodemographic factors on students' attitudes toward AI-generated video content creation
Πέλλας, Ν. (2023) · Smart Learning Environments · doi:10.1186/s40561-023-00276-4 · Cited by 120
“Therefore, it is crucial to strike a balance between harnessing the creative potential of AI-generated videos and ensuring that these technologies are developed and deployed with a keen awareness of their impact on sociodemographic inclusivity and equity (Rahman & Watanobe, 2023).”
Background
Why do students use ChatGPT? Answering through a triangulation approach
Niloy, A. C., Bari, M. A., Sultana, J., Chowdhury, R., Raisa, F. M., Islam, A., Mahmud, S., Jahan, I., Sarkar, M., Akter, S., et al. (2024) · Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100208 · Cited by 120
Artificial Intelligence Integration: Pedagogical Strategies and Policies at Leading Universities
Alqahtani, N., & Wafula, Z. (2025) · Innovative Higher Education · doi:10.1007/s10755-024-09749-x · Cited by 84
“Many educators and students have a limited understanding of how it can be used in educational contexts, questioning its capabilities and limitations (Rahman & Watanobe, 2023 ).”
A systematic literature review of empirical research on applying generative artificial intelligence in education
Zhang, X., Zhang, P., Shen, Y., Liu, M., Wang, Q., Gašević, D., & Fan, Y. (2024) · Frontiers of Digital Education · doi:10.1007/s44366-024-0028-5 · Cited by 83
Beyond the hype: exploring faculty perceptions and acceptability of AI in teaching practices
Ofosu-Ampong, K. (2024) · Discover Education · doi:10.1007/s44217-024-00128-4 · Cited by 79
ChatGPT as an important tool in organizational management: A review of the literature
Ayinde, L. A., Wibowo, M. P., Ravuri, B., & Emdad, F. B. (2023) · Business Information Review · doi:10.1177/02663821231187991 · Cited by 95
Investigation of student experiences with ChatGPT-supported online learning applications in higher education
Kayalı, B., Yavuz, M., Balat, Ş., & Çalışan, M. (2023) · Australasian Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.14742/ajet.8915 · Cited by 110
“It can also make extra contributions in terms of providing instant feedback for students and creating scenario-based learning environments (Rahman & Watanobe, 2023).”
Background
Enhancing academic integrity among students in GenAI Era:A holistic framework
Rasul, T., Nair, S., Kalendra, D., Balaji, M. S., Santini, F. D. O., Ladeira, W. J., Rather, R. A., Yasin, N., Rodriguez, R. V., Kokkalis, P., et al. (2024) · The International Journal of Management Education · doi:10.1016/j.ijme.2024.101041 · Cited by 82
ChatGPT Knowledge Evaluation in Basic and Clinical Medical Sciences: Multiple Choice Question Examination-Based Performance
Meo, S. A., Al-Masri, A. A., Alotaibi, M., Meo, M. Z. S., & Meo, M. O. S. (2023) · Healthcare · doi:10.3390/healthcare11142046 · Cited by 74
“ChatGPT may develop the option of cheating on online exams and minimize critical thinking skills [3].”
Background
What factors will affect the effectiveness of using ChatGPT to solve programming problems? A quasi-experimental study
Jing, Y., Wang, H., Chen, X., & Wang, C. (2024) · Humanities and Social Sciences Communications · doi:10.1057/s41599-024-02751-w · Cited by 89
“…of learners learning programming with the assistance of ChatGPT, such as the opportunities for scientists and engineers to learn programming using AI tools like ChatGPT (Guo, 2023), and the methods and limitations of ChatGPT in enhancing learners ’ programming skills (Rahman and Watanobe, 2023).”
Evaluating the Effectiveness of advanced large language models in medical Knowledge: A Comparative study using Japanese national medical examination
Liu, M., Okuhara, T., Dai, Z., Huang, W., Gu, L., Okada, H., Furukawa, E., & Kiuchi, T. (2025) · International Journal of Medical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2024.105673 · Cited by 73
AI Literacy in K-12 and Higher Education in the Wake of Generative AI: An Integrative Review
Gu, X., & Ericson, B. J. (2025) · ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research (ICER) · doi:10.1145/3702652.3744217 · Cited by 135
“Amid reflections on how generative AI tools could reshape computing education objectives [51, 64, 96], teaching AI literacy emerged as a potential path forward.”
AI Literacy in K-12 and Higher Education in the Wake of Generative AI: An Integrative Review
Gu, X., & Ericson, B. J. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2503.00079 · Cited by 73
“Amid reflections on how generative AI tools could reshape computing education objectives [51, 64, 96], teaching AI literacy emerged as a potential path forward.”
The impact of students’ use of ChatGPT on their research skills: The mediating effects of autonomous motivation, engagement, and self-directed learning
Li, Y., Sadiq, G., Qambar, G., & Zheng, P. (2024) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-024-12981-9 · Cited by 92
“…of information, summa - rization of research articles, hypothesis development, writing outlines for articles and theses, writing initial drafts, providing feedback, and evaluating written content (Atlas, 2023; Halaweh, 2023 ; Karakose et al., 2023 ; Kasneci et al., 2023 ; Rahman & Watanobe, 2023 ).”
Influential
Students’ appraisals post-ChatGPT use: Students’ narrative after using ChatGPT for writing
Nugroho, A., Andriyanti, E., Widodo, P., & Mutiaraningrum, I. (2024) · Innovations in Education and Teaching International · doi:10.1080/14703297.2024.2319184 · Cited by 117
“This technology improves automated speech recognition to perform informative automatic tasks (Rahman & Watanobe, 2023).”
Perspectives of Generative AI in Chemistry Education Within the TPACK Framework
Feldman-Maggor, Y., Blonder, R., & Alexandron, G. (2024) · Journal of Science Education and Technology · doi:10.1007/s10956-024-10147-3 · Cited by 115
“…assessment methods (Chiu, 2023), point to the role of AI-related professional development (Nazaretsky et al., 2022) and transparent system design (Feldman-Mag-gor et al., 2024a) in the acceptance of educational AI, and express concerns over their possible misuse (e.g., Rahman & Watanobe, 2023).”
From recorded to AI ‐generated instructional videos: A comparison of learning performance and experience
Xu, T., Liu, Y., Jin, Y., Qu, Y.-Y., Bai, J., Zhang, W., & Zhou, Y. (2024) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/bjet.13530 · Cited by 113
ChatGPT as an academic support tool on the academic performance among students: The mediating role of learning motivation
Caratıquıt, K., & CARATIQUIT, L. J. (2023) · Journal of Social Humanity and Education · doi:10.35912/jshe.v4i1.1558 · Cited by 103
Perceptions of Higher Education Students towards ChatGPT Usage
Das, S. R., & Madhusudan, J. V. (2024) · International Journal of Technology in Education · doi:10.46328/ijte.583 · Cited by 103
“Other limitations include a lack of contextual understanding and limited depth of comprehension (Farrokhnia et al., 2023; Rahman and Watanobe, 2023).”
Background
Do large language models have a legal duty to tell the truth?
Wachter, S., Mittelstadt, B., & Russell, C. (2024) · Royal Society Open Science · doi:10.1098/rsos.240197 · Cited by 104
Exploring the Impact of Generative AI ChatGPT on Critical Thinking in Higher Education: Passive AI-Directed Use or Human–AI Supported Collaboration?
Nasr, N. R., Tu, C., Werner, J., Bauer, T., Yen, C., & Sujo-Montes, L. E. (2025) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci15091198 · Cited by 123
“On the other hand, GenAI’s tendency to generate inaccurate information suggests the possibility that its uncritical adoption could lead to shallow learning outcomes (Rahman & Watanobe, 2023).”
Application of ChatGPT in Higher Education and Research – A Futuristic Analysis
Aithal, P. S., & Aithal, S. (2023) · International Journal of Applied Engineering and Management Letters · doi:10.47992/ijaeml.2581.7000.0193 · Cited by 71
Exploring the Role of ChatGPT in Education: Applications and Challenges
Mosaiyebzadeh, F., Pouriyeh, S., Parizi, R. M., Dehbozorgi, N., Dorodchi, M., & Batista, D. M. (2023) · Conference on Information Technology Education · doi:10.1145/3585059.3611445 · Cited by 92
“It has been considered a cuttingedge technology that has the potential to revolutionize various fields such as education [28], healthcare [5], programming [27], and agriculture [4], in the next few decades.”
Background
Generative Artificial Intelligence and ChatGPT in Language Learning: EFL Students' Perceptions of Technology Acceptance
Anh, V. T. K., & Nguyen, H. T. T. (2024) · Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice · doi:10.53761/fr1rkj58 · Cited by 145
“Rahman et al. (2023) carried out a survey with students and teachers to explore the impact of ChatGPT in a programming course.”
Background
ChatGPT is not capable of serving as an author: ethical concerns and challenges of large language models in education
(2023) · International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering Technology and Science · doi:10.56726/irjmets45212 · Cited by 74
Examining the Effect of ChatGPT Usage on Students’ Academic Learning and Achievement: A Survey-Based Study in Ajman, UAE
Youssef, E., Medhat, M., Abdellatif, S., & Al Malek, M. (2024) · Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100316 · Cited by 65
Large Language Models in Education: A Systematic Review
Dong, B., Bai, J., Xu, T., & Zhou, Y. (2024) · International Conference on Computer Science and Technologies in Education (CSTE) · doi:10.1109/cste62025.2024.00031 · Cited by 82
“However, the existing research also highlights the limitations of generative AI, including deficiencies in training, a lack of common sense, and challenges in reasoning [7].”
Background
Higher Education Faculty Perceptions of ChatGPT and the Influencing Factors: A Sentiment Analysis of X
Mamo, Y., Crompton, H., Burke, D., & Nickel, C. (2024) · TechTrends · doi:10.1007/s11528-024-00954-1 · Cited by 65
“ChatGPT and other generative models involve the collection and processing of personal data, which raises concerns about privacy and data security (Rahman & Watanobe, 2023).”

Authors: Rahman, M. M., & Watanobe, Y.
Affiliations: University of Aizu (JP)
Corresponding author: Rahman, Md. Mostafizer
ORCID: Rahman, Md. Mostafizer
Watanobe, Yutaka
Venue: Applied Sciences
Publisher: MDPI AG
Published: 2023-05-08
Volume: 13
Issue: 9
Pages: 5783
ISSN: 2076-3417 (ISSN-L)
DOI: 10.3390/app13095783
OpenAlex: W4381982883
Semantic Scholar: 3b69ec0fc17c5134c9b002bebe283e0189bfdae5
Cited by: 1,080
References: 58
Citations by year: 2026: 193 · 2025: 338 · 2024: 425 · 2023: 124
FWCI: 253.56
Type: journal article
Language: en
Open access: gold
doi.org
Licence: cc-by
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (vor)
Locations: Applied Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Preprints.org (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders: Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) KAKENHI (23H03508)
Topics: Social Sciences › Education › Artificial Intelligence in Education
Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Teaching and Learning Programming
Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Keywords: ChatGPT, large language models, artificial intelligence in education, academic dishonesty, critical thinking, programming education, code generation, code correction, student and teacher perceptions

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-09, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-09 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

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

ChatGPT for Education and Research: Opportunities, Threats, and Strategies

Abstract

Overview

AI snapshot

TL;DR

Key findings

Methods

Limitations

Integrity signals

Verification

Claims the paper makes

Claims other papers make about this one

Self-check

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Related

Metadata

Record

About these checks