Exploring ChatGPT’s Role in Higher Education: Perspectives from Pakistani University Students on Academic Integrity and Ethical Challenges
Open accessAbstract
This study investigates the perceptions of university students in Pakistan on the use of ChatGPT in learning. It aims to understand the students’ views on the benefits, challenges, and overall impact of ChatGPT on their academic experiences. A quantitative approach was employed, collecting data from 400 students across various universities in Pakistan through a structured questionnaire. The validity and reliability of the questionnaire were ensured through pilot testing and statistical analysis. The study found that while most students perceive ChatGPT as a beneficial tool for improving their learning, significant concerns remain about academic integrity, over-reliance on artificial intelligence (AI), and the accuracy of information provided by ChatGPT. The findings suggest that perceptions vary across demographic factors such as age, gender, and type of university. These findings can benefit policymakers and educational institutions in effectively integrating AI tools such as ChatGPT into educational systems, ensuring that the value is maximized while addressing potential disadvantages. The study contributes to the existing body of knowledge on AI utilization in education, particularly within the context of developing countries.
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?
Interventions in skill development focus on training students to assess the credibility, relevance, and appropriateness of AI-generated content.
“Interventions in this category focus on training students to assess the credibility, relevance, and appropriateness of AI-generated content (Alghazo et al., 2025; Huang et al., 2024; Silvola et al., 2025).”
From Six Institutional Intervention Areas to Support Ethical and Effective Student Use of Generative AI in Higher Education: A Narrative Review (2026) · cites this paper as Alghazo et al., 2025
Cites
What ChatGPT means for universities: Perceptions of scholars and students
(2023) · Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching · doi:10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.22 · Cited by 431 · see citing works
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 · see citing works
Singh, H., Tayarani-Najaran, M.-H., & Yaqoob, M. (2023) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci13090924 · Cited by 150 · see citing works
Exploring the ethical considerations of using Chat GPT in university education
Huallpa, E. A. (2023) · Periodicals of Engineering and Natural Sciences (PEN) · doi:10.21533/pen.v11i4.3770 · Cited by 145 · see citing works
ChatGPT adoption and its influence on faculty well-being: an empirical research in higher education
Cambra-Fierro, J. J., Blasco, M. F., López-Pérez, M.-E. E., & Trifu, A. (2025) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-024-12871-0 · Cited by 97 · see citing works
(2023) · International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering Technology and Science · doi:10.56726/irjmets45212 · Cited by 74 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Kangwa, D., Msafiri, M. M., & Fute, A. (2025) · Journal of Computer Assisted Learning · doi:10.1111/jcal.70109 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
Jayasinghe, S., Gamage, K. A. A., Yang, D., Cheng, C., Disanayake, C., & Apeji, U. D. (2026) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci16010137 · Cited by 23 · see citing works
- Authors
- Alghazo, R., Fatima, G., Malik, M., Abdelhamid, S. E., Jahanzaib, M., Nayab, D. E., & Raza, A.
- Affiliations
- University of North Dakota (US)
- University of the Punjab (PK)
- Virginia Military Institute (US)
- University of Okara (PK)
- Corresponding author
- Alghazo, Runna
- Venue
- Education Sciences
- Publisher
- MDPI AG
- Published
- 2025-01-27
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 158
- ISSN
- 2227-7102 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4406864172
- Cited by
- 22
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2026: 16 · 2025: 6
- FWCI
- 23.07
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Education Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- Commonwealth Cyber Initiative
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Academic integrity and plagiarism
- Keywords
- ChatGPT, generative AI in education, academic integrity, student perceptions, overreliance on AI, AI accuracy, ethical challenges of AI, higher education, Pakistan
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
