The DOI matches its Crossref record; 29 of the 29 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
ChatGPT in higher education: Considerations for academic integrity and student learning
Open accessAbstract
The release of ChatGPT has sparked significant academic integrity concerns in higher education. However, some commentators have pointed out that generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools such as ChatGPT can enhance student learning. Consequently, academics should adapt their teaching and assessment practices to embrace the new reality of living, working, and studying in a world where AI is freely available. Despite this important debate, very little academic literature has been published on ChatGPT and other generative AI tools. This article uses content analysis to examine news articles (N=100) about how ChatGPT is disrupting higher education, concentrating specifically on Australia, New Zealand, the United States, and the United Kingdom. It explores several key themes, including university responses, academic integrity concerns, the limitations and weaknesses of AI tool outputs, and opportunities for student learning. The data reveals mixed public discussion and university responses, with a focus mainly on academic integrity concerns and opportunities for innovative assessment design. There has also been a lack of public discussion about the potential for ChatGPT to enhance participation and success for students from disadvantaged backgrounds. Similarly, the students’ voice is poorly represented in media articles to date. This article considers these trends and the impact of AI tools on student learning at university.
Overview
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
Verification
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“research emerging from late 2022 to early 2023 began to reflect significant concerns about academic dishonesty and the threat to traditional modes of assessment (Sullivan et al., 2023).”
From The Artificial Intelligence Assessment Scale (AIAS): A Framework for Ethical Integration of Generative AI in Educational Assessment (2024) · cites this paper as Sullivan et al., 2023
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Sullivan et al. (2023) identified systemic marginalization of student voices in favor of institutional integrity narratives.”
From Reimagining writing assessment for the AI era: a systematic review on balancing AI support and authentic skill growth (2026) · cites this paper as Sullivan et al. (2023)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“while research on generative AI adoption in higher education has grown rapidly, most studies focus on Western or East Asian institutional contexts [1, 6, 7], leaving African higher education settings substantially underexplored.”
From Generative AI Usage and Information Literacy Skills among University Students in North-West Nigeria (2026) · cites this paper as [1]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Whilst chatbots can be responsive pedagogical tools [41], educators have raised the alarm about students using chatbots to compose essays, write computer code, and complete other homework assignments [56].”
From New Era of Artificial Intelligence in Education: Towards a Sustainable Multifaceted Revolution (2023) · cites this paper as [56]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“In 2023, ChatGPT (OpenAI, San Francisco, USA) became the most well-known aid for written assignments in universities (Dwivedi et al., 2023; Sullivan et al., 2023).”
From Using version control to document genuine effort in written assignments: a protocol with examples for universities (2023) · cites this paper as Sullivan et al., 2023
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Despite the evolving levels of nuance in our understanding of these technologies in HE, to date, there has been little discussion of the student perspectives of GenAI in HE in both media and research (Sullivan et al., 2023).”
From The Artificial Intelligence Assessment Scale (AIAS): A Framework for Ethical Integration of Generative AI in Educational Assessment (2024) · cites this paper as Sullivan et al., 2023
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Other authors see the benefits of GenAI to enhance student learning through innovative assessment designs [41], potentially addressing such student concerns in the long term.”
From Generative AI and Academic Integrity in Higher Education: A Systematic Review and Research Agenda (2025) · cites this paper as [41]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“yet questions persist regarding their capacity to critically evaluate such resources [1].”
From Generative AI Usage and Information Literacy Skills among University Students in North-West Nigeria (2026) · cites this paper as [1]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The emergence of generative AI has sparked discussions about academic integrity and the possible exploitation of such technology in student assignments (Sullivan et al., 2023).”
From Assessment design through co-creation (2025) · cites this paper as Sullivan et al., 2023
In the citing paper
“However, the release of ChatGPT and other free-touse generative AI tools have provided a new and distinct method for cheating.”
From Bob or Bot: Exploring ChatGPT's Answers to University Computer Science Assessment (2024) · cites this paper as [48]
In the citing paper
“Nonetheless, this unprecedented level of support also raises concerns about academic integrity and the role of course instructors [26].”
From Exploring ChatGPT’s impact on post-secondary education: A qualitative study (2023) · cites this paper as [26]
In the citing paper
“The public discourse surrounding GenAI has been mostly positive, but in the education sector there is serious concern about academic integrity and plagiarism (Dehouche, 2021;Lampropoulos et al., 2023;Sullivan et al., 2023;Yeo, 2023).”
From Not quite eye to A.I.: student and teacher perspectives on the use of generative artificial intelligence in the writing process (2023) · cites this paper as Sullivan et al., 2023
In the citing paper
“The findings from previous studies indicate the importance of rethinking, improving, and redesigning innovative assessment methods in the era of chatbots [14, 20, 64, 75]”
From A systematic literature review of empirical research on ChatGPT in education (2024) · cites this paper as [75]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Suspending OpenMP Tasks on Asynchronous Events: Extending the Taskwait Construct
Pereira, R., Martin, M., Roussel, A., Carribault, P., & Gautier, T. (2023) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-40744-4_5 · Cited by 13,143
The Content Analysis Guidebook
Neuendorf, K. A. (2017) · doi:10.4135/9781071802878 · Cited by 9,286
Zawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M., & Gouverneur, F. (2019) · International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education · doi:10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0 · Cited by 7,242
Exploring the impact of artificial intelligence on teaching and learning in higher education
Popenici, S. A. D., & Kerr, S. (2017) · Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning · doi:10.1186/s41039-017-0062-8 · Cited by 2,019 · cited 1×
“In broad terms, AI and its impact on learning have been researched for decades (Popenici & Kerr, 2017; Dodigovic, 2005; Garito, 1991; Frasson & Gauthier, 1990; Brown et al., 1978).”
BackgroundWhat if the devil is my guardian angel: ChatGPT as a case study of using chatbots in education
Tlili, A., Shehata, B., Adarkwah, M. A., Bozkurt, A., Hickey, D. T., Huang, R., & Agyemang, B. (2023) · Smart Learning Environments · doi:10.1186/s40561-023-00237-x · Cited by 2,003 · cited 4×
“Another recent journal article has explored social media sentiments about ChatGPT in the context of education, finding that the public discourse has been generally positive so far (Tlili et al., 2023).”
BackgroundInfluentialSetting the agenda: the mass media and public opinion
(2005) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.42-6312 · Cited by 1,826
ChatGPT: Bullshit spewer or the end of traditional assessments in higher education?
(2023) · Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching · doi:10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.9 · Cited by 1,806 · cited 2×
“Consequently, academics should adapt teaching and assessment practices to embrace the new reality of living, working, and studying in a world where AI is freely available (Liu et al., 2023; García-Peñalvo, 2023; Rudolph et al., 2023).”
BackgroundOuyang, F., Zheng, L., & Jiao, P. (2022) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-022-10925-9 · Cited by 831 · cited 1×
“…reviews focused on AI in higher education highlight that studies tend to frame AI principally as a tool for improving assignment feedback and assisting with administrative duties rather than exploring concerns relating to academic integrity (Ouyang et al., 2022; Zawacki-Ricther et al., 2019).”
The Content Analysis Guidebook
Neuendorf, K. A. (2017) · doi:10.4135/9781071873045 · Cited by 480
Contract cheating: a survey of australian university students
Bretag, T., Harper, R., Burton, M., Ellis, C., Newton, P., Rozenberg, P., Saddiqui, S., & van Haeringen, K. (2019) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075079.2018.1462788 · Cited by 476
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Frasson, C., & Gauthier, G. (Eds.). (1990). Intelligent tutoring systems: At the crossroad of artificial intelligence and education. Intellect Books.
- Miriam Sullivan, Andrew Kelly, and Paul McLaughlan. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. university PR on science news coverage? A longitudinal automated content analysis of university media releases and newspaper coverage in Switzerland, 2003-2017. International Journal of Communication, 14, 3143-3164. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/13498/3113
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 101–200 of 857
Exploring ChatGPT’s impact on post-secondary education: A qualitative study
Rajabi, P., Taghipour, P., Cukierman, D., & Doleck, T. (2023) · Proceedings of the 25th Western Canadian Conference on Computing Education · doi:10.1145/3593342.3593360 · Cited by 57
“Nonetheless, this unprecedented level of support also raises concerns about academic integrity and the role of course instructors [26].”
BackgroundFaruk, L. I. D., Rohan, R., Ninrutsirikun, U., & Pal, D. (2023) · doi:10.1145/3628454.3629552 · Cited by 69
Chaka, C. (2024) · Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching · doi:10.37074/jalt.2024.7.1.14 · Cited by 85
Generative AI Usage and Academic PerformancePreprint
Wecks, J. O., Voshaar, J., Plate, B. J., & Zimmermann, J. (2024) · Social Science Research Network · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4812513 · Cited by 38
“By providing plain language explanations, giving feedback on grammar, and demystifying academic conventions, GenAI can be particularly helpful to disadvantaged or less privileged students, such as non-native speakers or those with communication disabilities (Sullivan et al. 2023).”
Mumtaz, S., Carmichael, J., Weiss, M., & Nimon-Peters, A. (2025) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-024-13099-8 · Cited by 55
“Furthermore, the media’s underrepresentation of the potential benefits of AIT for disadvantaged students highlights the need for a balanced discussion (Sullivan et al., 2023 ).”
Cong-Lem, N., Tran, T. N., & Nguyen, T. T. (2024) · Teaching English With Technology · doi:10.56297/fsyb3031/mxnb7567 · Cited by 64
Aldraiweesh, A., & Alturki, U. (2025) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2025.3534099 · Cited by 78
“In educational settings, the autonomous nature of AI tools may shift students’ focus toward the direct, tangible benefits of the technology rather than the influence of peer or group interactions [113], [115].”
ChatGPT for research and publication: Opportunities and challenges
Xames, M. D., & Shefa, J. (2023) · Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching · doi:10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.20 · Cited by 117
Bob or Bot: Exploring ChatGPT's Answers to University Computer Science Assessment
Richards, M., Waugh, K., Slaymaker, M., Petre, M., Woodthorpe, J., & Gooch, D. (2024) · ACM Transactions on Computing Education · doi:10.1145/3633287 · Cited by 52
ChatGPT for Research and Publication: Opportunities and ChallengesPreprint
Xames, M. D., & Shefa, J. (2023) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4381803 · Cited by 51
ChatGPT and AI in the Universities: An Introduction to the Near Future
Rezaev, A. V., & Трегубова, Н. Д. (2023) · Высшее образование в России · doi:10.31992/0869-3617-2023-32-6-19-37 · Cited by 72
Arthur, F., Salifu, I., & Nortey, S. A. (2024) · Interactive Learning Environments · doi:10.1080/10494820.2024.2362805 · Cited by 50
“Despite the concerns that ChatGPT poses a significant threat to academic integrity, it offers numerous opportunities to support learning in a variety of ways (Busch & Hausvik, 2023; Fuchs, 2023; King & ChatGPT, 2023; Sullivan et al., 2023).”
Effects of AI-Based ChatGPT on Higher Education Libraries
Aithal, S., & Aithal, P. S. (2023) · International Journal of Management Technology and Social Sciences · doi:10.47992/ijmts.2581.6012.0272 · Cited by 66
Sevnarayan, K., & Potter, M.-A. (2024) · Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching · doi:10.37074/jalt.2024.7.1.41 · Cited by 64
Asad, M. M., & Ajaz, A. (2024) · International Journal of Information and Learning Technology · doi:10.1108/ijilt-06-2024-0103 · Cited by 73
Henadirage, A., & Gunarathne, N. (2025) · International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education · doi:10.1007/s40593-024-00439-5 · Cited by 48
“This overdependence on the model can significantly impede users’ (or students’) overall development and performance in several ways (Sullivan et al., 2023).”
Pierrès, O., Darvishy, A., & Christen, M. (2025) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-024-13134-8 · Cited by 48
Mohammadi, E., Thelwall, M., Cai, Y., Collier, T., Tahamtan, I., & Eftekhar, A. (2026) · Information Processing & Management · doi:10.1016/j.ipm.2025.104350 · Cited by 47
Çelık, F., Ersanlı, C. Y., & Goshnag, A. (2024) · The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning · doi:10.19173/irrodl.v25i3.7779 · Cited by 74
“ChatGPT, a sophisticated generative language model, proves valuable in enhancing critical thinking, academic research, writing, and problem-solving skills (Dwivedi et al., 2023; Sullivan et al., 2023).”
BackgroundLin, M. P.-C., Liu, A. L., Poitras, E., Chang, M., & Chang, D. (2024) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su16208992 · Cited by 72
A university framework for the responsible use of generative AI in research
Smith, S. M., Tate, M., Freeman, K., Walsh, A., Ballsun-Stanton, B., & Lane, M. (2026) · Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management · doi:10.1080/1360080x.2025.2509187 · Cited by 46
Preparing Educators to Teach and Create With Generative Artificial Intelligence
MacDowell, P., Moskalyk, K., Korchinski, K., & Morrison, D. (2024) · Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology · doi:10.21432/cjlt28606 · Cited by 66
“Additionally, the teachers learned how to cite their ChatGPT debate using the correct APA format, reinforcing scholarly practices in AI-assisted conversations (Sullivan et al., 2023).”
BackgroundAlshamy, A., Al-Harthi, A. S. A., & Abdullah, S. (2025) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci15040501 · Cited by 46
“It also echoes findings from similar studies which found that overreliance on GenAI technologies could undermine students’ creativity and critical thinking skills and overall learning experience (Téllez et al., 2024; Nikolic et al., 2023; Sullivan et al., 2023; Taylor, 2023).”
InfluentialMoya, B., Eaton, S., Pethrick, H., Hayden, A., Brennan, R., Wiens, J., & McDermott, B. (2024) · Canadian Perspectives on Academic Integrity · doi:10.55016/ojs/cpai.v7i3.78123 · Cited by 48
“Institutions have used diverse approaches to uphold academic integrity with the arrival of enhanced AI tools (Sullivan et al., 2023).”
MethodPasupuleti, R. S., & Thiyyagura, D. (2024) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-024-12573-7 · Cited by 56
“Previous studies has demonstrated the usefulness of ChatGPT in activities such as assignment creation (Sullivan et al., 2023), essay writing (Su et al., 2023), English as a foreign language (EFL) learning (Strzelecki, 2023) and general proofreading (Crawford et al., 2023).”
Exploring the opportunities and challenges of ChatGPT in academia
Islam, I., & Islam, M. N. (2024) · Discover Education · doi:10.1007/s44217-024-00114-w · Cited by 113
Reddy, M. R., Walter, N. G., & Sevryugina, Y. V. (2024) · Journal of Chemical Education · doi:10.1021/acs.jchemed.4c00226 · Cited by 57
AI in essay-based assessment: Student adoption, usage, and performance
Smerdon, D. (2024) · Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100288 · Cited by 43
The role of generative AI in education: Perceptions of Saudi students
Aldossary, A., Aljindi, A. A., & Alamri, J. M. (2024) · Contemporary Educational Technology · doi:10.30935/cedtech/15496 · Cited by 70
Teaching and learning with AI: an Integrated AI-Oriented Pedagogical Model
Creely, E., & Carabott, K. (2025) · The Australian Educational Researcher · doi:10.1007/s13384-025-00913-6 · Cited by 86
“On the other hand, it is viewed as a significant threat to education, particularly concerning ethical, responsible and inclusive use, especially given its ability to generate content (writing and graphical materials) in mere seconds (Akgun & Greenhow, 2022; Sullivan et al., 2023).”
Matthews, J. A., & Volpe, C. R. (2023) · Australasian Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.14742/ajet.8896 · Cited by 60
“Although AI-mediated technology, such as ChatGPT, represents an important opportunity for higher education (Ouyang et al., 2022), it also represents a significant disruption (Dawson, 2021; Lodge, Thompson, & Corrin, 2023; Sullivan et al. 2023).”
BackgroundSDG 4, Academic Integrity and Artificial Intelligence: Clash or Win-Win Cooperation?
Artyukhov, A., Wołowiec, T., Artyukhova, N., Bogacki, S., & Vasylieva, T. (2024) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su16198483 · Cited by 42
Verano-Tacoronte, D., Bolívar-Cruz, A., & Sosa-Cabrera, S. (2025) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-025-13585-7 · Cited by 39
“University teachers have expressed concerns about maintaining academic integrity and ensuring effective student learning, as reflected in the limited academic research available (e.g., Bae et al., 2024; Cotton et al., 2023; Dwivedi et al., 2023; García-Peñalvo, 2023; Sullivan et al., 2023).”
Cheng, M. W. T., & YIM, I. H. Y. (2024) · Discover Education · doi:10.1007/s44217-023-00081-8 · Cited by 44
“Therefore it is paramount for universities to adapt and embrace it in a way that supports students’ learning and prepares them for the challenges in the AI-era future [46].”
InfluentialAcceptance of ChatGPT by undergraduates in Sri Lanka: a hybrid approach of SEM-ANN
Nawaz, S. S., Sanjeetha, M. B. F., Murshidi, G. H. A., Riyath, M. I. M., Yamin, F. M., & Mohamed, R. (2024) · Interactive Technology and Smart Education · doi:10.1108/itse-11-2023-0227 · Cited by 51
Almanea, M. (2026) · Computer Assisted Language Learning · doi:10.1080/09588221.2024.2410158 · Cited by 40
Chat or cheat? Academic dishonesty, risk perceptions, and ChatGPT usage in higher education students
Ortiz-Bonnin, S., & Blahopoulou, J. (2025) · Social Psychology of Education · doi:10.1007/s11218-025-10080-2 · Cited by 80
“However, incorporating such tools into academic envi - ronments requires not only acknowledging their potential to enhance productivity and efficiency but also engaging in critical reflection on the ethical and pedagogical challenges they pose (Cordón García, 2023; Sullivan et al., 2023 ).”
ChatGPT in Education: Empowering Educators through Methods for Recognition and Assessment
de Winter, J., Dodou, D., & Stienen, A. H. A. (2023) · Informatics · doi:10.3390/informatics10040087 · Cited by 47
The effect of ChatGPT on EFL students' social and emotional learning
Bin-Hady, W. R. A., Ali, J. K. M., & Al-humari, M. A. (2024) · Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning · doi:10.1108/jrit-02-2024-0036 · Cited by 67
Bikanga Ada, M. (2024) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci14101106 · Cited by 40
“Such measures are essential given the growing concerns regarding academic integrity, including plagiarism, in higher education [2–4].”
InfluentialGupta, N., Khatri, K., Malik, Y., Lakhani, A., Kanwal, A., Aggarwal, S., & Dahuja, A. (2024) · BMC Medical Education · doi:10.1186/s12909-024-06592-8 · Cited by 48
“Major publishers and universities have adopted or are changing policies to address this issue, such as not allowing designation of AI as a contributing author and forbid-ding or limiting the usage of AI tools [156].”
Hughes, L., Mavi, R. K., Aghajani, M., Fitzpatrick, K., Senali, M. G., Shekarabi, S. A. H., Hughes, R., Khanfar, A. A. A., Khatavakhotan, A. S., Mavi, N. K., et al. (2025) · Journal of Innovation & Knowledge · doi:10.1016/j.jik.2025.100772 · Cited by 72
Ethics and governance of generative AI in education: a systematic review on responsible adoption
Alfiras, M., Emran, A. Q., & Mohamed, A. M. A. (2025) · Discover Education · doi:10.1007/s44217-025-01051-y · Cited by 73
“Other tensions include: • Academic integrity vs. authentic learning Currie [20] advocates the measures to prevent misconduct, and Sullivan et al. [61] believe that bans can suppress the honest support of learning.”
InfluentialHallucinations in ChatGPT: An Unreliable Tool for Learning
Ahmad, Z., Kaiser, W., & Rahim, S. (2023) · Rupkatha Journal on Interdisciplinary Studies in Humanities · doi:10.21659/rupkatha.v15n4.17 · Cited by 44
“Another research by Sullivan et al. (2023) points out that academic perspectives on ChatGPT have not unanimously declared AI tools as a monumental threat to higher education till now.”
BackgroundGenerative AI and College Students: Use and Perceptions
Golding, J. M., Lippert, A., Neuschatz, J. S., Salomon, I., & Burke, K. C. (2024) · Teaching of Psychology · doi:10.1177/00986283241280350 · Cited by 40
“A major worry is that they could become another means for cheating (Chan & Hu, 2023; Gecker, 2023; Intelligent.com, 2023a, Stohr et al., 2024; Sullivan et al., 2023; but see Spector, 2023), because they allow students to submit work that is not their own original content.”
Wang, L., & Ren, B. (2024) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci14121329 · Cited by 38
Factors Affecting the Adoption and Use of ChatGPT in Higher Education
Alshammarı, S. H., & Alshammari, M. H. (2024) · International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education · doi:10.4018/ijicte.339557 · Cited by 60
Can generative AI motivate management students? The role of perceived value and information literacy
Jose, E. M. K., Prasanna, A., Kushwaha, B. P., & Das, M. (2024) · The International Journal of Management Education · doi:10.1016/j.ijme.2024.101082 · Cited by 55
Generative Artificial Intelligence as a Catalyst for Change in Higher Education Art Study Programs
Ansone, A., Zālīte-Supe, Z., & Daniela, L. (2025) · Computers · doi:10.3390/computers14040154 · Cited by 50
Artificial intelligence in higher education. A protocol paper for a systematic literature review
Ismail, F. M. M., Tan, E., Rudolph, J., Crawford, J., & Tan, S. (2023) · Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching · doi:10.37074/jalt.2023.6.2.34 · Cited by 39
Parsons, B., & Curry, J. H. (2023) · TechTrends · doi:10.1007/s11528-023-00912-3 · Cited by 42
Velli, K., & Zafiropoulos, K. (2024) · European Journal of Investigation in Health Psychology and Education · doi:10.3390/ejihpe14090169 · Cited by 36
“This has led to discussions about the need for educators to adapt their assessment practices to ensure fair and accurate evaluation of student learning [16].”
BackgroundZgambo, M., Costello, M., Buhlmann, M., Maldon, J., Anyango, E., & Adama, E. A. (2025) · Nurse Education Today · doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2025.106796 · Cited by 39
Generative AI in Education: Mapping the Research Landscape Through Bibliometric Analysis
Ng, S. L., & Ho, C. (2025) · Information · doi:10.3390/info16080657 · Cited by 64
AI in higher education: A bibliometric analysis, synthesis, and a critique of research
Lachheb, A., Leung, J., Abramenka‐Lachheb, V., & Sankaranarayanan, R. (2025) · The Internet and Higher Education · doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2025.101021 · Cited by 64
Singh, M. (2023) · South African Journal of Higher Education · doi:10.20853/37-5-5941 · Cited by 34
“A systematic review, conducted by Sullivan et al. (2023) about the impact of ChatGPT on the integrity of the university, found that, out of 100 articles, 88 mentioned concerns relating to cheating and academic dishonesty.”
BackgroundInfluentialComprehensive AI assessment framework: Enhancing educational evaluation with ethical AI integration
Kılınç, S. (2024) · Journal of Educational Technology and Online Learning · doi:10.31681/jetol.1492695 · Cited by 50
Generative AI and the future of connectivist learning in higher education
Liang, E. S., & Bai, S. (2025) · Journal of Asian Public Policy · doi:10.1080/17516234.2024.2386085 · Cited by 34
“Since the launch of GenAI tools such as ChatGPT, there has been a rapid surge of scholarly discussions bringing to light both the opportunities and challenges that these technologies present in higher education across different levels (e.g. Sullivan et al., 2023).”
The critique of AI as a foundation for judicious use in higher education
Popenici, S. (2023) · Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching · doi:10.37074/jalt.2023.6.2.4 · Cited by 53
“The prominence of generative AI solutions such as ChatGPT, created and released for the public by OpenAI, made evident in an extraordinarily short period of time that the impact of AI on everyone’s life will be exponentially more significant than it already was (Sullivan et al., 2023; Rudolph et al., 2023b).”
BackgroundFamaye, T., Bailey, C. S., Adisa, I. O., & Irgens, G. A. (2024) · International Journal of Technology in Education · doi:10.46328/ijte.651 · Cited by 48
“This perspective stands out from existing literature which have primarily focused on ethical concerns associated with cheating and plagiarism (Cotton et al. 2023, Kuchemann et al., 2023, Sullivan, et al 2023).”
BackgroundExploring the ethical use of LLM chatbots in higher education
Mvondo, G. F. N., Niu, B., & Eivazinezhad, S. (2025) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2025.115575 · Cited by 41
Younas, M. S., El‐Dakhs, D. A. S., & Noor, U. (2025) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2025.1689205 · Cited by 58
Vidaurre, S. M. E., Rodríguez, N. C. V., Quelopana, R. L. G., Valdivia, A. N. M., Rossi, E. L., & Nolasco-Mamani, M. A. (2024) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su16209005 · Cited by 57
Dang, A., & Wang, H. (2024) · Journal of Second Language Writing · doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2024.101157 · Cited by 32
Кazimova, D., Tazhigulova, G. O., Shraimanova, G. S., Zatyneyko, A., & Sharzadin, A. M. (2025) · International Journal of Engineering Pedagogy (iJEP) · doi:10.3991/ijep.v15i1.50773 · Cited by 52
A Study on the Efficacy of ChatGPT-4 in Enhancing Students’ English Communication Skills
Wang, Y. (2025) · SAGE Open · doi:10.1177/21582440241310644 · Cited by 89
Knight, S., Dickson-Deane, C., Heggart, K., Kitto, K., Çetindamar Kozanoğlu, D., Maher, D., Narayan, B., & Zarrabi, F. (2023) · Australasian Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.14742/ajet.8922 · Cited by 31
“…news coverage across Australia, New Zealand, the United States of America (USA) and United Kingdom, with a significant focus on academic integrity concerns and the need for assessment innovation, but less coverage on student perspectives or how GenAI might support students (Sullivan et al., 2023).”
BackgroundA Collaborative Model for Integrating Teacher and GenAI into Future Education
Memon, T. D., & Kwan, P. (2025) · TechTrends · doi:10.1007/s11528-025-01105-w · Cited by 56
“Academic integrity issues such as plagiarism and contract cheating also become more prevalent with increased GenAI use, necessitating stricter measures and innovative assessment methods to ensure authentic learning (Sullivan et al., 2023).”
Eğitimde Yapay Zekâ Kullanımı: ChatGPT’nin KEFE ve PEST Analizi
Kutlucan, E., & Seferoğlu, S. S. (2024) · Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi · doi:10.37217/tebd.1368821 · Cited by 34
Strzelecki, A. (2024) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-024-13222-9 · Cited by 46
Honig, C. D. F., Rios, S., & Desu, A. (2025) · Australasian journal of engineering education · doi:10.1080/22054952.2025.2467500 · Cited by 43
Pratiwi, H., Suherman, Hasruddin, & Ridha, M. (2025) · European Journal of Education · doi:10.1111/ejed.70083 · Cited by 31
Novozhilova, E., Mays, K. K., & Katz, J. E. (2024) · Humanities and Social Sciences Communications · doi:10.1057/s41599-024-02625-1 · Cited by 38
ChatGPT, the perfect virtual teaching assistant? Ideological bias in learner-chatbot interactions
Poucke, M. V. (2024) · Computers & composition/Computers and composition · doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2024.102871 · Cited by 46
Fawaz, M. A., Malti, W. E., Alreshidi, S. M., & Kavuran, E. (2025) · Nursing and Health Sciences · doi:10.1111/nhs.70030 · Cited by 38
Is Anxiety Affecting the Adoption of ChatGPT in University Teaching? A Gender Perspective
Cruz, A. M. B., & Tacoronte, D. V. (2025) · Technology Knowledge and Learning · doi:10.1007/s10758-025-09830-0 · Cited by 38
Pharmacy student use of ChatGPT: A survey of students at a U.S. School of Pharmacy
Anderson, H. D., Kwon, S., Linnebur, L. A., Valdez, C. A., & Linnebur, S. A. (2024) · Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning · doi:10.1016/j.cptl.2024.102156 · Cited by 28
Qu, Y., & Wang, J. (2025) · Journal of Academic Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10805-025-09643-x · Cited by 29
Taufiq-Hail, G. A.-M., Yusof, S. A. M., Rashid, A., El-Shekeil, I., & Lutfi, A. (2024) · Emerging Science Journal · doi:10.28991/esj-2024-08-03-02 · Cited by 28
“Furthermore, there is little research on ChatGPT and other generative AI tools that could enhance the pedagogical process by using these innovative tools ethically to foster critical students’ critical thinking [14].”
BackgroundAn investigation of generative AI in the classroom and its implications for university policy
Hamerman, E. J., Aggarwal, A., & Martins, C. M. (2024) · Quality Assurance in Education · doi:10.1108/qae-08-2024-0149 · Cited by 36
Köhler, C., & Hartig, J. (2024) · Contemporary Educational Technology · doi:10.30935/cedtech/15144 · Cited by 88
Lemke, C., Kirchner, K., Anandarajah, L., & Herfurth, F. (2023) · European Conference on e-Learning · doi:10.34190/ecel.22.1.1828 · Cited by 39
“These insights also align with previous research findings (Gimpel et al, 2023; Sullivan, Kelly and McLaughlan, 2023) on the impact of LLMs in HE.”
BackgroundResultMambile, C., & Mwogosi, A. (2024) · Technological Sustainability · doi:10.1108/techs-03-2024-0014 · Cited by 42
Virtual Tutor, Digital Natives and AI: Analyzing the impact of ChatGPT on academia in Indonesia
Margono, H., Saud, M., & Falahat, M. (2024) · Social Sciences & Humanities Open · doi:10.1016/j.ssaho.2024.101069 · Cited by 26
Examining students' attitudes and intentions towards using ChatGPT in higher education
Haq, M. Z. U., Cao, G., & Abukhait, R. M. Y. (2025) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/bjet.13582 · Cited by 26
Phua, J. T. K., Neo, H. F., & Teo, C.-C. (2025) · Big Data and Cognitive Computing · doi:10.3390/bdcc9050131 · Cited by 58
“…in higher education focus on both the potential benefits and academic integrity concerns which led to the argument for a balanced approach to integrating AI tools, emphasizing the need for innovative assessment design and the inclusion of student voices in discussions about AI in education [16].”
A Systematic Literature Review of Empirical Research on ChatGPT in EducationPreprint
Albadarin, Y., Tukiainen, M., Saqr, M., & Pope, N. (2023) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4562771 · Cited by 26
Alharbi, W. (2024) · International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching · doi:10.4018/ijcallt.351245 · Cited by 26
Danish university policies on generative AI: Problems, assumptions and sustainability blind spots
Driessens, O., & Pischetola, M. (2024) · MedieKultur: Journal of media and communication research · doi:10.7146/mk.v40i76.143595 · Cited by 25
Belda-Medina, J. R., & Kokošková, V. (2024) · Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching · doi:10.1080/17501229.2024.2435900 · Cited by 40
“Critics argue that excessive dependence on GPT may hinder learners’ ability to develop their linguistic skills and learning progress (Dergaa et al. 2023; Sullivan, Kelly, and McLaughlan 2023).”
Large Language Models in Computer Science Classrooms: Ethical Challenges and Strategic Solutions
Azoulay, R., Hirst, T., & Reches, S. (2025) · Applied Sciences · doi:10.3390/app15041793 · Cited by 40
Shahzad, M. F., Xu, S., An, X., & Asif, M. (2025) · SAGE Open · doi:10.1177/21582440251368594 · Cited by 45
Emerging Dynamics of ChatGPT in Academia: A Scoping Review
Mahrishi, M., Abbas, A., Radovanović, D., & Hosseini, S. (2024) · Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice · doi:10.53761/b182ws13 · Cited by 28
Pernaa, J., Ikävalko, T., Takala, A., Vuorio, E., Pesonen, R. M., & Haatainen, O. (2024) · Informatics · doi:10.3390/informatics11020020 · Cited by 32
“Our design conjecture was that the use of AI chatbots offers many internal strengths, such as increasing productivity by expediting the preparation of a summary [15,20,45].”
BackgroundMethodAI Policies, Equity, and Morality and the Implications for Faculty in Higher Education
Azevedo, L., Mallinson, D. J., Wang, J., Robles, P., & Best, E. (2024) · Public Integrity · doi:10.1080/10999922.2024.2414957 · Cited by 42
The quiet transformation of higher education in the AI era
Sejdiu, N. P., & Sejdiu, S. (2025) · Open Research Europe · doi:10.12688/openreseurope.20715.1 · Cited by 29
Teaching and testing in the era of text-generative AI: exploring the needs of students and teachers
Jochim, J., & Lenz-Kesekamp, V. (2024) · Information and Learning Sciences · doi:10.1108/ils-10-2023-0165 · Cited by 32
Salazar, L. R., Peeples, S., & Brooks, M. E. (2024) · Advances in educational technologies and instructional design book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3693-0831-8.ch010 · Cited by 26
High School Teachers’ Adoption of Generative AI
Elstad, E., & Eriksen, H. (2024) · Nordic Journal of Comparative and International Education (NJCIE) · doi:10.7577/njcie.5736 · Cited by 28
“This is particularly true in the context of pupils who submit AI-generated texts for teachers to assess (Chaudhry et al., 2023; Cotton et al., 2024; Sullivan et al., 2023; Susnjak, 2022).”
BackgroundMah, D.-K., Knoth, N., & Egloffstein, M. (2025) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2025.1484904 · Cited by 39
Metadata
- Authors
- Sullivan, M., Kelly, A., & McLaughlan, P.
- Affiliations
- Edith Cowan University (AU)
- Venue
- Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching
- Publisher
- Open Access Publishing Association
- Published
- 2023-03-21
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 1
- ISSN
- 2591-801X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4327918021
- Cited by
- 853
- References
- 25
- Citations by year
- 2026: 192 · 2025: 255 · 2024: 284 · 2023: 122
- FWCI
- 199.83
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Australasian Journal of Paramedicine (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Artificial Intelligence in Education
- Social Sciences › Education › Academic integrity and plagiarism
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Keywords
- ChatGPT, generative AI, academic integrity, higher education, student learning, assessment design, student participation, disadvantaged students, news media coverage
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
