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 201–300 of 857
Farinosi, M., & Melchior, C. (2025) · European Journal of Education · doi:10.1111/ejed.70094 · Cited by 23
To adopt or to ban? Student perceptions and use of generative AI in higher education
Farinosi, M., & Melchior, C. (2025) · Humanities and Social Sciences Communications · doi:10.1057/s41599-025-05982-7 · Cited by 26
“As with the emergence of any new technology, this has led to an evolution of meaning and usage practices, which have prompted a range of responses, including admiration, controversy, excitement and scepticism (e.g. Montenegro-Rueda et al., 2023; Rudolph et al., 2023; Sullivan et al., 2023).”
Prospects for ChatGPT Application in Higher Education: A Scoping Review of International Research
Raitskaya, L., & Lambovska, M. (2024) · Integration of Education · doi:10.15507/1991-9468.114.028.202401.010-021 · Cited by 34
Bibliometric Overview of ChatGPT: New Perspectives in Social Sciences
Oliński, M., Krukowski, K., & Sieciński, K. (2024) · Publications · doi:10.3390/publications12010009 · Cited by 31
“Among them are Sullivan et al. [40] and Halaweh [41].”
BackgroundPre-Service Teachers’ Assessment of ChatGPT’s Utility in Higher Education: SWOT and Content Analysis
Markos, A., Prentzas, J., & Sidiropoulou, M. (2024) · Electronics · doi:10.3390/electronics13101985 · Cited by 39
“The scholarly conversation is formed on a broader direction that includes the discussion of the significance of ChatGPT in education [15,16], the impact of ChatGPT in education [17], and the application of ChatGPT in higher education [18–20].”
BackgroundAuthentic assessment in higher education: the spectre of lost futures
Vallis, C. (2024) · Teaching in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/13562517.2024.2362217 · Cited by 22
Kangwa, D., Msafiri, M. M., & Fute, A. (2025) · Journal of Computer Assisted Learning · doi:10.1111/jcal.70109 · Cited by 22
Yan, W., Nakajima, T., & Sawada, R. (2025) · Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100465 · Cited by 50
Lee, A. V. Y. (2024) · Asia Pacific Journal of Education · doi:10.1080/02188791.2024.2305171 · Cited by 20
“Generative AI is likely here to stay and thus there is an increasing demand to be able to design and institute new practices and procedures for managing the issues brought about by it (Sullivan et al., 2023).”
BackgroundWiden the debate: What is the academic community’s perception on ChatGPT?
Jiang, Y., Xie, L., Lin, G., & Mo, F. (2024) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-024-12677-0 · Cited by 21
Watanabe, A. (2024) · The Electronic Journal of e-Learning · doi:10.34190/ejel.21.5.3229 · Cited by 21
Ethical Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence Among Ecuadorian University Students
Buele, J., Sabando-García, Á. R., Sabando-García, B. J., & Yánez-Rueda, H. (2025) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su17104435 · Cited by 20
Teaching AI with games: the impact of generative AI drawing on computational thinking skills
Hsu, T., & Hsu, T.-P. (2025) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-025-13624-3 · Cited by 27
Unleashing ChatGPT's impact in higher education: Student and faculty perspectives
Rajabi, P., Taghipour, P., Cukierman, D., & Doleck, T. (2024) · Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans · doi:10.1016/j.chbah.2024.100090 · Cited by 21
Tudino, G., & Qin, Y. (2024) · Lingua · doi:10.1016/j.lingua.2024.103838 · Cited by 32
Artificial intelligence in the context of teacher education: emerging themes and critical issues
Carrillo, C., Flores, M. A., & Mena, J. (2025) · European Journal of Teacher Education · doi:10.1080/02619768.2025.2584283 · Cited by 24
“Other concerns relate to unequal access to GenAI tools, student privacy and data security, and the spread of fraudulent information generated by AI (Luo 2024; Rudolph, Tan, and Tan 2023; Sullivan, Kelly, and McLaughlan 2023; UNESCO 2023; Yan et al. 2024).”
Esmaeil, A. A. A. H., Dzulkifli, D. N. A. K., Maakip, I., Mantaluk, O. O., & Marshall, S. (2023) · Jurnal Komunikasi Malaysian Journal of Communication · doi:10.17576/jkmjc-2023-3904-08 · Cited by 39
ChatGPT in Brazilian K-12 science education
Monteiro, F. F., Souza, P. V. S., da Silva, M. C., Maia, J. R., da Silva, W. F., & Girardi, D. (2024) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2024.1321547 · Cited by 31
South African University Students’ Use of AI-Powered Tools for Engaged LearningPreprint
Bosch, T. E., Jordaan, M., Mwaura, J., Nkoala, S., Schoon, A., Smit, A., Uzuegbunam, C. E., & Mare, A. (2023) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4595655 · Cited by 28
Leung, C. H. (2024) · Asian Journal of Contemporary Education · doi:10.55493/5052.v8i2.5101 · Cited by 28
“Prompt engineering can also design automatic assessment systems to analyze students' assignments, exam answers, and individual learning behaviors, among others (Sullivan, Kelly, & McLaughlan, 2023).”
BackgroundAbuadas, M. H., & Albikawi, Z. F. (2025) · Ethics & Behavior · doi:10.1080/10508422.2025.2511336 · Cited by 28
Sandhaus, H., Gu, Q., Parreira, M. T., & Ju, W. G. (2025) · Designing Interactive Systems Conference · doi:10.1145/3715336.3735805 · Cited by 34
A Glimpse of chatGPT: An Introduction of Features, Challenges, and Threads in Higher Education
Arista, A., Shuib, L. M., & Ismail, M. A. (2023) · International Conference on Informatics, Multimedia, Cyber and Information System (ICIMCIS) · doi:10.1109/icimcis60089.2023.10349057 · Cited by 20
“Because of these student actions, ChatGPT has been prohibited from various educational institutions, and some professors have referred to these technologies as a “threat” and a “plague on education” [26].”
BackgroundChatGPT en Educación Superior: explorando sus potencialidades y sus limitaciones
Galli, M. G., & Kanobel, M. C. (2023) · Revista Educación Superior y Sociedad (ESS) · doi:10.54674/ess.v35i2.815 · Cited by 37
The use of AI Chatbots in higher education: the problem of plagiarism
Prokhorova, Y., Gujrati, R., & Uygun, H. (2024) · Review of Artificial Intelligence in Education · doi:10.37497/rev.artif.intell.educ.v5i00.31 · Cited by 23
Generative AI governance in higher education: a case study from Africa
Thaldar, D., Botes, M., Badru, A., Chenia, H., Duma, S., Dlamini, S. B., Amin, N., Hugo, W., Govender, R., Bruce-Brand, J., et al. (2025) · Frontiers in Political Science · doi:10.3389/fpos.2025.1666661 · Cited by 40
Mundo, M. A. D., Reyes, E. F. D., Gervacio, E. M., Manalo, R. B., Book, R. J., Chavez, J. V., Espartero, M. M., & Sayadi, D. S. (2024) · Environment and Social Psychology · doi:10.59429/esp.v9i8.3028 · Cited by 38
“In fact, the study of Sullivan et al. [79] revealed that there is “potential threat of artificial intelligence as a tool to facilitate student cheating.””
BackgroundMethodKhizar, H. M. U., Ashraf, A., Yuan, J., & Al‐Waqfi, M. A. (2025) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2025.124047 · Cited by 18
Peters, M., & Angelov, D. (2025) · International Journal for Educational Integrity · doi:10.1007/s40979-025-00201-x · Cited by 27
Navigating Ethical Complexities Through Epistemological Analysis of ChatGPT
Chavanayarn, S. (2023) · Bulletin of Science Technology & Society · doi:10.1177/02704676231216355 · Cited by 18
“The notable examples of this are the ongoing debate regarding students ’ utilization of ChatGPT, or the impact of AI in the workplace (Bankins & Formosa, 2023; Farrokhnia et al., 2023; Sullivan et al., 2023).”
BackgroundFegade, A., Raut, R., Deshpande, A., Mittal, A., Kaul, N., & Khanna, V. (2023) · 2023 6th International Conference on Contemporary Computing and Informatics (IC3I) · doi:10.1109/ic3i59117.2023.10397917 · Cited by 18
“These news articles have focused on weaknesses, limitations, integrity concerns, and opportunities for students learning [33].”
BackgroundEthics of Artificial Intelligence in University Education
Zeer, M., Siaj, R. W., Ghannam, J. A., & Kanan, M. A. (2023) · International Engineering Conference on Electrical, Energy, and Artificial Intelligence (EICEEAI) · doi:10.1109/eiceeai60672.2023.10590285 · Cited by 22
“Despite these concerns, Sullivan et al. (2023) underscore the centrality of academic integrity in shaping the discourse on AI in education [22].”
BackgroundVoshaar, J., Wecks, J. O., Plate, B. J., & Zimmermann, J. (2024) · Issues in Accounting Education · doi:10.2308/issues-2023-091 · Cited by 23
Saifi, S., Tanveer, S., Arwab, M., Lal, D., & Mirza, N. (2025) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-024-13282-x · Cited by 17
“Alternative viewpoints have adopted a more intricate approach, highlighting that despite the potential of ChatGPT to incorporate errors in facts and prejudices, it also has the capacity to improve the learning experience for students (Sullivan et al., 2023).”
Xing, H., & Wen, G. J. (2025) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-025-13505-9 · Cited by 25
Formación Docente en IA Generativa: Impacto Ético y Retos en Educación Superior
López, F., Angulo-Alvarez, M., & Zuñiga, D. I. S. (2025) · Alteridad · doi:10.17163/alt.v20n2.2025.01 · Cited by 24
Reconsidering teacher assessment literacy in GenAI-enhanced environments: A scoping review
Cui, Y. H., Meng, Y., & Tang, L. (2025) · Teaching and Teacher Education · doi:10.1016/j.tate.2025.105163 · Cited by 24
The Change We Work: Professional Agency and Ethics for Emerging AI Technologies
Moore, S. L., Mehdiabadi, A. H., Law, V., & Kang, S. “. (2023) · TechTrends · doi:10.1007/s11528-023-00895-1 · Cited by 21
Naher, J., Maruf, M. H., Bakht, S. T., & Sadaf, S. S. (2023) · Technium Romanian Journal of Applied Sciences and Technology · doi:10.47577/technium.v15i.9660 · Cited by 24
“[19] conducted an extensive examination of news articles discussing ChatGPT within higher education.”
BackgroundAn Overview chatGPT in Higher Education in Indonesia and Malaysia
Arista, A., Shuib, L. M., & Ismail, M. A. (2023) · International Conference on Informatics, Multimedia, Cyber and Information System (ICIMCIS) · doi:10.1109/icimcis60089.2023.10349053 · Cited by 20
“More investigation is unavoidably needed into the ways that ChatGPT is being explored in the context of higher education given this significant debate [22].”
BackgroundZhao, R., Yunus, M. M., & Rafiq, K. R. M. (2023) · International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences · doi:10.6007/ijarbss/v13-i12/20258 · Cited by 28
Awal, M. R., & Asaduzzaman (2024) · Higher Education Skills and Work-based Learning · doi:10.1108/heswbl-09-2023-0249 · Cited by 19
Enhancing Classroom Learning: ChatGPT's Integration and Educational Challenges
AlAli, R. M., & Wardat, Y. (2024) · International Journal of Religion · doi:10.61707/znwnxd43 · Cited by 25
“To ensure the responsible and ethical use of ChatGPT, it is crucial to handle the information generated by the model carefully in order to avoid misrepresenting facts (Keith, 2022; Sullivan et al., 2023).”
BackgroundMethodMosleh, S. M., Alsaadi, F. A., Alnaqbi, F. K., Alkhzaimi, M. A., Alnaqbi, S. W., & Alsereidi, W. M. (2024) · Heliyon · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e31952 · Cited by 36
Tomczyk, P., Brüggemann, P., Mergner, N., & Petrescu, M. (2026) · Journal of Librarianship and Information Science · doi:10.1177/09610006241295802 · Cited by 17
Kangwa, D., Msafiri, M. M., & Fute, A. (2025) · AI and Ethics · doi:10.1007/s43681-025-00689-6 · Cited by 17
Verma, S. R., Kashive, N., & Gupta, A. K. (2025) · Benchmarking An International Journal · doi:10.1108/bij-07-2024-0564 · Cited by 21
El uso de la inteligencia artificial en la investigación científica
Díaz-Subieta, L. B. (2024) · Revista Historia de la Educación Latinoamericana · doi:10.19053/uptc.01227238.18014 · Cited by 12
Awareness, perception, and adoption of ChatGPT in African HEIs: A multi-dimensional analysis
Ojubanire, O. A., Olaleye, S. A., Marhraoui, M. A., Kamihanda, M. W., Oke, O. I., & Ojubanire, O. A. (2025) · The Internet and Higher Education · doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2025.100999 · Cited by 22
Addressing Academic Dishonesty in Higher Education: A Systematic Review of Generative AI’s Impact
Sharma, R. C., & Panja, S. K. (2025) · Open Praxis · doi:10.55982/openpraxis.17.2.820 · Cited by 30
“Sullivan et al. (2023) posited their research on Australia, New Zealand, the USA, and the UK to find out the effect of ChatGPT in higher education.”
High school students’ use and beliefs about generative artificial intelligence and writing in school
Bueie, A. A., Skar, G. B. U., & Graham, S. (2025) · Reading and Writing · doi:10.1007/s11145-025-10702-3 · Cited by 32
In ChatGPT they trust: a study of students' perceptions and misuse of ChatGPT in higher education
Yeung, L. K. C., Chow, D. P. L., Wong, P. H., & Lau, S. S. S. (2026) · AI and Ethics · doi:10.1007/s43681-025-00855-w · Cited by 16
(2024) · Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching · doi:10.37074/jalt.2024.7.1.33 · Cited by 16
Meo, S. A., Alotaibi, M. S., Meo, M. Z. S., Meo, M. O. S., & Hamid, M. (2024) · Frontiers in Public Health · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2024.1360597 · Cited by 15
“The controversies about ChatGPT and its implications in higher education are the major limitations to the implementation of ChatGPT in academia (7).”
BackgroundThe impact of artificial intelligence on research and higher education in Morocco
Moukhliss, G., Lahyani, K., & Diab, G. (2024) · Journal of Education and Learning (EduLearn) · doi:10.11591/edulearn.v18i4.21511 · Cited by 31
“In the academic world, AI has become ubiquitous at all levels [8], from primary to higher education [9], in all disciplines including health sciences, language teaching, mathematics education, engineering, translation teaching, mobile learning and nursing pain education.”
BackgroundUniversity teachers at the crossroads: unpacking their intentions toward ChatGPT's instructional use
Jaffar, M., Jogezai, N. A., Latiff, A. R. A., Baloch, F. A., & Khilji, G. K. (2024) · Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education · doi:10.1108/jarhe-10-2023-0463 · Cited by 19
A Systematic Rapid Review of Empirical Research on Students’ Use of ChatGPT in Higher Education
Dikilitaş, K., Klippen, M. I. F., & Keleş, S. (2024) · Nordic Journal of Systematic Reviews in Education · doi:10.23865/njsre.v2.6227 · Cited by 25
“…students’ learning and teaching in universities also revealed that the sentiment in the media is focused more on a negative discourse than a positive one, hence highlighting the public discussions and university responses on such controversies about academic integrity (Sullivan et al., 2023).”
BackgroundJasrai, L. (2025) · The TQM Journal · doi:10.1108/tqm-12-2024-0498 · Cited by 19
Challenges and Limitations of Generative AI in Education
Gökoğlu, S. (2024) · Advances in Educational Technologies and Instructional Design · doi:10.4018/979-8-3693-1351-0.ch008 · Cited by 15
Developing a college student feedback literacy scale for the GenAI context
Cui, Y. H., Meng, Y., Qian, X., & Tang, L. (2025) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2025.2495048 · Cited by 17
AI Literacy in Higher Education: A Systematic Approach to Questionnaire Development and Validation
Ranieri, M., Biagini, G., & Cuomo, S. (2025) · International Journal of Digital Literacy and Digital Competence · doi:10.4018/ijdldc.388469 · Cited by 15
Vietnamese University Students’ Perceptions of ChatGPT for Homework Assistance
Le, M. T. T., & Tran, K. V. (2024) · International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies (iJIM) · doi:10.3991/ijim.v18i15.48819 · Cited by 18
Anik, M. H., Raaz, S. N. C., & Khan, N. (2024) · International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education · doi:10.1007/s40593-024-00438-6 · Cited by 27
Galindo‐Domínguez, H., Campo, L., Delgado, N., & de la Maza, M. S. (2025) · Interactive Learning Environments · doi:10.1080/10494820.2025.2457351 · Cited by 27
“…identifying the most influential factors when it comes to committing plagiarism through generative AI tools (Dehouche, 2021; Dergaa et al., 2023; Sullivan et al., 2023), as these factors might be crucial for developing responsible frameworks to mitigate deceptive AI usage (Sarkadi et al., 2023).”
Sullivan, M., McAuley, M., Degiorgio, D., & McLaughlan, P. (2024) · Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching · doi:10.37074/jalt.2024.7.2.7 · Cited by 15
Self-citationYıldız, T. A. (2024) · Computers in the Schools · doi:10.1080/07380569.2024.2429534 · Cited by 19
Toward non-human-centered design: designing an academic article with ChatGPT
LİVBERBER, T. (2023) · El Profesional de la Informacion · doi:10.3145/epi.2023.sep.12 · Cited by 18
Riding the Generative AI Tsunami: Addressing the Teaching and Learning Crisis in Higher Education
Tan, S., Rudolph, J., & Tan, S. (2024) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-54509-2_8 · Cited by 20
A mesterséges intelligencia a felsőoktatásban
Rajki, Z., Nagy, J. T., & Dringó-Horváth, I. (2024) · Iskolakultúra · doi:10.14232/iskkult.2024.7.3 · Cited by 22
Teacher’s pet or rebel? Practitioners’ perspectives on the impacts of ChatGPT on course design
Tran, T. M., Bakajic, M., & Pullman, M. (2024) · Higher Education · doi:10.1007/s10734-024-01350-7 · Cited by 27
Otto, S., Ejsing‐Duun, S., & Lindsay, E. D. (2025) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-025-13533-5 · Cited by 21
“Thus, concerns raised over the likelihood of students using GenAI to fraudulently produce written assignments manifested in public discussions predominantly revolving around concerns related to academic integrity in early 2023 (Lodge et al., 2023; Selwyn, 2024; Sullivan et al., 2023).”
Effects of AI-Based ChatGPT on Higher Education LibrariesPreprint
Aithal, S., & Aithal, P. S. (2023) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4453581 · Cited by 14
Perkins, M., & Roe, J. (2023) · doi:10.35542/osf.io/z4cru · Cited by 117
Conklin, S. A., Dorgan, T., & Barreto, D. (2024) · Discover Education · doi:10.1007/s44217-024-00386-2 · Cited by 23
“Many are concerned about academic honor code violations and lack of clear policies and detection methods [3, 27, 41, 44].”
Stephenson, Z., Johnson‐Glauch, N., & Cruchley, S. (2025) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2025.2504621 · Cited by 21
Generative AI in Accounting Education: Evaluating ChatGPT's Role in Assessment and Skill Development
Tharapos, M., Lau, K. H., Peszynski, K., Nguyen, L. A., Magdziarz, S., Morton, E., Borg, V., & Duan, S. X. (2025) · Accounting and Finance · doi:10.1111/acfi.70051 · Cited by 44
Bashir, S., & Lapshun, A. L. (2025) · Cogent Education · doi:10.1080/2331186x.2025.2526436 · Cited by 19
Clashing AIs: Artificial Intelligence Literacy and Academic Integrity in an EFL Context
Uygun, E. (2025) · Journal of Academic Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10805-025-09676-2 · Cited by 18
AI literacy: A core practice in world language education
Lu, X., Zaitseva, A., & Troyan, F. J. (2025) · Foreign Language Annals · doi:10.1111/flan.70037 · Cited by 21
Bhuiyan, M. R. I., Uddin, S., Sultana, T., Amin, A. A. A., & Islam, M. M. (2026) · SAGE Open · doi:10.1177/21582440251413008 · Cited by 17
“Examples are looking at the trend of fake citations and materials (Cooper, 2023) streamlining writing processes as well as enhancing academic assignments/essays quality or standard (Sullivan et al., 2023).”
Exploring Students’ Perception of Using ChatGPT in Higher Education
Sila, C. A., William, C., Yunus, M. M., & Rafiq, K. R. M. (2023) · International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences · doi:10.6007/ijarbss/v13-i12/20250 · Cited by 24
Use of ChatGPT in Higher Education: A Study with Graduate Students
Costa, R., Costa, A. L., & Carvalho, A. A. A. (2024) · EAI/Springer Innovations in Communication and Computing · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-52296-3_7 · Cited by 15
Assessing law students in a GenAI world to create knowledgeable future lawyers
Head, A., & Willis, S. (2024) · International Journal of the Legal Profession · doi:10.1080/09695958.2024.2379785 · Cited by 24
“…reports the success of ChatGPT in passing some law exams (Choi and Schwarcz 2023; Perlman 2022; see also Hargreaves 2023) and discusses how legal educators might design assessments to combat the threat GenAI poses (Croft 2023; Hargreaves 2023; Katz et al. 2023; Ryznar 2023; Sullivan et al. 2023).”
InfluentialBridging Novice Programmers and LLMs with Interactivity
Yeh, T. Y., Tran, K., Gao, G., Yu, T. T., Fong, W. O., & Chen, T.-Y. (2025) · ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE) · doi:10.1145/3641554.3701867 · Cited by 13
“Additionally, students are using these systems in classes regardless of our advice [22], and some institutions are making ChatGPT available to their entire student body [4].”
A Transformer-Based Educational Virtual Assistant Using Diacriticized Latin Script
Lâm, K. N., Nguy, L. H., Le, V. L., & Kalita, J. K. (2023) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2023.3307635 · Cited by 15
“has benefited significantly from ChatGPT [42], [43], [44].”
BackgroundChatGPT in Higher Education: Design Teaching Model Involving ChatGPT
An, Y., Ouyang, W., & Fu, Z. (2023) · Lecture Notes in Education Psychology and Public Media · doi:10.54254/2753-7048/24/20230560 · Cited by 12
Bakas, N., Papadaki, M., Vagianou, E., Christou, I. T., & Chatzichristofis, S. A. (2024) · Lecture notes in business information processing · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-56478-9_21 · Cited by 13
ChatGPT in public policy teaching and assessment: An examination of opportunities and challenges
Casey, D. (2024) · Australian Journal of Public Administration · doi:10.1111/1467-8500.12647 · Cited by 12
The Vision of University Students from the Educational Field in the Integration of ChatGPT
Cifuentes, S. C., Valverde, E. G., & Caballero, S. C. (2024) · Digital · doi:10.3390/digital4030032 · Cited by 13
“Moreover, it is essential for teaching staff to be adequately prepared to integrate these tools into their teaching and evaluation practices [13].”
BackgroundAI and ChatGPT in Higher Education: Greek Students’ Perceived Practices, Benefits, and Challenges
Κώστας, Α., Paraschou, V., Spanos, D., Tzortzoglou, F., & Sofos, A. (2025) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci15050605 · Cited by 24
Uso de ChatGPT como herramienta en las aulas de clase
Alzate, A. S. (2023) · Revista EIA · doi:10.24050/reia.v20i40.1708 · Cited by 12
ChatGPT: Systematic Review of Potentials and Limitations in Education
Patrício, M. R., & Gonçalves, B. F. (2024) · Lecture notes in networks and systems · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-54256-5_32 · Cited by 12
AI-Powered Chatbots as Personalized Academic Writing Assistants for Non-Native English Speakers
Sol, K., & Heng, K. (2024) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-981-13-2262-4_313-1 · Cited by 12
Stranges, T. N., & MacNutt, M. J. (2025) · AJP Advances in Physiology Education · doi:10.1152/advan.00241.2024 · Cited by 13
Rafidi, T. J., & Khatib, N. E. (2025) · Discover Education · doi:10.1007/s44217-025-00721-1 · Cited by 14
“This has led educators to develop multimodal examination formats and consider advanced proctoring techniques to limit cheating [27, 30].”
Ibrahim, A.-W., Taura, A. A., Iliyasu, A., Shogbesan, Y. O., & Lukman, S. A. (2024) · Edukasiana Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan · doi:10.56916/ejip.v3i3.763 · Cited by 21
“In fact, Sullivan et al. (2023) concluded that “academics can redesign assessment tasks in such a way that they cannot be completed as easily by AI tools” (p. 35).”
BackgroundResultInfluentialChatGPT in Higher Education: Perceptions of Computer Science-Related Students
Hammer, S., Ottinger, S., Zönnchen, B., Hohendanner, M., Hobelsberger, M., & Thurner, V. (2024) · IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON) · doi:10.1109/educon60312.2024.10578742 · Cited by 13
“Consequently, large language models (LLMs), such as ChatGPT, entered the realm of education which elicited both admiration and controversy [1].”
BackgroundThe Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Learners and Teachers: A Mathematics Education Perspective
Li, X., Gould, T., & Zaki, R. (2024) · Integrated science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-60713-4_9 · Cited by 11
Singh, R. G., & Ngai, C. S. B. (2024) · Discover Education · doi:10.1007/s44217-024-00211-w · Cited by 11
“While some themes uncovered resonate with discussions in prior studies [5, 10], previous studies on ChatGPT followed opinion-based discussions, involved a qualitative study or conducted a literature review e.g. [4, 22, 23] without offering a rigorous research design to identify the key themes…”
InfluentialTransformative landscape of ChatGPT in higher education: unveiling the academic discourse
Shrivastava, A. (2024) · Global Knowledge Memory and Communication · doi:10.1108/gkmc-02-2024-0068 · Cited by 9
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
