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 601–700 of 857
Future-facing assessment and feedback in geography: navigating an evolving landscape
Hill, J. (2026) · Journal of Geography in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03098265.2026.2637878 · Cited by 1
Tishenina, M. (2026) · Studies in Philosophy and Education · doi:10.1007/s11217-026-10051-w · Cited by 4
Pre-Service Teachers’ Perceptions of Artificial Intelligence Fraud: A Thematic Conceptualization
Küçükaydın, M. A. (2026) · Journal of Academic Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10805-026-09733-4 · Cited by 1
“…in this study explains how teacher candidates draw ethical boundaries regarding artificial intelligence by addressing contextual factors (Lund et al., 2025 ), internal ethical inquiries (Macfarlane et al., 2014 ; Sullivan et al., 2023 ), forms of use, and professional consequences together.”
Generative AI and management education: a knowledge management perspective
Rai, H., Malik, N., & Varma, A. (2026) · Journal of Knowledge Management · doi:10.1108/jkm-01-2025-0102 · Cited by 3
Dong, H., Ngai, C. S. B., Yi, L., & Liu, M. (2026) · Higher Education · doi:10.1007/s10734-026-01624-2 · Cited by 3
Kalim, U., Irfan, S., Jamil, B., & Kanwar, A. S. (2026) · Discover Education · doi:10.1007/s44217-026-01370-8 · Cited by 3
Ridhani, J., Gunawan, K., Putra, I. N. T. A., Cahyono, B. T., & Indrawan, I. P. O. (2025) · International Conference on Data Science and Geoinformatics (ICDSG) · doi:10.1109/icdsg67714.2025.11381334 · Cited by 1
Assessment futures through teachers’ eyes: a qualitative case study in higher education
Katajavuori, N., Pyörälä, E., Haarala-Muhonen, A., Kallunki, V., Kinnunen, P., & Myyry, L. (2026) · European Journal of Higher Education · doi:10.1080/21568235.2026.2658139 · Cited by 1
Zhu, J., Guan, C., Zhang, H., Wang, L., Zhang, Y., & Bian, X. (2026) · Frontiers in Medicine · doi:10.3389/fmed.2026.1817255 · Cited by 2
“By identifying knowledge gaps, providing personalized tutoring, and enhancing feedback, AI-assisted teaching methods may improve both teaching quality and learning outcomes (8–10).”
Random Forest-Based Prediction of Academic Misconduct Among Medical Professional Master's Student
Zhang, L., Wang, S., & Xue, S. (2026) · International Conference on Digital Education and Information Technology (DEIT) · doi:10.1145/3802607.3802668 · Cited by 1
Artificial Intelligence and Higher Education: A Bibliometric Study
Facina, A. S., Facina, I. S., Borsatto, J. M. L. S., & Carli, A. S. S. D. (2026) · World sustainability series · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-12678-8_15 · Cited by 1
Alnujaidi, S. (2026) · Journal of language and Education · doi:10.17323/jle.2026.27903 · Cited by 2
Hu, W. W. (2026) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075079.2026.2658738 · Cited by 1
Zhou, J. (2026) · International Conference on Big Data and Informatization Education (ICBDIE) · doi:10.1145/3806980.3806996 · Cited by 1
“Sullivan et al. [9] investigated pre-service teachers’ perceptions of AI integration through qualitative interviews, revealing that while educators recognize AI’s potential for reducing administrative workload, significant anxiety exists regarding its impact on pedagogical authenticity and…”
Mokgwathi, M. S. (2026) · Discover Education · doi:10.1007/s44217-026-01797-z · Cited by 3
“These patterns suggest that awareness of epistemic risk does not automatically translate into effective epistemic regulation without instructional support [43, 50].”
Bariham, I. (2026) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2026.1846197 · Cited by 1
Kazykhankyzy, L., Khalmatova, Z., Seıtova, M., Kılıç, E., & Çelik, H. E. (2026) · European Journal of Education · doi:10.1111/ejed.70746 · Cited by 1
Cammà, C., Amenta, L., Battaglia, S., Celsa, C., Cirrincione, G., Contino, S., Corso, P. P., Dio, S. D., Maria, G. D., Enea, M., et al. (2026) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1861001 · Cited by 1
“Recent developments in generative AI, particularly large language models like ChatGPT, have accelerated discussions about AI’s role in education (Kelly and Sullivan, 2023).”
EGenAI-DBR: a design-based framework for responsible generative AI integration in higher education
Saremi, S., Mirzaei, M., Rasti, A., Abadeh, M. N., Varposhti, M., Shibl, R., Ahmed, H., Dkheel, S. A., Wang, K., & Humphreys, D. (2026) · Education Innovations Systems and Future Learning · doi:10.1108/eisfl-04-2026-0057 · Cited by 1
Apata, O. E., Kwok, O., & Ajose, S. T. (2026) · Journal of Computer Assisted Learning · doi:10.1002/jcal.70309 · Cited by 3
Charles, K., Lucy, A. C., Irene, E. C., & Fobi, S. (2026) · Educational Point · doi:10.71176/edup/19172 · Cited by 1
“(Coates et al., 2025; Eaton, 2021; Munaye et al., 2025; Sullivan et al., 2023)”
Empowering Faculty Vitality and Mitigating Burnout Through Generative AI in Higher Education
Evans, S. Y. (2024) · Advances in educational technologies and instructional design book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3693-1351-0.ch014 · Cited by 3
Pondering Deeper, Ahead and Beyond Over the Use of ChatGPT in H(A)Igher Education
Soroliou, E., Kritikou, M. O., Antonopoulos, S., & Kania, A. (2023) · HAPSc Policy Briefs Series · doi:10.12681/hapscpbs.36697 · Cited by 1
Educația și conștientizarea etică a tehnologiilor IA și folosirea lor în mediul academic
Cioranu-Rădulescu, C. (2024) · Revista de Pedagogie Digitala · doi:10.61071/rpd.2420 · Cited by 1
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AS A DRIVER OF INNOVATION IN EDUCATION
Tereshchuk, S., SLOBODIANIUK, O., & Kuzmina Greblia liceium, U. (2023) · ЗБІРНИК НАУКОВИХ ПРАЦЬ КАМ'ЯНЕЦЬ-ПОДІЛЬСЬКОГО НАЦІОНАЛЬНОГО УНІВЕРСИТЕТУ ІМЕНІ ІВАНА ОГІЄНКА. СЕРІЯ ПЕДАГОГІЧНА · doi:10.32626/2307-4507.2023-29.36-40 · Cited by 1
Application of ChatGPT in Doctoral Education and Programming
Long, K. B., & Adams, K. R. (2024) · Advances in educational technologies and instructional design book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3693-1054-0.ch008 · Cited by 2
A Study to Measure the Potential Impact of Generative Artificial Intelligence on Academic Integrity
Duane, A. (2024) · Resilience Through Digital Innovation: Enabling the Twin Transition · doi:10.18690/um.fov.4.2024.1 · Cited by 2
Alvarez, G., & Creß, U. (2024) · Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching · doi:10.37074/jalt.2024.7.2.16 · Cited by 2
Real Customization or Just Marketing: Are Customized Versions of Generative AI Useful?
Garrido‐Merchán, E. C., Barrigüete, J. L. A., Borrás-Pala, F., Escobar-Torres, L., Zorita, C. M. D. I., Ortiz-Lozano, J. M., & Vieites, A. R. (2024) · F1000Research · doi:10.12688/f1000research.153129.2 · Cited by 1
Chat GPT in Higher Education: An Analysis of Research Trends and Themes
Ibrahimi, G., & Benchekroun, B. A. (2024) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-65691-0_2 · Cited by 1
Postigo-Zumarán, J. E., Revilla, L. J. N., Arias-Chávez, D., & Sevillano, L. M. C. (2024) · International Journal of Religion · doi:10.61707/3m2s5y94 · Cited by 1
“In addition, Gamage et al. (2023) and Sullivan et al. (2023), conducted critical studies on the challenges associated with ChatGPT-generated content detection, its impact on academic integrity and in terms of factors to consider for higher level students' learning.”
From Chatting to Cheating: How Can Ethical Considerations Be Ensured in this AI-Driven Research Era?
Benaissa, M., Attou, Y., Seddik, M., & Nfissi, A. (2025) · International Journal of Language and Literary Studies · doi:10.36892/ijlls.v7i1.1996 · Cited by 3
“(Sullivan, et. al,2023).”
Digital Enhancement: Applying Generative AI in Students Decision Making Process
Cabral, C. A. A., & Pereira, R. (2025) · Studies in systems, decision and control · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-78412-5_7 · Cited by 1
Perception of ChatGPT’s Effectiveness in Learning
Gupta, V., Bhokare, S., & Patil, P. (2025) · International Journal of Advanced Research in Science Communication and Technology · doi:10.48175/ijarsct-23170 · Cited by 1
Hunter, J., Bai, E., Alberini, G., & Robinson, K. A. (2025) · ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE) · doi:10.1145/3641554.3701852 · Cited by 1
“A Co-Pilot for Learning Design?”
Ryall, A., & Abblitt, S. (2023) · ASCILITE Publications · doi:10.14742/apubs.2023.513 · Cited by 1
Modifying assessment tasks to ensure learning occurs in the era of artificial intelligence
Palmer, E. (2023) · ASCILITE Publications · doi:10.14742/apubs.2023.536 · Cited by 1
“We need to focus on learning (Al-Husseiny, 2023; Sullivan et al., 2023) rather than ‘catching’ violations of academic integrity and to do that our focus must be on assessment.”
BackgroundAithal, S., & Aithal, P. S. (2024) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4715179 · Cited by 1
AI Literacy in Academic Library Instruction: An Environmental ScanPreprint
Bongiovanni, E. A., Beltran, L., Griego, C. D., Herckis, L., Kawaratani, L. E., Lan, H., McKee, J., & Werlinich, A. (2025) · doi:10.31219/osf.io/rcy57_v2 · Cited by 1
Writing with AI at the Margins: Student Voice and Authenticity at a Minority-Serving InstitutionPreprint
Chick, J. (2025) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-8427622/v1 · Cited by 3
A Systematic Review of Ethical Integration of Generative AI in Higher Education
Yarboi, P. Y., Adu-Manu, K. S., Amponsah, S., Oheneba-Sakyi, Y., & Barimah, A. (2026) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci16071016 · Cited by 1
Abdellatif, M. S., Alshehri, M. A., Lamouchi, A., Rahmath, M., & Nemt-allah, M. A. (2026) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1809174
“Sullivan et al. (2023) identified systemic marginalization of student voices in favor of institutional integrity narratives.”
Shepherd, N. J. (2025) · Journal of Knowledge Learning and Science Technology ISSN: 2959-6386 (online) · doi:10.60087/jklst.vol4.n4.016
Generative AI Usage and Information Literacy Skills among University Students in North-West Nigeria
Dada, K. S. J., & Quadir, O. R. (2026) · Data Science: Journal of Computing and Applied Informatics · doi:10.32734/jocai.v10.i1-24709
Karadağ, E., Calışkan, N., Çiftçi, Ş. S., & Polat, M. (2026) · Journal of Narrative and Language Studies · doi:10.59045/nalans.2026.93
Exploring ChatGPT and Higher Education Practice in Indonesia
Yusuf, Y., Hudaya, H., & Abdu, W. J. (2023) · International Journal of Membrane Science and Technology · doi:10.15379/ijmst.v10i3.1777
“It can provide students and educators with personalized, real-time responses to their questions and needs, and it can be used to generate lesson plans or teaching materials, allowing educators to save time and effort in preparing for class [1].”
BackgroundChat GPT no ensino de física experimental
Souza, L. B. E., Dias, A. B., de Arruda, M. M., Lima, K. L. D., & CAMPOS, L. B. (2023) · Brazilian Congress of Engineering Education (COBENGE) · doi:10.37702/2175-957x.cobenge.2023.4656
Indicadores e índices para evaluar el uso y apropiación tecnológica en docentes de licenciatura
Rodríguez, E. R. (2023) · RIDE Revista Iberoamericana para la Investigación y el Desarrollo Educativo · doi:10.23913/ride.v14i27.1735
Сучасні виклики академічної доброчесності
Вараксіна, О. В. (2023) · Высшая школа: научные исследования · doi:10.36059/978-966-397-345-6-25
(2024) · Emerald Group Publishing Limited eBooks · doi:10.1108/978-1-83797-647-820241013
Education for Emancipating Teachers
Scotton, P. (2024) · Palgrave studies in educational philosophy and theory. · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-47044-8_10
ChatGPT és más nagy nyelvi modellek (LLM-ek) biztonsági kérdései, szervezeti és társadalmi hatásai
Nagy, P. (2024) · Rendvédelem · doi:10.53793/rv.2024.2.1 · Cited by 1
Strategies and Considerations of Implementing AI in Higher Education
Harthy, K. A., & Hasani, S. A. A. (2024) · Advances in educational technologies and instructional design book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3693-2145-4.ch011
CHATGPT AND CREATIVE THINKING IN UNIVERSITY STUDENTS
Gonzales, J. D. R. (2024) · doi:10.53555//zenodo.7546575 · Cited by 1
CHATGPT AND CREATIVE THINKING IN UNIVERSITY STUDENTS
Gonzales, J. D. R. (2024) · doi:10.53555/zenodo.7546575
Tan, H. K. R. (2024) · Sains Humanika · doi:10.11113/sh.v16n2.2135
Margono, H., Saud, M., & Falahat, M. (2024) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4851986
Anonymous assessment: is it still worth it?
Smith, P. V., & Whitworth, A. (2024) · Teaching in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/13562517.2024.2363891
Bienvenido-Huertas, D., Pérez-Ordóñez, J. L., Álvarez, J. M. D., & Sánchez-García, D. (2024) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-59644-5_34
Thambirajah, J. I. (2024) · International Journal For Multidisciplinary Research · doi:10.36948/ijfmr.2024.v06i03.23153
González, M. S. (2023) · International Conference on Virtual Campus (JICV) · doi:10.1109/jicv59748.2023.10565683
“…intelligence also occupies a significant portion of academic production in universities, as evidence the research of Sullivan et al. (2023) [7], which indicates that the majority revolves around academic integrity and opportunities for innovative assessment designs with AI, while little…”
BackgroundThe Use of Chat-Gpt in Creating Educational MaterialsPreprint
Александровна, Л. А. (2024) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4864331
ChatGPT Empowers Teacher Education Change: Advantages, Challenges, and responses
Cong, X. (2024) · Journal of higher education teaching. · doi:10.62517/jhet.202415307
“Internal and external factors such as individual, situational, and institutional factors are highly likely to induce normal students to engage in cheating, including competition, pressure, poor management of time and resources, poor academic background, and the desire to achieve good grades [7] .”
Camarillo, M. K., Lee, L. P., & Swan, C. (2024) · ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition · doi:10.18260/1-2--48014 · Cited by 1
Revolutionizing Education: Supporting Digital Transformation with ChatGPT
Baytiyeh, H. (2024) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-70779-7_5
Özer, Ö. (2024) · Advances in educational technologies and instructional design book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3693-4310-4.ch010
Tondepu, N. (2024) · International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology (IJISRT) · doi:10.38124/ijisrt/ijisrt24aug1110
Accentuate the Positive: Exploratory Case Study of ChatGPT as a Complementary Learning Tool
Barrett, G., Fitzgerald, C., & Ryan, M. (2024) · Lecture notes in educational technology · doi:10.1007/978-981-97-6136-4_13
Liu, Y. (2024) · Advances in educational marketing, administration, and leadership book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3693-3707-3.ch019
Estrategias de enseñanza con IAGen como oportunidades de catalización de la integridad académica
Angelis, S. D., Perillo, L., Aubert, E., Cherbavaz, M. C., & Andreoli, S. A. (2024) · Trayectorias Universitarias · doi:10.24215/24690090e169
“…socialización de documentos oficiales con directrices sobre el uso y alcance de estas tecnologías, la invitación a su utilización en contextos específicos de actividad, hasta su incorporación expresa mediante sugerencias de actividades en guías docentes (Sullivan et al., 2023; Toksha et al., 2022).”
The use of ChatGPT in higher education: Students' perceptions
Dragojević, T. N., & Turudić, J. (2024) · Nastava i vaspitanje · doi:10.5937/nasvas2403315d
Shivdas, A., Sumesh, G., Suresh, A., & Adhil, S. (2024) · Studies in systems, decision and control · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-71526-6_14
Hermila, A., Bau, R. T. R. L., & Latief, M. (2024) · IEEE International Conference on Data and Software Engineering (ICoDSE) · doi:10.1109/icodse63307.2024.10829912
ChatGPT Calls for Self Reflection: Student Perceptions of Evaluation Activities in Video
Hayashi, V. T., & Paiva, H. M. (2024) · IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment, and Learning for Engineering · doi:10.1109/tale62452.2024.10834346 · Cited by 1
“A 2023 survey of 1,000 college students showed that a fifth of them use ChatGPT to write assessment responses [1].”
L'Intelligenza Artificiale in ambito educativo: percezioni dei docenti in formazione iniziale
Martino, V. D. (2025) · EDUCATION SCIENCES AND SOCIETY · doi:10.3280/ess2-2024oa18470
The use of AI in the development of learning strategies by university students
Gonzáles, M. O. F. (2024) · Seminars in Medical Writing and Education · doi:10.56294/mw2024657
Mesny, A., Roberge‐Maltais, I., & Galy, A. (2025) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5168346
The Show-Your-Chat-History Method for Transparent Student AI Usage
Broemmer, D. (2025) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3693-7332-3.ch029
Fostering Academic Integrity: a Key to Advancing Higher Education
Tymchenko, I., Danyliuk, I. M., Yaroshov, M., Yaremkevych, R., & Демiхова, С. (2025) · Cadernos de Educação Tecnologia e Sociedade · doi:10.14571/brajets.v18.nse2.270-280
Sedio, M. Z. (2025) · E-Journal of Humanities Arts and Social Sciences · doi:10.38159/ehass.20256310
Ai as a Mode of Communication in Belf: Insights from Japanese Business ProfessionalsPreprint
Ujiie, S. O. (2025) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5235158 · Cited by 1
Brunton, R., Rhazzafe, S., Moodley, R., Kühn, S., Caraffini, F., Wilford, S., Higginbottom, R., Colreavy‐Donnelly, S., & Góngora, M. (2025) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5243811
Sang, N. Q., Thao, N., Tam, D. T. M., & Duc, M. L. (2025) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5264269
Exploring Prospects of Artificial Intelligence-Based ChatGPT for Higher Education Context
Makgato-Khunou, P., & Tlale, L. D. N. (2025) · Journal of Education and Learning Technology · doi:10.38159/jelt.2025652
Student Experience with AI-Assisted Situational Analysis in Construction Management
Daggubati, S. C. (2025) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-981-96-6001-8_5
García-Chitiva, M. D. P. (2025) · Panorama · doi:10.15765/r9j1gm70 · Cited by 1
Research on AI Application in English Writing Instruction
Wang, W. (2025) · Lecture Notes in Education Psychology and Public Media · doi:10.54254/2753-7048/2025.cb23805
AI and the Future of Social Science Education
Lee, J., & Liu, Y. (2025) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-2612-2.ch001
(2025) · Saudi Journal of Educational Sciences · doi:10.33948/sjes-ksu-2-19
الدوسري, أ., الجندي, ع. ع., & العمري, ج. م. (2025) · Saudi Journal of Educational Sciences · doi:10.33948/sjes-ksu-2-19-1
Integration of Artificial Intelegence into English for Academic Purposes
Abuova, J., & Abdullah, S. I. S. S. (2024) · International Conference on Future Networks and Distributed Systems (ICFNDS) · doi:10.1145/3726122.3726159 · Cited by 1
“[17] state that AI can be easily used for plagiarism and cheating purposes, especially in writing assignments.”
ChatGPT in Education: Challenges and Best Practices
Salvador, L. R., Llerena, C. L. Á., & Dai, N. H. P. (2025) · IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Engineering Systems (INES) · doi:10.1109/ines67149.2025.11078207
“AI-tools should in fomenting”
OMOYAJOWO, B. S., & BAMBI, B. I. (2025) · Federal University Gusau Faculty of Education Journal · doi:10.64348/zije.202558
Students’ perspectives on the application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in completing assignments.
Luu, T. T., & Nguyen, L. T. (2025) · International STEM Education Conference (iSTEM-Ed) · doi:10.1109/istem-ed65612.2025.11129375
Suitability Assessments in Higher Education
Hvalby, M. (2025) · Nordisk tidsskrift i veiledningspedagogikk · doi:10.15845/ntvp.v10i2.4382
Agormedah, E. K. (2025) · Future education and learning spaces · doi:10.1007/978-981-96-9251-4_10 · Cited by 1
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
