Cited by 550Artificial Intelligence in EducationAcademic integrity and plagiarismArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 59 of the 63 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 23 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

Leadership is needed for ethical ChatGPT: Character, assessment, and learning using artificial intelligence (AI)

Open access

Crawford, Joseph, Cowling, Michael, Allen, Kelly-Ann·2023·Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice

DOI 10.53761/1.20.3.02

Open this paper in CoChat — free account Open PDF

Abstract

The OpenAI’s ChatGPT-3, or Chat Generative Pre-Trained Transformer was released in November 2022 without significant warning, and has taken higher education by storm since. The artificial intelligence (AI)-powered chatbot has caused alarm for practitioners seeking to detect authenticity of student work. Whereas some educational doomsayers predict the end of education in its current form, we propose an alternate early view. We identify in this commentary a position where educators can leverage AI like ChatGPT to build supportive learning environments for students who have cultivated good character. Such students know how to use ChatGPT for good, and can engage effectively with the ChatGPT application. In building our ChatGPT argument, we acknowledge the existing literature on plagiarism and academic integrity, and consider leadership as a root support mechanism, character development as an antidote, and authentic assessment as an enabler. In doing so, we highlight that while ChatGPT – like papermills, and degree factories before it – can be used to cheat on university exams, it can also be used to support deeper learning and better learning outcomes for students. In doing so, we offer a commentary that offers opportunities for practitioners, and research potential for scholars.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This commentary argues that higher education should respond to ChatGPT not only with detection or bans, but with teacher leadership, character development, and authentic assessment to support ethical and deeper learning. It proposes that ChatGPT can support flow, basic psychological needs, and formative feedback, while acknowledging risks of plagiarism and overreliance.

Key findings

The authors argue that effective teacher leadership and character development are needed so students use ChatGPT “for good, rather than for personal benefit,” rather than relying solely on detection or punishment.
They propose ChatGPT can support positive learning outcomes by reducing cognitive load and enabling flow, supporting autonomy, competence, and relatedness, and providing 24/7 formative feedback and confidence-building.
They argue ChatGPT can enable authentic assessment—for example, applying theory to complex cases, storyboards, or podcasts—rather than assessments that ask students to regurgitate textbook content.
The paper cites contextual numbers: ChatGPT reached 100 million users in less than 2 months; student cheating admissions rose from 3% in 1963 to 64% in 2015; human reviewers correctly identified 68% of ChatGPT-generated abstracts and 86% of genuine abstracts; and one professor reported 14 of 163 students caught using ChatGPT to cheat.

Methods

Design: a commentary/position paper guided by the research question, “What are the opportunities of ChatGPT in higher education practice?”
Data or sample: no empirical sample; the authors draw on existing literature and on ChatGPT-generated responses to prompts, which are quoted as indented italicised paragraphs.
Main analysis: conceptual argument organised around four opportunities—character-based leadership, flow, basic psychological needs, and ChatGPT as student assistant—plus discussion of authentic assessment.

Limitations

The paper states that it offers an “early view” and that peer-reviewed literature on ChatGPT is limited, with few quality studies in top-tier journals at the time.
The paper acknowledges that ChatGPT outputs are not actually ChatGPT’s opinion but “a confluence of societal opinion from its last knowledge update,” and that the veracity of its output should always be questioned.
Evident from the text: this is a commentary without empirical data, sample, or systematic analysis; its claims about benefits rely on author propositions and ChatGPT self-assessment rather than tested outcomes.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.53761/1.20.3.02

Cites

59 of 59 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 23 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

In the paper
“The future-focused promotion of good practice and character development does not forego the need for detection, as undetected cheating could lead to future character erosion, but rather offers a multipronged response that serves as more effective than only focusing on prevention or prescription”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites LaMontagne et al., 2014
Load-bearingStrength:boosted· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes
In the paper
“In these scenarios it was the leadership of teachers that influenced the extent to which students would engage in effective or ineffective (e.g., cheating) learning.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Crawford, 2023
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This indicates, from a practical perspective, that a doctoral candidate with minimal training in grading papers or integrity-detection may have considerable challenge in identifying when students use the AI tool to cheat.”
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes
- Rests on an assumption: In blind studies, human reviewers correctly identified 68% of ChatGPT generated abstracts and 86% of genuine abstracts, but incorrectly identified the rest.
In the paper
“a fact that mental health scholars have known for some time”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites LaMontagne et al., 2014
Strength:boosted· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passes
In the paper
“and it is helping them succeed (Chen et al., 2023)”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Chen et al., 2023
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passes
In the paper
“While students are presenting an acceptance of chatbots (Ragheb et al., 2021)”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Ragheb et al., 2021
Strength:plain· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passes

Show all 8 claims

Probably not a substantial claim. 66
It may state two separate claims as one. 21

In the paper
“Writing is already a complex activity but paired with deadlines, other academic pressures and stress, students undertake a substantial cognitive load when completing written-based assignments”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Lea & Street, 1998
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Such a focus may enable students to inquire about their content and material more deeply, and indeed engage in deeper forms of learning (e.g., Archer-Kuhn, 2020).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Archer-Kuhn, 2020
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passes
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In 1963, for instance, only 3 percent of students admitted to cheating on exams, while in 2015, that number had risen to 64 percent and some studies identify higher rates”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites McCabe et al., 2016
- Not checked yetcites Wright, 2015
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passes
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In a context where increasing numbers of university students feel lonely and isolated (Thomas et al., 2020), ChatGPT-3 could fill a part of this void.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Thomas et al., 2020
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passes
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“That is, while the data may generally be correct, and it can support higher volume scholarly work (Liebrenz et al., 2023), it still needs a critical reader in its work.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Liebrenz et al., 2023
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Such development is critical if moral disengagement and patterns of motivated forgetting of bad decisions is to be avoided, two key mechanisms by which students can feel comfortable with cheating”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Shu et al., 2011
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“This opportunity, with the right assessment and curriculum design, could enable students to be more critical in their learning, rather than anxious that they have a lack of references, or that commas are in the wrong place (Gravett & Kinchin, 2020).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Gravett & Kinchin, 2020
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Assuming they build capacity to evaluate the value of the text and ensure that the final output is correct, this has the potential to produce a more useful result, reflecting the students' ideas and approach, but allowing them to express themselves as a form of 'transition pedagogy'.”
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: fails
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Students will build the capacity to evaluate the value of the text and ensure that the final output is correct.
In the paper
“Instead, and perhaps unlike papermills, ChatGPT can be encouraged in the same way software tools like Grammarly can be used to support learning (Thi & Nikolov, 2022).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Thi & Nikolov, 2022
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“with an oft-quoted statistic that ChatGPT was able to reach 100 million users in less than 2 months”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hu, 2023
Strength:hedged· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passes
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“There is an implied assumption in the emergent literature that students will use ChatGPT-3 to write assignments for them (e.g., Pavlik, 2023;Perkins, 2023).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Pavlik, 2023
- Not checked yetcites Perkins, 2023
Strength:plain· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passes
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Research has found that academic stress is positively linked with cheating behaviour (Ma et al., 2013) and students who are more likely to engage in plagiarism (Ehrich et al., 2016).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Ma et al., 2013
- Not checked yetcites Ehrich et al., 2016
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passes
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“And for some, effective measures of detection, and prescription of significant punishment has been the proposed solution”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Amigud & Dawson, 2019
- Not checked yetcites Dawson et al., 2020
Strength:plain· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passes
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“ChatGPT-3, we posit, also has the propensity to support students meeting their basic psychological needs of autonomy, competence, and relatedness to facilitate self-determination and bolster academic motivation and performance (Geary et al., 2023Ryan & Deci, 2000).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Geary et al., 2023
- Not checked yetcites Ryan & Deci, 2000
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibrated
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passes
It may state two separate claims as one.

71 of 71

The paper relies on this without support.
ChatGPT can create new and innovative authentic assessment in higher education.
“ChatGPT can create new and innovative authentic assessment in higher education.”
The paper relies on this without support.
In blind studies, human reviewers correctly identified 68% of ChatGPT generated abstracts and 86% of genuine abstracts, but incorrectly identified the rest.
“Although, in the context of blind studies, human reviewers correctly identified 68 percent of ChatGPT generated abstracts and 86 percent of genuine abstracts, but incorrectly identified the rest.”
The paper relies on this without support.
ChatGPT was introduced publicly from November 2022, with a stable release from February 2023.
“the ChatGPT AI being introduced publicly from November 2022, and a stable release from February 2023.”
The paper relies on this without support.
ChatGPT-3 was released in November 2022 without significant warning and has taken higher education by storm.
“The OpenAI's ChatGPT-3, or Chat Generative Pre-Trained Transformer was released in November 2022 without significant warning, and has taken higher education by storm since.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
Students will build the capacity to evaluate the value of the text and ensure that the final output is correct.
“Assuming they build capacity to evaluate the value of the text and ensure that the final output is correct”
The paper relies on this without support.
Many scholars have presented arguments against ChatGPT's utility in classrooms, citing plagiarism, authentication, and academic integrity as key concerns.
“Many scholars to date have presented arguments against the tool's utility in classrooms, citing plagiarism, authentication, and academic integrity as key concerns.”

6 of 6

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

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

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

Same article listed with different first authors
Minor
References 10 and 65 give the same title, journal, volume, issue, year, and pages, but disagree about the article's first author and author order.

1 of 1

Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037//0003-066x.55.1.68 · Cited by 54,599
State-of-the-art in artificial neural network applications: A survey
Abiodun, O. I., Jantan, A., Omolara, A. E., Dada, K. V., Mohamed, N. A., & Arshad, H. (2018) · Heliyon · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2018.e00938 · Cited by 3,227
Student writing in higher education: An academic literacies approach
Lea, M. R., & Street, B. (1998) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075079812331380364 · Cited by 2,608 · cited 1×
“Writing is already a complex activity but paired with deadlines, other academic pressures and stress, students undertake a substantial cognitive load when completing written-based assignments (Lea & Street, 1998).”
Background
The prevalence and correlates of depression, anxiety, and stress in a sample of college students
Beiter, R., Nash, R., McCrady, M., Rhoades, D., Linscomb, M., Clarahan, M., & Sammut, S. (2015) · Journal of Affective Disorders · doi:10.1016/j.jad.2014.10.054 · Cited by 2,030 · cited 2×
“Research shows that social and peer pressure (Beiter et al., 2015), academic work (Alghamdi et al., 2019), financial concerns (Beiter et al., 2015), academic pressure (Reddy et al., 2018), and balancing other responsibilities like work and family (von Keyserlingk et al., 2022) are significant…”
Background
The forthcoming artificial intelligence (AI) revolution: Its impact on society and firms
Makridakis, S. (2017) · Futures · doi:10.1016/j.futures.2017.03.006 · Cited by 1,866 · cited 2×
“, 2021), building targeted marketing campaigns and using their understanding of both individuals and groups to tailor their content (Makridakis, 2017).”
Background
ChatGPT: five priorities for research
van Dis, E. A. M., Bollen, J., Zuidema, W., van Rooij, R., & Bockting, C. L. (2023) · Nature · doi:10.1038/d41586-023-00288-7 · Cited by 1,842 · cited 1×
“And these four proposed below also go beyond technology- and authentication-centric strategies proposed by van Dis et al. (2023).”
Background
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
ChatGPT is fun, but not an author
Thorp, H. H. (2023) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.adg7879 · Cited by 1,437 · cited 2×
“These studies, with considerable brevity, highlight a position on ChatGPT, including Editor-inChief of Science, Holden Thorp (2023), which indicates “Machines play an important role, but as tools for the people posing the hypotheses... and making sense of the results”, or put more simply, it is not an author on a pape…”
Background
A Review of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Education from 2010 to 2020
Zhai, X., Chu, X., Chai, C. S., Jong, M. S. Y., Istenic, A., Spector, M., Liu, J.-B., Yuan, J., & Li, Y. (2021) · Complexity · doi:10.1155/2021/8812542 · Cited by 1,364
The impact of stress on students in secondary school and higher education
Pascoe, M. C., Hetrick, S. E., & Parker, A. G. (2020) · International Journal of Adolescence and Youth · doi:10.1080/02673843.2019.1596823 · Cited by 1,359 · cited 1×
“Stress has substantial implications resulting in often adverse effects on students' academic performance, a concern given that it is also widely reported that University students face significant psychosocial challenges during their studies (Deng et al., 2022; Pascoe et al., 2020).”
Background

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 63 references

4 of the 63 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

van Dis, E. A., Bollen, J., Zuidema, W., van Rooij, R., & Bockting, C. L. (2023). ChatGPT: five priorities for research. Nature, 614(7947), 224-226.

Sorted by citations

Items 201–300 of 550

ChatGPT and healthcare—current and future prospects
Booven, D. V., & Chen, C. (2024) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-443-15504-8.00006-5 · Cited by 13
A Review of Generative AI in Computer Science Education: Challenges and Opportunities in Accuracy, Authenticity, and Assessment
Reihanian, I., Hou, Y., Chen, Y., & Zheng, Y. (2025) · Communications in computer and information science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-94943-2_11 · Cited by 22
Epistemic trust in generative AI for higher education scale (ETGAI-HE scale)
Pandey, C. S., Mishra, P., Pandey, S., & Pandey, S. (2025) · AI & Society · doi:10.1007/s00146-025-02566-6 · Cited by 12
“Artificial intelligence is being applied in specific domains such as healthcare research (Crawford et al. 2023) and finance (Dowling and Lucey 2023).”
Student engagement with artificial intelligence tools in academia: a survey of Jordanian universities
Mashagbeh, M. A., Alsharqawi, M., Tudevdagva, U., & Khasawneh, H. J. (2025) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2025.1550147 · Cited by 25
The Quantitative and Qualitative Study of the Effectiveness of the Problem-based Learning Approach in Teaching Research Methods
Kaeedi, A., Esfahani, A. R. N., Sharifian, F., & Moosavipour, S. (2023) · Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice · doi:10.53761/1.20.5.07 · Cited by 17
Academic integrity violations in higher education: a systematic literature review from 2013–2023
Sozon, M., Sia, B. C., Pok, W. F., & Alkharabsheh, O. H. M. (2024) · Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education · doi:10.1108/jarhe-12-2023-0559 · Cited by 28
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
“Exploring the ethical implications that artificial intelligence can have in the educational context, as [40,45,46] did in their studies, is essential.”
Background
AI 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
ChatGPT and its impact on competence training in occupational therapists: a reflection on academic integrity
Avello-Sáez, D., & Estrada-Palavecino, L. (2023) · Cadernos Brasileiros de Terapia Ocupacional · doi:10.1590/2526-8910.ctoen271035342 · Cited by 12
“…with one's own critical thinking, analysis and research is highlighted, and of being aware of the risks associated with dependence on this type of tool, since they can restrict creativity, critical thinking and problem solving (Crawford et al., 2023; Farrokhnia et al., 2023; Tlili et al., 2023).”
BackgroundMethodInfluential
Discovering how students use generative artificial intelligence tools for academic writing purposes
Johnston, H., Eaton, M., Henry, I., Deeley, E.-M., & Parsons, B. N. (2025) · Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education · doi:10.47408/jldhe.vi34.1301 · Cited by 12
On the Influence of Artificial Intelligence on Foreign Language Learning and Suggested Learning Strategies
Aijun, Y. (2024) · International Journal of Education and Humanities · doi:10.58557/(ijeh).v4i2.214 · Cited by 23
“This finding is supported by the previous studies highlighting technical drawbacks of using chatbots (Crawford et al., 2023; Huang et al., 2022).”
Result
A Cross-Era Discourse on ChatGPT’s Influence in Higher Education through the Lens of John Dewey and Benjamin Bloom
Mandai, K., Tan, M. J. H., Padhi, S., & Pang, K. T. (2024) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci14060614 · Cited by 11
“Another concern may be its influence on educational “outcomes” where, for instance, ChatGPT and related AI tools could be used to cheat or substantially alter the result of students’ assessments [20].”
Background
The digital transformation of jurisprudence: an evaluation of ChatGPT-4’s applicability to solve cases in business law
Schweitzer, S., & Conrads, M. (2024) · Artificial Intelligence and Law · doi:10.1007/s10506-024-09406-w · Cited by 15
The research landscape on generative artificial intelligence: a bibliometric analysis of transformer-based models
Sekli, G. M. (2024) · Kybernetes · doi:10.1108/k-03-2024-0554 · Cited by 13
Top-ranked U.S. and U.K.’s universities’ first responses to GenAI: key themes, emotions, and pedagogical implications for teaching and learning
Singh, R. G., & Ngai, C. S. B. (2024) · Discover Education · doi:10.1007/s44217-024-00211-w · Cited by 11
“Halaweh [25] argued for the ethical use of ChatGPT in education and Crawford et al. [26] suggested that appropriate leadership is required for the ethical use of ChatGPT in education.”
Exploring knowledge, attitudes, and practices of academics in the field of educational sciences towards using ChatGPT
Karafil, B., & Uyar, A. (2025) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-024-13291-w · Cited by 14
“Various researchers have highlighted concerns regarding academic integrity among students, citing the potential for misuse or unethical use of ChatGPT (Atlas, 2023; Cotton et al., 2023; Crawford et al., 2023; Eke, 2023; Sallam, 2023; Sok & Heng, 2023; Sullivan et al., 2023).”
Use of case studies in social work assessments – ChatGPT’s kryptonite?
Netto, N. R. (2023) · Social Work Education · doi:10.1080/02615479.2023.2266461 · Cited by 14
“…academic integrity concerns to be addressed, a commentary espoused the need for leadership as a root support mechanism, character development as an antidote, and authentic assessment as an enabler, so as to enable deeper learning with improved learning outcomes for students (Crawford et al., 2023).”
Generative AI in higher education: The need to develop or revise academic integrity policies to ensure the ethical use of AI in CambodiaPreprint
Sok, S., & Heng, K. (2024) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4806030 · Cited by 14
ChatGPT and the course vulnerability index
Adilov, N., Cline, J. W., Hanke, H., Kauffman, K., Meneau, L., Resendez, E., Singh, S., Slaubaugh, M., & Suntornpithug, N. (2023) · Journal of Education for Business · doi:10.1080/08832323.2023.2260929 · Cited by 10
“…studies exist that specifically delve into the topics of the incorporation of AI tools and cheating mitigation strategies in the classroom (Baidoo-Anu & Owusu Ansah, 2023; Crawford et al., 2023; Oravec, 2022; Qadir, 2023; Reiss, 2021; Surahman & Wang, 2022; Susnjak, 2022; Yildirim et al., 2021).”
AI -ChatGPT Usage Among Users: Factors Affecting Intentions to Use and the Moderating Effect of Privacy Concerns
Ayoub, D., Metawie, M., & Fakhry, M. (2024) · MSA- Management Sciences Journal/MSA-Management Sciences Journal · doi:10.21608/msamsj.2024.265212.1054 · Cited by 12
Building bridges to the future of learning: Exploring artificial intelligence research using R-Studio assisted bibliometrics
Tamphu, S., Suyitno, I., Susanto, G., Budiana, N., Salim, M. R., Nurhikmah, N., & Purnawati, W. (2024) · Cogent Education · doi:10.1080/2331186x.2024.2417623 · Cited by 66
“Crawford et al. (2023) with 127 citations studied effective learning methods and university teaching approaches to increase student engagement and learning outcomes.”
Desarrollo de una declaración de uso de inteligencia artificial con una perspectiva de integridad académica en educacióN MéDica y Ciencias De la Salud
Avello-Sáez, D., Lucero-González, N., & Villagrán, I. (2024) · Revista Médica Clínica Las Condes · doi:10.1016/j.rmclc.2024.06.003 · Cited by 20
“Al respecto, es esencial destacar que, conforme se generalizan las herramientas de IA, la tendencia es que los académicos no deben prohibirlas, sino encontrar formas creativas de integrarlas en los procesos de enseñanza y aprendizaje, y utilizarlas para promover la integridad académica 2 .”
Globalisation and Higher Education: Integrating Generative Artificial Intelligence into Global Higher Educational Systems: Implications for Practice, Policy, and Research
Barrot, J. S. (2024) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-67667-3_13 · Cited by 10
U.S. college students’ acceptability and educational benefits of ChatGPT from a digital divide perspective
Zhang, C. (., Wang, L. H., & Rice, R. E. (2025) · Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100385 · Cited by 21
Desafiando el estado del arte en el uso de ChatGPT en educación en el año 2023
Saz-Pérez, F., & Pizà-Mir, B. (2023) · REIRE Revista d Innovació i Recerca en Educació · doi:10.1344/reire.44018 · Cited by 25
“La ética en la implementación de ChatGPT en la enseñanza es un tema de preocupación importante (Crawford et al., 2023).”
Background
A Study on the Use of Chatgpt in English Writing Classes for Taiwanese College Students Using Tam Technology Acceptance ModelPreprint
Tan, P. J. B. (2024) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4811515 · Cited by 10
Assessing the Intellectual Structure of the Evolving Knowledge Base on ChatGPT in the Field of Education and Health
Demirkol, M., & Malkoç, N. (2023) · Educational Process International Journal · doi:10.22521/edupij.2023.124.3 · Cited by 10
“The analysis showed that the central theme of Large-Language-Models (0.85, 0.5) had relationships with the Student-Character, Political-Bias, Health, Gpt-3.”
ResultInfluential
Integrating Professional Perspectives for AI Literacy
Merceron, K., & Best, K. (2024) · Advances in educational technologies and instructional design book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3693-0831-8.ch014 · Cited by 9
Interactive Chatbot ChatGPT in Education: Challenges and Opportunities
Zabelin, D. A., Plashcheva, E. V., & Ланина, С. Ю. (2023) · Преподаватель ХХI век · doi:10.31862/2073-9613-2023-4-94-102 · Cited by 9
Strengthening students’ research efficacy in higher institutions. A joint mediating effect of the impact of Artificial intelligence using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM)
Ofem, U. J., Ene, E. I., Ajuluchukwu, E. N., Neji, H. A., Edam-Agbor, I. B., Orim, F. S., Nwogwugwu, C. E., Ovat, S. V., Ukatu, J. O., Ekpang, P. O., et al. (2024) · Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100337 · Cited by 14
Acceptance of Artificial Intelligence (ChatGPT) Among Trainee Teachers in Higher Education
Fraile, M. N., & Badiola, L. (2024) · Trends in Higher Education · doi:10.3390/higheredu3040063 · Cited by 9
Artificial Intelligence and Student Engagement
Singh, P. (2024) · Advances in educational technologies and instructional design book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3693-5633-3.ch008 · Cited by 12
Integration of the SECI model and ChatGPT in higher education
Barreto, U., & Abarca, Y. (2025) · Heliyon · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2025.e42814 · Cited by 9
“This finding aligns with previous studies that have emphasized the need for human supervision and complementary pedagogical approaches to mitigate the potential negative consequences of AI dependency [26,44].”
Who is solving the challenge? The use of ChatGPT in mathematics and biology courses using challenge-based learning
Elizondo-García, M. E., la Cerda, H. H. D., Benavides-García, I. G., Caratozzolo, P., & Membrillo‐Hernández, J. (2025) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2025.1417642 · Cited by 11
ChatGPT theses. Identifying distinctive markers in AI-generated versus human-created texts: A multimodal analysis in university education
Nowacki, L., & Wrochna, A. E. (2025) · E-Learning and Digital Media · doi:10.1177/20427530251331083 · Cited by 11
Exploring the trustworthiness of ChatGPT: how students perceive AI reliability in a business school context
Ah‐Pine, E. N., & Awuye, I. S. (2025) · Journal of International Education in Business · doi:10.1108/jieb-09-2024-0123 · Cited by 10
Shaping the future of education: a cluster analysis of generative AI’s transformative impact
Issa, H.-E. A., & Maheshwari, G. (2025) · Interactive Technology and Smart Education · doi:10.1108/itse-01-2025-0013 · Cited by 17
ChatGPT en la educación: un enfoque bibliométrico de la integración de sistemas de Chatbots en los procesos educativos
Reyes-Moreno, E. R., Londoño-Gallego, J. A., Andrade-Martelo, I. C., Villar-Vega, H. F., & Maldonado, J. J. C. (2023) · Aibi revista de investigación administración e ingeniería · doi:10.15649/2346030x.3245 · Cited by 17
Using simulations in project management education – impact on awareness and ability to navigate projects in a sustainable way
Ingason, H. Þ., & Eskerod, P. (2024) · International Journal of Managing Projects in Business · doi:10.1108/ijmpb-08-2023-0179 · Cited by 9
Generative artificial intelligence in education: an umbrella review of applications and challengesPreprint
Namoun, A., Ibrahim, I. A., Mustafa, E., Alrehaili, A., Tufail, A., Shuja, J., & Bilal, K. (2024) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-4892155/v1 · Cited by 11
Learning with Generative Artificial Intelligence Within a Network of Co-Regulation
Lodge, J. M., De Barba, P., & Broadbent, J. (2024) · Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice · doi:10.53761/m2v9an32 · Cited by 9
Estrategias para la incorporación de la inteligencia artificial en educación a partir de ChatGPT: Oportunidades y dilemas para profesorado, alumnado e investigación-publicación
Lindín, C. (2024) · Didacticae Revista de Investigación en Didácticas Específicas · doi:10.1344/did.43107 · Cited by 8
TRANSFORMING HIGHER EDUCATION IN THE ERA OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE CHAT TOOLS: CASE STUDY
Vindača, O., Āboliņa, A., & Danilāne, L. (2024) · Environment Technology Resources Proceedings of the International Scientific and Practical Conference · doi:10.17770/etr2024vol2.8014 · Cited by 8
“Research by Crawford, Cowling, and Allen (2023) demonstrates that ChatGPT outperforms students, suggesting it has the potential to improve higher education courses and potentially revolutionize conventional learning methods [4].”
Unraveling the factors shaping the intention of tourism and hospitality students to engage with ChatGPT: a decision-making exploration
Ahmad, N. (2025) · Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism · doi:10.1080/15313220.2025.2492020 · Cited by 8
How AI Can Be Successfully Implemented in the Classroom Settings
Kalim, U., Irfan, S., Maqbool, S., & Zafeer, H. M. I. (2025) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-1827-1.ch010 · Cited by 9
Mapping artificial intelligence research in higher education toward sustainable development
Hong, T. T. M., Tung, N. T. T., & Thanh, N. T. P. (2025) · Discover Sustainability · doi:10.1007/s43621-025-02162-0 · Cited by 16
Best Ways Using AI in Impacting Success on MBA Graduates
Praveenadevi, D., Kowsalyadevi, S., Girimurugan, B., Sreemai, P., Nandini, K., & Pareek, S. (2023) · International Conference on Disruptive Technologies (ICDT) · doi:10.1109/icdt57929.2023.10151211 · Cited by 8
Inteligencia artificial generativa en la educación arquitectónica ecuatoriana: innovación glocal, dilemas éticos y la tensión entre lo analógico y lo digital.
Proaño, Á. F. C., Zamora, S. L. L., Baquerizo, C. A. M., & Padilla, B. A. M. (2025) · Revista Social Fronteriza · doi:10.59814/resofro.2025.5(2)631 · Cited by 8
ChatGPT in Scholarly Discourse: Sentiments and an Inflection Point
Twinomurinzi, H., & Gumbo, S. (2023) · Communications in computer and information science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-39652-6_17 · Cited by 10
Editorial: Framing the Future with a Research Agenda for Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education
Fitzgerald, R., Amantha Kumar, J., Roe, J., Roehrer, E., & Yang, J. (2025) · Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice · doi:10.53761/jwt7ra63 · Cited by 8
Educational Potential of ChatGPT: Teaching Tool for Students’ Competencies Development
Shabunina, V., Sarancha, V., Maslak, V., Shevchenko, O., & Tur, O. (2023) · 2023 IEEE 5th International Conference on Modern Electrical and Energy System (MEES) · doi:10.1109/mees61502.2023.10402380 · Cited by 7
“It’s important J. Crawford et al. to be mentioned who argued for the necessity of leadership in guaranteeing the ethical utilization of ChatGPT in education, specifically highlighting character development, assessment practices, and learning through artificial intelligence [18].”
Background
Artificial intelligence (AI) in psychology: a commentary on AI’s emerging role and the ensuing conversation
Munnik, J. B., & Noorbhai, H. (2024) · South African Journal of Psychology · doi:10.1177/00812463231223427 · Cited by 7
“…and other plagiarism checkers have been updated with AI-generated content detectors, but these systems are not yet perfect and may falsely flag some human-written content as AI-generated (Clayton, 2023; Crawford et al., 2023; Dwivedi et al., 2023; Rosenzweig-Ziff, 2023; Sun & Hoelscher, 2023).”
Background
The Academic Intensity Use of Chatbot-Based Artificial Intelligence and Its Relation to Academic Well-Being: A Correlational Study at the University of Jordan
Ajlouni, A. O., Abu‐Shawish, R. K., Silim, D. M., & Ibrahim, A. H. (2024) · International Journal of Engineering Pedagogy (iJEP) · doi:10.3991/ijep.v14i8.50339 · Cited by 9
Jordanian English language learners’ engagement with AI-supported self-regulated learning
Al‐Smadi, O. A., Rashid, R. A., Al-Ramahi, R. A., Alqaryouti, M. H., Ugli, H. S. Z., & Norinboev, A. (2025) · Research in Learning Technology · doi:10.25304/rlt.v33.3377 · Cited by 18
Two years after ChatGPT: a thematic analysis of First-Year students’ reflections on AI tool use in higher education
Hua, J., & Cunningham, J. (2025) · Journal of Information Communication and Ethics in Society · doi:10.1108/jices-05-2025-0118 · Cited by 8
Exploring school leaders’ perceptions of using an artificial intelligence tool for management tasks: Empirical evidence from Cyprus
Kafa, A. (2025) · Management in Education · doi:10.1177/08920206251394137 · Cited by 9
The (lack of) ethics at generative AI in Business Management education and research
Jacinto, E., Correa, A., Ames, M. C. F. D. C., & Serafim, M. C. (2024) · RAM. Revista de Administração Mackenzie · doi:10.1590/1678-6971/eramd240061 · Cited by 9
A Catalog of Generative AI Tools for Faculty Advancement
Ahmed, K. (2024) · International Conference on Information Technology Based Higher Education and Training (ITHET) · doi:10.1109/ithet61869.2024.10837663 · Cited by 7
Artificial intelligence (AI) performance on pharmacy skills laboratory course assignments
Do, V., Donohoe, K. L., Peddi, A. N., Carr, E., Kim, C., Mele, V., Patel, D. M., & Crawford, A. N. (2025) · Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning · doi:10.1016/j.cptl.2025.102367 · Cited by 7
Global Trends in the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Dental Education: A Bibliometric Analysis
Iniesta, M., & Pérez‐Higueras, J. J. (2025) · European Journal Of Dental Education · doi:10.1111/eje.13133 · Cited by 8
Exploring the Impact of Chat GPT on Higher Education: Advantages, Hurdles, and Prospective Research Avenues
Sain, Z. H., & Kurniati, V. S. D. (2023) · TAMANSISWA INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL IN EDUCATION AND SCIENCE · doi:10.30738/tijes.v5i1.16274 · Cited by 11
SCIENCE TEACHERS' APPROACH TO CONTEMPORARY ASSESSMENT WITH A READING LITERACY EMPHASIS
Kerneža, M., & Zemljak, D. (2023) · Journal of Baltic Science Education · doi:10.33225/jbse/23.22.851 · Cited by 16
Peran ChatGPT Sebagai Artificial Intelligence Dalam Menyelesaikan Masalah Pertanahan dengan Metode Studi Kasus dan Black Box Testing
Darman, R. (2024) · Tunas Agraria · doi:10.31292/jta.v7i1.256 · Cited by 33
El uso de inteligencia artificial y sus desafíos para la evaluación académica: una revisión de la literatura
VanderLinde, G., & Cury, T. M. (2024) · Cuaderno de Pedagogía Universitaria · doi:10.29197/cpu.v21i41.564 · Cited by 16
“…inteligencia artificial tienen el potencial de aumentar el compromiso y la retención de conocimientos entre los estudiantes, también existen problemas con su evaluación y valoración (Firat, 2023)), así como dudas sobre la autenticación, el plagio y la integridad académica (Crawford et al., 2023).”
Background
Investigating the Implementation of ChatGPT in English Language Education
Afkarin, M. Y., & Asmara, C. H. (2024) · Journey Journal of English Language and Pedagogy · doi:10.33503/journey.v7i1.4000 · Cited by 7
“Improved Comprehension and Self-Directed Study: In line with the results of Crawford et al. (2023) ChatGPT was recognized as a tool that promotes independent learning and helps students better understand complex material..”
Result
Artificial intelligence in university education: Systematic reviewPreprint
Regalado, Ó. L., Rojas, N. N., López-Gil, O. R., Gonzáles, H. L., & Rodríguez, J. S. (2024) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3830323/v1 · Cited by 7
Voice of the Insiders: Graduate Students’ Perceptions of the Application of ChatGPT in an EAP Context
Zhang, W., & An, S. (2025) · Journal of Language Teaching and Research · doi:10.17507/jltr.1602.35 · Cited by 6
In the wake of ChatGPT: early reflections on marking open-book online accounting assessments
Dosumu, O. E., Porumb, V., Stafford, A., & Zimmer, A. (2025) · Accounting Education · doi:10.1080/09639284.2025.2487487 · Cited by 15
“Overall, ChatGPT can enhance students’ sense of competence by equipping them with the necessary information and resources to complete various tasks (Crawford et al., 2023).”
Evaluating ChatGPT-3’s efficacy in solving coding tasks: implications for academic integrity in English language assessments
Elhambakhsh, S. E. (2025) · Language Testing in Asia · doi:10.1186/s40468-024-00333-w · Cited by 6
“The initiatives for detecting cheating in AI-generated materials are still in their nascent phases (Crawford, Cowling, and Allen, 2023; Leatham, 2023; Ryznar, 2023), thereby exposing academic players in contemporary institutions to significant and perhaps detrimental disputes.”
Exploring the influential factors and key dimensions of AI information literacy among high school students: a social-ecological perspective
Luo, M., Kuang, Z., Ng, D. T. K., Zheng, Z., & Yang, Y. (2025) · Interactive Learning Environments · doi:10.1080/10494820.2025.2575016 · Cited by 8
“This aligns with findings of limited ethical awareness in AI use (Pei et al., 2025), as students often overlook issues like plagiarism or data privacy (Crawford et al., 2023) – for example, uncritically adopting AI-generated essays or accepting biased career recommendations.”
Enhancing students’ critical thinking literacy in a generative AI context: Eye movement patterns of deepfake detection
Weigelt-Marom, H., Segev, E., Kurtz, G., Kahana, O., & Raz-Fogel, N. (2025) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2025.105529 · Cited by 10
Humanising Peer Review with Artificial Intelligence: Paradox or Panacea?
Crawford, J., Allen, K., & Lodge, J. M. (2024) · Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice · doi:10.53761/xeqvhc70 · Cited by 7
“In Crawford et al. (2023b) the Editors of the Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice make clear that authors are expected to disclose any use, or declare no-use of artificial intelligence (see our section below entitled ‘Conflict of Interest’) to make the approach to research clear.”
BackgroundMethodSelf-citation
Are Chatbots the Future of Higher Education? Unveiling Their Impact, Challenges, and Prospects
Oqaidi, K., Aouhassi, S., & Mansouri, K. (2024) · International Conference on Innovative Research in Applied Science, Engineering and Technology (IRASET) · doi:10.1109/iraset60544.2024.10548820 · Cited by 6
“The potential for AI chatbots to be used for cheating in academic assessments is a significant concern, with the need for leadership and character development highlighted as potential solutions [44].”
Background
Redefining the Concept of Literacy: a DigCompEdu extension for Critical Engagement with AI tools
Georgopoulou, M. S., Krouska, A., Troussas, C., & Sgouropoulou, C. (2024) · South-East Europe Design Automation, Computer Engineering, Computer Networks and Social Media Conference (SEEDA-CECNSM) · doi:10.1109/seeda-cecnsm63478.2024.00026 · Cited by 9
“These include concerns about data privacy and potential bias within algorithms [16], the risk of misuse for plagiarism [17-18], the possibility of providing misleading or oversimplified information [19], emotional isolation and a lack of socialization [20], and an over-reliance on AI tools [21-22].”
Background
Impact of Behavioural Intention to Use Generative Artificial Intelligence on Academic Performance of Students in Higher Education Institutions
Poudel, R. L., & Bastakoti, C. K. (2024) · Prithvi Journal of Research and Innovation · doi:10.3126/pjri.v6i1.72853 · Cited by 8
“These findings align with recent studies by Crawford (2023) and Rasul et al. (2023), which also questioned the positive impact of GAI tools on student performance.”
The role of artificial intelligence in language teacher education: EFL learners’ views on the concept of “ChatGPT” through metaphorical analysis
Uçar, S. (2025) · Social Sciences & Humanities Open · doi:10.1016/j.ssaho.2025.101394 · Cited by 18
Integrating Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education
Dubey, P., & Crevar, A. R. (2025) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-0502-8.ch008 · Cited by 7
What Have People Discussed about ChatGPT in Malaysian Education? A Qualitative Content Analysis of News Articles
Tang, C. M., & Chaw, L. Y. (2023) · European Conference on e-Learning · doi:10.34190/ecel.22.1.1557 · Cited by 6
Training Teaching Personnel in Incorporating Generative Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education: A Complex Thinking Approach
Soledad, M., Oliva-Córdova, L. M., & Patiño, A. (2024) · Lecture notes in educational technology · doi:10.1007/978-981-97-1814-6_16 · Cited by 6
How Supervisors Can Support Doctoral Students to Publish and Not Perish in Academia
Marson, J., & Ferris, K. (2023) · Encyclopedia · doi:10.3390/encyclopedia3040097 · Cited by 6
¿Puede engañarnos una IA? Carencias del estudiantado universitario para detectar ChatGPT
González-Geraldo, J. L., & Ortega-López, L. (2024) · Education in the Knowledge Society (EKS) · doi:10.14201/eks.31760 · Cited by 5
Analyzing The Impact of Generative AI on IT Employee Performance
Rafi, M. S., Aitken, J. M., Fatah, T. D., & Mailangkay, A. B. L. (2024) · International Conference on Creative Communication and Innovative Technology (ICCIT) · doi:10.1109/iccit62134.2024.10701171 · Cited by 9
“Our findings align with [3], who emphasized the importance of discriminant validity in ensuring that constructs are distinct from one another in the context of AI leadership and ethics.”
MethodResult
The Role of AI in Transforming Education: A Systematic Review of Trends
Ratul, Q. E. A., Zaman, E., Das, S. K., & Memari, M. (2025) · Intermountain Engineering, Technology and Computing (IETC) · doi:10.1109/ietc64455.2025.11039329 · Cited by 5
Integrating Generative AI in Education: Implications for School Leadership from Policy Documents Through Bolman and Deal's Four Frame Theory
Durán, A., & Ermiş, U. F. (2025) · Bartın University Journal of Faculty of Education · doi:10.14686/buefad.1435086 · Cited by 5
“Is this Really your Work?”: A Qualitative Study of Teacher-Led Interviews and Student Accountability in the Age of Generative AI
Cong‐Lem, N. (2025) · Journal of Academic Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10805-025-09704-1 · Cited by 7
“This aligns with calls in the literature for assessment models that foreground process, authenticity, and ethical awareness (Ardito, 2024; Crawford et al., 2023; Evangelista, 2025).”
Harnessing Ambiguity in Challenge-Based Learning as a Practice of Deep Engagement with Large Language Models
Bombaerts, G. J. T. (2025) · Digital Society · doi:10.1007/s44206-025-00233-3 · Cited by 6
“…above mentioned goals of critical thinking, higher-order thinking, contextualization, authenticity, different balances between product and process, and using collaborative or in-class assessments, and effec - tive teacher leadership (Crawford et al., 2023; Kizilcec et al., 2024; Shishavan, 2024).”
The AI disruption in engineering education: an analysis of changing student norms through cultural historical activity theory
Lindell, T. L., & Stöhr, C. (2026) · Journal of Computing in Higher Education · doi:10.1007/s12528-025-09488-8 · Cited by 9
“The effectiveness of AI-generated feedback compared to teacher feedback remains uncertain and underexplored, further complicating the adaptation to these new norms (e.g., Crawford et al., 2023).”
Influential
The AI Guilt Complex: Moral Emotions and Ethical Dilemmas in Academic Technology Adoption
Vassallo, D. (2026) · Journal of Academic Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10805-026-09726-3 · Cited by 6
“Faculty across disciplines confront daily decisions about whether, when, and how to use AI tools that can generate literature reviews, draft grant proposals, and provide student feedback in seconds (Crawford et al., 2023; Zawacki-Richter et al., 2019).”
ChatGPT for Generating Questions and Assessments based on Accreditations
Aboalela, R. (2023) · International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Soft Computing and Applications (AIAPP) · doi:10.5121/csit.2023.132207 · Cited by 8
The SEARCH for AI-Informed Wellbeing Education: A Conceptual Framework
Allen, K., Kern, M. L., Crawford, J., Cowling, M., Vo, D. T., & Waters, L. E. (2024) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-46238-2_14 · Cited by 4
Self-citation
Eğitim Amaçlı Tasarlanan Sohbet Robotları Üzerine Yapılan Çalışmaların İncelenmesi
Cevher, A. Y., & Yıldırım, S. (2024) · Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi · doi:10.37217/tebd.1301877 · Cited by 5
Unveiling the Layers: Analyzing ChatGPT Implementations in Turkish State Universities
Ulum, Ö. G. (2024) · Base for Electronic Educational Sciences · doi:10.29329/bedu.2024.651.7 · Cited by 5
AI-Enhanced Leadership Decision Support System Using ChatGPT for Ethical Learning
Balamurugan, M., Raghu, N., Dayananda, L. N., Sahoo, S. K., Shankaregowda, S. A., Kannanugo, N., Deepthi, M., & Vinod Kumar, M. (2024) · Advances in business strategy and competitive advantage book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3693-1946-8.ch008 · Cited by 5
The role of ChatGPT on academic research: perspectives from filipino students across diverse educational levels
Cabuquin, J. C., Acidre, M. A. S. T., Manabat, M. A. A., Aruta, M. G. H., Sangutan, J., & Yu, R. F. B. (2024) · Salud Ciencia y Tecnología - Serie de Conferencias · doi:10.56294/sctconf2024.1205 · Cited by 15
Chatbot de IA para prevenir el abandono de la educación superior: una revisión de la literatura
Segovia-García, N., & García, L. S. (2024) · Education in the Knowledge Society (EKS) · doi:10.14201/eks.31416 · Cited by 13
Claude Rules: An Evaluation of Large Language Models’ Applicability to Solve Cases in German Business Law
Schweitzer, S., Conrads, M., & Naeve, J. (2024) · Procedia Computer Science · doi:10.1016/j.procs.2024.09.406 · Cited by 7
Investigating an Assessment Design that Prevents Students from Using ChatGPT as the Sole Basis to Pass Assessment at the Tertiary Level
Stack, M. (2023) · E-Journal of Humanities Arts and Social Sciences · doi:10.38159/ehass.20234127 · Cited by 5
Exploring the Use of ChatGPT as a Tool for Developing Eportfolios in ESL Classrooms
Anh, L. N. N., Vu, N. N., Nguyen, M. T.-X., & Bo, L. K. (2024) · EAI/Springer Innovations in Communication and Computing · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-50139-5_3 · Cited by 8
Necesidades y perspectivas de la integración de la inteligencia artificial generativa en el contexto educativo español
Saz-Pérez, F., & Pizà-Mir, B. (2024) · UTE Teaching & techonology Universitas Tarraconsensis · doi:10.17345/ute.2024.3803 · Cited by 10
WIP Productive Uses of Generative AI: Preliminary Findings from an Electrical and Computer Engineering Capstone Course
Mohammed, C., & Sarjusingh, W. (2024) · 2024 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) · doi:10.1109/fie61694.2024.10893028 · Cited by 5

Authors: Crawford, J., Cowling, M., & Allen, K.-A.
Affiliations: University of Tasmania (AU)
Central Queensland University (AU)
Monash University (AU)
ORCID: Crawford, Joseph
Allen, Kelly-Ann
Venue: Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice
Publisher: Open Access Publishing Association
Published: 2023-04-02
Volume: 20
Issue: 3
ISSN: 1449-9789 (ISSN-L)
DOI: 10.53761/1.20.3.02
OpenAlex: W4323536358
Semantic Scholar: 370a9fff56ff5b9a54c96b818cff34b9c59e1b67
Cited by: 547
References: 63
Citations by year: 2026: 74 · 2025: 157 · 2024: 214 · 2023: 102
FWCI: 128.15
Type: journal article
Language: en
Open access: diamond
doi.org
Locations: Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice (publishedVersion)
Monash University Research Portal (Monash University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Research Online (University of Wollongong) (submittedVersion)
Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by-nd)
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 in higher education, academic integrity, plagiarism, character development, educational leadership, authentic assessment, student learning, AI chatbots, deep learning

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

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

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

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Leadership is needed for ethical ChatGPT: Character, assessment, and learning using artificial intelligence (AI)

Abstract

Overview

AI snapshot

TL;DR

Key findings

Methods

Limitations

Integrity signals

Verification

Claims the paper makes

Claims other papers make about this one

Self-check

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Related

Metadata

Record

About these checks