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
The worldwide trend to high participation higher education: dynamics of social stratification in inclusive systems
Marginson, S. (2016) · Higher Education · doi:10.1007/s10734-016-0016-x · Cited by 1,088 · cited 1×
“Since the 70s, social shifts have dramatically increased living costs, educational costs, and competition for further learning and finding work post-degree (Marginson, 2016; Perrone & Vickers, 2003).”
Background
Mental health problems in college freshmen: Prevalence and academic functioning
Bruffaerts, R., Mortier, P., Kiekens, G., Auerbach, R. P., Cuijpers, P., Demyttenaere, K., Green, J. G., Nock, M. K., & Kessler, R. C. (2018) · Journal of Affective Disorders · doi:10.1016/j.jad.2017.07.044 · Cited by 1,047 · cited 2×
“Rising stress and anxiety in university students A growing body of research suggests that contemporary university students are vulnerable to stress and mental health issues (Bruffaerts et al., 2018; Prowse et al., 2021; Shaffique et al., 2020).”
Background
Collaborating With ChatGPT: Considering the Implications of Generative Artificial Intelligence for Journalism and Media Education
Pavlik, J. V. (2023) · Journalism & Mass Communication Educator · doi:10.1177/10776958221149577 · Cited by 972 · cited 1×
“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).”
Background
ChatGPT listed as author on research papers: many scientists disapprove
Stokel-Walker, C. (2023) · Nature · doi:10.1038/d41586-023-00107-z · Cited by 868 · cited 1×
“This is not a consensus perspective though, with at least four studies to date citing ChatGPT as a co-author (see Stokel-Walker, 2023).”
Background
Academic Integrity considerations of AI Large Language Models in the post-pandemic era: ChatGPT and beyond
Perkins, M. (2023) · Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice · doi:10.53761/1.20.02.07 · Cited by 839 · cited 1×
“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).”
Dishonest Deed, Clear Conscience: When Cheating Leads to Moral Disengagement and Motivated Forgetting
Shu, L. L., Gino, F., & Bazerman, M. H. (2011) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0146167211398138 · Cited by 706 · cited 1×
“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 (Shu et al., 2011).”
Background
Artificial Intelligence (AI) student assistants in the classroom: Designing chatbots to support student success
Chen, Y., Jensen, S., Albert, L. J., Gupta, S., & Lee, T. (2023) · Information Systems Frontiers · doi:10.1007/s10796-022-10291-4 · Cited by 685 · cited 2×
“, 2021), and it is helping them succeed (Chen et al., 2023), it is likely to entrench existing views of the world rather than what the world ought to be.”
Background
Academic Stress and its Sources Among University Students
Reddy, K. J., Menon, K. R., & Thattil, A. (2018) · Biomedical & Pharmacology Journal · doi:10.13005/bpj/1404 · Cited by 611 · cited 1×
“…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 sources of stress.”
Background
Abstracts written by ChatGPT fool scientists
Else, H. (2023) · Nature · doi:10.1038/d41586-023-00056-7 · Cited by 611
Generating scholarly content with ChatGPT: Ethical challenges for medical publishing
Liebrenz, M., Schleifer, R., Buadze, A., Bhugra, D., & Smith, A. (2023) · The Lancet Digital Health · doi:10.1016/s2589-7500(23)00019-5 · Cited by 594 · cited 1×
“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.”
Background
Workplace mental health: developing an integrated intervention approach
LaMontagne, A. D., Martin, A. J., Page, K. M., Reavley, N. J., Noblet, A. J., Milner, A. J., Keegel, T. G., & Smith, P. M. (2014) · BMC Psychiatry · doi:10.1186/1471-244x-14-131 · Cited by 575 · cited 1×
“…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; a fact that mental health scholars have known for some time (e.g., LaMontagne et al., 2014).”
Background
The Role of Artificial Intelligence and Data Network Effects for Creating User Value
Gregory, R. W., Henfridsson, O., Kaganer, E., & Kyriakou, H. (2021) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2019.0178 · Cited by 540 · cited 2×
“…the broad area of data warehousing and data analytics was quickly adopted by both Google and others to truly understand their customer base (Gregory et al., 2021), building targeted marketing campaigns and using their understanding of both individuals and groups to tailor their content…”
Background
Coping With the COVID-19 Pandemic: Examining Gender Differences in Stress and Mental Health Among University Students
Prowse, R., Sherratt, F., Abizaid, A. B., Gabrys, R. L., Hellemans, K. G. C., Patterson, Z. R., & McQuaid, R. J. (2021) · Frontiers in Psychiatry · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2021.650759 · Cited by 496 · cited 1×
“Rising stress and anxiety in university students A growing body of research suggests that contemporary university students are vulnerable to stress and mental health issues (Bruffaerts et al., 2018; Prowse et al., 2021; Shaffique et al., 2020).”
Background
Psychological Wellbeing and Academic Experience of University Students in Australia during COVID-19
Dodd, R. H., Dadaczynski, K., Okan, O., McCaffery, K. J., & Pickles, K. (2021) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph18030866 · Cited by 395 · cited 2×
“Many students report lower levels of wellbeing and increased academic-related stress due to the COVID-19 pandemic (Dodd et al., 2021; von Keyserlingk et al., 2022) In the years that have followed, a similar pattern of statistics emerges that is too significant to ignore – student stress and mental…”
Background
Generality in artificial intelligence
McCarthy, J. (1987) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/33447.33448 · Cited by 391 · cited 1×
“It was in the 1950s that McCarthy first proposed the idea that machines could be intelligent (see McCarthy et al., 1955, McCarthy, 1987).”
Background
Work strain, health, and absenteeism: A meta-analysis.
Darr, W., & Johns, G. (2008) · Journal of Occupational Health Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0012639 · Cited by 376
Family and Academic Stress and Their Impact on Students' Depression Level and Academic Performance
Deng, Y., Cherian, J., Khan, N. U. N., Kumari, K., Sial, M. S., Comite, U., Gavurova, B., & Popp, J. (2022) · Frontiers in Psychiatry · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2022.869337 · Cited by 371 · 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
Watson: Beyond Jeopardy!
Ferrucci, D., Levas, A., Bagchi, S., Gondek, D., & Mueller, E. T. (2013) · Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.artint.2012.06.009 · Cited by 351 · cited 1×
“It started with an evolution on the toy problems, with machines learning to play chess so that they could beat the Grand Champions, or to compete in Jeopardy! and score higher than the most skilled human players (Ferrucci et al., 2013; Hassabis, 2017).”
Background
How Common Is Commercial Contract Cheating in Higher Education and Is It Increasing? A Systematic Review
Newton, P. M. (2018) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2018.00067 · Cited by 341 · cited 1×
“While once contract cheating was considered a concern to those students who could afford it (Newton, 2018), from 2023 onwards, scholars are already worried about the effects that new AI and large language models (LLMs) will have on academic integrity issues for universities.”
Background
A systematic review of online examinations: A pedagogical innovation for scalable authentication and integrity
Butler-Henderson, K. A., & Crawford, J. (2020) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104024 · Cited by 288 · cited 1×
“One of the major challenges of online examinations, for example, was the ability to authenticate the student who did the exam using software like retina and keystroke monitoring (Butler-Henderson & Crawford, 2020).”
MethodSelf-citation
COVID-19 and the mental well-being of Australian medical students: impact, concerns and coping strategies used
Lyons, Z., Wilcox, H. M., Leung, L., & Dearsley, O. (2020) · Australasian Psychiatry · doi:10.1177/1039856220947945 · Cited by 277 · cited 1×
“It has been widely reported that the global pandemic significantly impacted students' mental health, with the most impact on social relationships, learning and stress levels among Australian university students (Lyons et al., 2020; Vernon et al., 2022).”
Background
Student Loneliness: The Role of Social Media Through Life Transitions
Thomas, L., Orme, E., & Kerrigan, F. (2019) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103754 · Cited by 271 · cited 1×
“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.”
Background
Comparison of direct and iterative artificial neural network forecast approaches in multi-periodic time series forecasting
Hamzaçebi, Ç., Akay, D., & Kutay, F. (2008) · Expert Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2008.02.042 · Cited by 244 · cited 1×
“Starting with Neural Networks, society found themselves able to build machines that could forecast results and predict outcomes (Hamzaçebi et al., 2009), often with more precision than a human being.”
Background
The relationship between financial strain, perceived stress, psychological symptoms, and academic and social integration in undergraduate students
Adams, D. R., Meyers, S. A., & Beidas, R. S. (2016) · Journal of American College Health · doi:10.1080/07448481.2016.1154559 · Cited by 200 · cited 1×
“Financial concerns are one of the leading sources of stress for university students (Adams et al., 2016; Beiter et al., 2015), with pressure to do well, graduate, and be employable a consistent pressure.”
Background
Computational Creativity and Music Generation Systems: An Introduction to the State of the Art
Carnovalini, F., & Rodà, A. (2020) · Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.3389/frai.2020.00014 · Cited by 175
Life after graduation as a “very uncomfortable world”: an Australian case study
Perrone, L., & Vickers, M. H. (2003) · Education + Training · doi:10.1108/00400910310464044 · Cited by 164 · cited 1×
“Since the 70s, social shifts have dramatically increased living costs, educational costs, and competition for further learning and finding work post-degree (Marginson, 2016; Perrone & Vickers, 2003).”
Background
Stress of university students before and after campus closure in response to COVID‐19
von Keyserlingk, L., Yamaguchi‐Pedroza, K., Arum, R., & Eccles, J. S. (2021) · Journal of Community Psychology · doi:10.1002/jcop.22561 · Cited by 161 · cited 2×
“…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 sources of stress.”
Background
Academic dishonesty and trustworthy assessment in online learning: A systematic literature review
Surahman, E., & Wang, T. (2022) · Journal of Computer Assisted Learning · doi:10.1111/jcal.12708 · Cited by 155 · cited 1×
“…increase in plagiarism and academic misconduct are complex and multifaceted, some researchers have suggested that the increased pressure on students to succeed academically, paired with the availability of technology, makes academic breaches far easier (Jereb et al., 2018; Surahman & Wang, 2022).”
Background
Sweeping dishonesty under the rug: How unethical actions lead to forgetting of moral rules.
Shu, L. L., & Gino, F. (2012) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0028381 · Cited by 150
Factors influencing plagiarism in higher education: A comparison of German and Slovene students
Jereb, E., Perc, M., Lämmlein, B., Jerebic, J., Urh, M., Podbregar, I., & Šprajc, P. (2018) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0202252 · Cited by 141 · cited 2×
“…increase in plagiarism and academic misconduct are complex and multifaceted, some researchers have suggested that the increased pressure on students to succeed academically, paired with the availability of technology, makes academic breaches far easier (Jereb et al., 2018; Surahman & Wang, 2022).”
Background
A comparison of Chinese and Australian university students' attitudes towards plagiarism
Ehrich, J. F., Howard, S. J., Mu, C., & Bokosmaty, S. (2014) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075079.2014.927850 · Cited by 134 · cited 2×
“, 2013) and students who are more likely to engage in plagiarism (Ehrich et al., 2016).”
Background
Artificial Intelligence: Chess match of the century
Hassabis, D. (2017) · Nature · doi:10.1038/544413a · Cited by 105 · cited 1×
“It started with an evolution on the toy problems, with machines learning to play chess so that they could beat the Grand Champions, or to compete in Jeopardy! and score higher than the most skilled human players (Ferrucci et al., 2013; Hassabis, 2017).”
Background
Students’ Academic Cheating in Chinese Universities: Prevalence, Influencing Factors, and Proposed Action
Ma, Y., McCabe, D. L., & Liu, R. (2013) · Journal of Academic Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10805-013-9186-7 · Cited by 87 · cited 2×
“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.”
Background
Work like a girl: Redressing gender inequity in academia through systemic solutions
Allen, K., Butler-Henderson, K. A., Reupert, A., Longmuir, F., Finefter‐Rosenbluh, I., Berger, E., Grové, C., Heffernan, A., Freeman, N. C., Kewalramani, S., et al. (2021) · Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice · doi:10.53761/1.18.3.3 · Cited by 82
Self-citation
Investigating the acceptance of applying chat-bot (Artificial intelligence) technology among higher education students in Egypt
Ragheb, M. A., Tantawi, P. I., Khourshed, N. F., & Hatata, A. Y. (2022) · International Journal of Higher Education Management · doi:10.24052/ijhem/v08n02/art-1 · Cited by 78
How Teacher and Grammarly Feedback Complement One Another in Myanmar EFL Students’ Writing
Thi, N. K., & Nikolov, M. (2022) · The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher · doi:10.1007/s40299-021-00625-2 · Cited by 77 · cited 1×
“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).”
Method
Cheating and Honor: Lessons from a Long-Term Research Project
McCabe, D. L. (2016) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-981-287-098-8_35 · Cited by 67
Can software improve marker accuracy at detecting contract cheating? A pilot study of the Turnitin authorship investigate alpha
Dawson, P., Sutherland-Smith, W., & Ricksen, M. (2020) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2019.1662884 · Cited by 56 · cited 1×
“And for some, effective measures of detection, and prescription of significant punishment has been the proposed solution (Amigud & Dawson, 2019; Dawson et al., 2020).”
Method
Untitled work
Crawford (2023) · doi:10.53761/1.20.01.01 · Cited by 52 · cited 2×
“…of https://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp/vol20/iss3/02 University Teaching and Learning Practice editorial, the Editor-in-Chief introduced publication sections that focused on good leadership and educational psychology to better understand and enhance how students engage with learning (Crawford, 2023).”
BackgroundSelf-citation
The law and the outlaw: is legal prohibition a viable solution to the contract cheating problem?
Amigud, A., & Dawson, P. (2019) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2019.1612851 · Cited by 51 · cited 1×
“And for some, effective measures of detection, and prescription of significant punishment has been the proposed solution (Amigud & Dawson, 2019; Dawson et al., 2020).”
Method
Referencing and empowerment: exploring barriers to agency in the higher education student experience
Gravett, K., & Kinchin, I. M. (2018) · Teaching in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/13562517.2018.1541883 · Cited by 38 · cited 1×
“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).”
Background
Sources of Stress Among Undergraduate Nursing Students
Alghamdi, S., Aljabri, S., Jafari, G., Alzebali, R., Alkunaidiri, N., & Kalantan, N. (2019) · Global Journal of Health Science · doi:10.5539/gjhs.v11n9p116 · Cited by 36 · cited 1×
“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
Cheating and Honor: Lessons from a Long-Term Research Project
McCabe, D. L. (2015) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-981-287-079-7_35-1 · Cited by 32
Meta-analysis of Prevalence of Depression, Anxiety and Stress Among University Students
Shaffique, S., Farooq, S. S., Anwar, H., Asif, H. M., Akram, M., & Jung, S. K. (2020) · RADS Journal of Biological Research & Applied Sciences · doi:10.37962/jbas.v11i1.308 · Cited by 32
Student Engagement and Deep Learning in Higher Education: Reflections on Inquiry-Based Learning on Our Group Study Program Course in the UK.
Archer‐Kuhn, B., Wiedeman, D., & Chalifoux, J. (2020) · Journal of higher education outreach & engagement/Journal of higher education outreach and engagement. · Cited by 21
Developing our students’ level of mindfulness during these unprecedented times
Reilly, P. (2020) · Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice · doi:10.53761/1.17.5.19 · Cited by 21 · cited 1×
“Time and resources of academic staff who already report they are at capacity for their workload, overloaded or stressed themselves – especially those from underserved populations (Allen et al., 2020; 2021).”
Background
Online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic: Does social connectedness and learning community predict self-determined needs and course satisfaction?
Geary, E., Allen, K., Gamble, N., & Pahlevansharif, S. (2023) · Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice · doi:10.53761/1.20.01.13 · Cited by 21 · cited 1×
“…basic psychological needs 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., 2023 Ryan & Deci, 2000).”
BackgroundSelf-citation
Pivots, pirouettes and practicalities: Actions and reactions of work-integrated learning practitioners
Connor, M., Mueller, B., Mann, S., & Andrew, M. (2021) · Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice · doi:10.53761/1.18.5.2 · Cited by 13 · cited 3×
“The COVID-19 pandemic adds another layer of concern regarding student stress and anxiety.”
Distinguished scholar invited essay : reflections on the role of character in business education and student leadership development
Wright, T. A. (2015) · Fordham Research Commons (Fordham University) · Cited by 2

Flagged first, then by citations

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

ChatGPT: A comprehensive review on background, applications, key challenges, bias, ethics, limitations and future scope
Ray, P. P. (2023) · Internet of Things and Cyber-Physical Systems · doi:10.1016/j.iotcps.2023.04.003 · Cited by 2,463
Role of AI chatbots in education: systematic literature review
Labadze, L., Grigolia, M., & Machaidze, L. (2023) · International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education · doi:10.1186/s41239-023-00426-1 · Cited by 1,043
“It can assist with homework questions, offering step-by-step solutions and guiding students through complex problems (Crawford et al., 2023; Fauzi et al., 2023; Lo, 2023; Qadir, 2023 Shidiq, 2023).”
Background
To use or not to use ChatGPT in higher education? A study of students’ acceptance and use of technology
Strzelecki, A. (2024) · Interactive Learning Environments · doi:10.1080/10494820.2023.2209881 · Cited by 807
“…in higher education, di ﬀ erent areas can be discussed as software is producing fake citations (Cooper, 2023), developing assignments (Sullivan et al., 2023), supporting essay writing (Crawford et al., 2023), and encouraging critical re ﬂ ection on AI ’ s use in society (van Dis et al., 2023).”
Background
Transforming Education: A Comprehensive Review of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Educational Settings through Bibliometric and Content Analysis
Bahroun, Z., Anane, C., Ahmed, V., & Zacca, A. (2023) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su151712983 · Cited by 784
The role of ChatGPT in higher education: Benefits, challenges, and future research directions
(2023) · Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching · doi:10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.29 · Cited by 561
“Assessment designs should engage students with tasks that require critical thinking and cannot be easily replicated by LLMs (Crawford et al., 2023; Kuhn, 2019; Iordanou et al., 2019).”
Background

See all 550

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