Academic Evolution in the Age of ChatGPT: An In-depth Qualitative Exploration of its Influence on Research, Learning, and Ethics in Higher Education
Open accessAbstract
This study delves into the potential advantages and challenges presented by the implementation of the ChatGPT within the realm of higher education. Specifically, it endeavours to shed light on the transformative effects of ChatGPT on the research and learning processes. Moreover, this study explores the intricate issues surrounding academic integrity, ethics, and regulatory concerns in this context. Adopting a qualitative research design, the study engaged in semi-structured interviews with 75 esteemed academicians hailing from higher education institutions in North Cyprus. The outcomes of this research endeavour reveal a spectrum of ways in which ChatGPT can augment educational productivity, learning experience, creativity, and idea generation. Nevertheless, it underscores the importance of meticulous consideration of ethical aspects pertaining to academic honesty and the potential over-reliance on ChatGPT. The findings not only offer insights into the opportunities and challenges linked with ChatGPT's integration into higher education, but also advocate for the responsible and ethical utilisation of AI technologies within academic settings. This study substantially contributes to the expanding body of research on the incorporation of artificial intelligence into education. It uniquely focuses on the ChatGPT, an innovative AI-based language model, within the context of higher education. The study's qualitative research methodology, characterised by its exploratory nature, provides a nuanced and comprehensive understanding of the impact of ChatGPT on learning and research writing and offers a wealth of valuable insights intended to assist educators, researchers, institutions and policymakers in their endeavours to seamlessly integrate AI technologies into their educational practices.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Generally, teachers and students want universities to enhance regulation of genAI.
“Generally, teachers and students want universities to enhance regulation (Duah & McGivern, 2024;Isiaku et al, 2024;Johnston et al., 2024;Nguyen, 2025;Xia et al., 2024;cf. Corbin et al., 2025).”
From Toward Partnership Ethics for Generative Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education (2026) · cites this paper as Isiaku et al, 2024
In “Students’ Views on Incorporating ChatGPT in Research,” participants call for well-defined policies governing ChatGPT and other AI tools. The Method section says the interviewees were students and research assistants, not teachers, so their views do not establish that teachers also want enhanced regulation. The Practical Implications section recommends institutional policies, but does not attribute that preference to teachers. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredStudents worry about dependence, loss of critical thinking skills and creative abilities, diminished human interactions, and cheating.
“Even so, students worry about dependence, loss of critical thinking skills and creative abilities, diminished human interactions, and cheating (Chan & Hu, 2023;Isiaku et al., 2024;Rana et al., 2025;Xia et al., 2024).”
From Toward Partnership Ethics for Generative Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education (2026) · cites this paper as Isiaku et al., 2024
In “Students’ Views on Incorporating ChatGPT in Learning” (page not provided), participants fear that excessive reliance could erode critical thinking; the research section also reports concerns about restricted creativity. The Conclusion (page not provided) identifies excessive dependence and academic dishonesty as participant concerns. The passages do not establish a concern about diminished human interactions. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredStudents and teachers worried about genAI leading to the loss of critical thinking skills, creativity, and autonomy.
“Students and teachers worried about genAI leading to the loss of critical thinking skills, creativity, and autonomy, all findings that resonate with previous research (Chan & Hu, 2023;Encheva et al., 2025;Isiaku et al., 2024;Newell et al., 2024;Olsson, 2026;Rahman et al., 2025;Xia et al., 2024).”
From Toward Partnership Ethics for Generative Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education (2026) · cites this paper as Isiaku et al., 2024
In “Students’ Views on Incorporating ChatGPT in Learning” (page unavailable), participants feared that excessive reliance could erode critical-thinking skills. The research section also reports concerns that ChatGPT could restrict creative thinking. But the Method describes interviews with students and research assistants, not teachers, and the retrieved passages do not report a concern about loss of autonomy. (LLM, conf=0.88)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredResearch from Australia, Cyprus, Hong Kong, the UK, and Sweden shows that students are generally positive toward using genAI.
“Research from Australia, Cyprus, Hong Kong, the UK, and Sweden shows that students are generally positive toward using genAI (Chan & Hu, 2023;Duah & McGivern, 2024;Isiaku et al., 2024;Johnston et al., 2024;Malmström et al., 2023;Rana et al., 2025).”
From Toward Partnership Ethics for Generative Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education (2026) · cites this paper as Isiaku et al., 2024
Research participants wanted the university to offer more guidance.
“Research participants wanted the university to offer more guidance, a pattern also found in other studies (e.g., Encheva et al., 2025;Isiaku et al, 2024;Johnston et al., 2024;Nguyen, 2025;Xia et al., 2024).”
From Toward Partnership Ethics for Generative Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education (2026) · cites this paper as Isiaku et al, 2024
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Using thematic analysis in psychology
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006) · Qualitative Research in Psychology · doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa · Cited by 194,414 · see citing works
Sallam, M. (2023) · Healthcare · doi:10.3390/healthcare11060887 · Cited by 3,126 · cited 3× · see citing works
“For instance, Sallam (2023) demonstrated that the ChatGPT can enhance scientific writing skills among healthcare students and provide personalised learning experiences.”
BackgroundChatting and cheating: Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT
Cotton, D. R. E., Cotton, P. A., & Shipway, J. R. (2024) · Innovations in Education and Teaching International · doi:10.1080/14703297.2023.2190148 · Cited by 3,087 · see citing works
Chatting and Cheating. Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT
Cotton, D., Cotton, P., & Shipway, J. R. (2023) · doi:10.35542/osf.io/mrz8h · Cited by 3,079 · see citing works
Ray, P. P. (2023) · Internet of Things and Cyber-Physical Systems · doi:10.1016/j.iotcps.2023.04.003 · Cited by 2,463 · cited 3× · see citing works
“From this extensive dataset, ChatGPT derives its prowess, boasting approximately 5 billion tokens and colossal 175 billion parameters, which empowers the model to make contextually informed decisions (Ray, 2023).”
BackgroundInfluentialChatGPT for Education and Research: Opportunities, Threats, and Strategies
Rahman, M. M., & Watanobe, Y. (2023) · Applied Sciences · doi:10.3390/app13095783 · Cited by 1,080 · cited 3× · see citing works
“It empowers students by facilitating access to information and fostering personalised interactions, feedback, and support tailored to their individual abilities (Rahman & Watanobe, 2023).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialGrassini, S. (2023) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci13070692 · Cited by 1,048 · cited 1× · see citing works
“…the attention of educators, with some viewing it as a potential catalyst for revolutionizing future learning and research, while others perceive it as a potential threat owing to its content generation capabilities, raising concerns about potential student misuse (Grassini, 2023; Sallam, 2023).”
BackgroundRevolutionizing education with AI: Exploring the transformative potential of ChatGPT
Adiguzel, T., Kaya, M. H., & Cansu, F. K. (2023) · Contemporary Educational Technology · doi:10.30935/cedtech/13152 · Cited by 975 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Notably, these studies primarily focused on smart AI tools, such as Smart Sparrows, ALEKS, Knewton, Grammarly, InstaText, and Codecademy, highlighting their success in fostering personalised learning paths, providing instant feedback, and facilitating task customization (Adiguzel et al., 2023).”
BackgroundEngineering Education in the Era of ChatGPT: Promise and Pitfalls of Generative AI for Education
Qadir, J. (2023) · 2023 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON) · doi:10.1109/educon54358.2023.10125121 · Cited by 707 · cited 2× · see citing works
“This is in line with research conducted by Qadir (2023), which explored both the positive and negative impacts of generative AI in education.”
BackgroundResultChatbots in Education and Research: A Critical Examination of Ethical Implications and Solutions
Kooli, C. (2023) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su15075614 · Cited by 666 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Previous research has indicated that AI-powered chatbots offer a wide array of advantages in the field of education (Kooli, 2023; Mohamed, 2023).”
BackgroundUnlocking the opportunities through ChatGPT Tool towards ameliorating the education system
Javaid, M., Haleem, A., Singh, R. P., Khan, S., & Khan, I. H. (2023) · BenchCouncil Transactions on Benchmarks, Standards and Evaluations · doi:10.1016/j.tbench.2023.100115 · Cited by 535 · cited 1× · see citing works
“This is also in line with previous studies on the ability of ChatGPT to improve supportive learning activities in higher education (Atlas, 2023; Javaid et al., 2023).”
ResultWhat ChatGPT means for universities: Perceptions of scholars and students
(2023) · Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching · doi:10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.22 · Cited by 431 · cited 1× · see citing works
“A growing body of research has examined the perception of university and on the use of ChatGPT in academia (Firat, 2023; Singh et al., 2023).”
BackgroundNazari, N., Shabbir, M. S., & Setiawan, R. (2021) · Heliyon · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07014 · Cited by 405 · see citing works
Hadi Mogavi, R., Deng, C., Juho Kim, J., Zhou, P., D. Kwon, Y., Hosny Saleh Metwally, A., Tlili, A., Bassanelli, S., Bucchiarone, A., Gujar, S., et al. (2024) · Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans · doi:10.1016/j.chbah.2023.100027 · Cited by 369 · see citing works
Bang, Y., Cahyawijaya, S., Lee, N., Dai, W., Su, D., Wilie, B., Lovenia, H., Ji, Z., Yu, T., Chung, W., et al. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2302.04023 · Cited by 337 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Malik et al. (2023) pointed out its limitations, noting deficiencies in common sense reasoning tasks and raising concerns about its language coverage (Bang et al., 2023).”
BackgroundKelly, A., Sullivan, M., & Strampel, K. (2023) · Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice · doi:10.53761/1.20.6.12 · Cited by 177 · see citing works
Singh, H., Tayarani-Najaran, M.-H., & Yaqoob, M. (2023) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci13090924 · Cited by 150 · cited 1× · see citing works
“A growing body of research has examined the perception of university and on the use of ChatGPT in academia (Firat, 2023; Singh et al., 2023).”
BackgroundLearning 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:10.53761/1.20.7.02 · Cited by 73 · see citing works
Malik, A., Khan, M. L., & Hussain, K. (2023) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4413516 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
ChatGPT in Ukrainian Education: Problems and Prospects
Fiialka, S., Kornieva, Z., & Honcharuk, T. (2023) · International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET) · doi:10.3991/ijet.v18i17.42215 · Cited by 45 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 26
- Agbaglo, E., & Bonsu, E. M. (2022). The role of digital technologies in higher education during the coronavirus pandemic: Insights from a Ghanaian university. Social Education Research, 45-57. https://doi.org/10.2478/jesm-2023-0001 · DOI
- Al-Sharafi, M. A., Al-Emran, M., Iranmanesh, M., Al-Qaysi, N., Iahad, N. A., & Arpaci, I. (2022). Understanding the impact of knowledge management factors on the sustainable use of AI-based chatbots for educational purposes using a hybrid SEM-ANN approach. Interactive Learning Environments, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2022.2075014 · DOI
- Barriball, K. L., & While, A. (1994). Collecting data using a semi-structured interview: A discussion paper. Journal of Advanced Nursing-Institutional Subscription, 19(2), 328- 335. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.1994.tb01088.x · DOI
- Chen, Y., Jensen, S., Albert, L. J., Gupta, S., & Lee, T. (2023). Artificial intelligence (AI) student assistants in the classroom: Designing chatbots to support student success. Information Systems Frontiers, 25(1), 161-182. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-022-10291-4 · DOI · Paper page
- Crawford, J., Vallis, C., Yang, J., Fitzgerald, R., O'Dea, C., & Cowling, M. (2023). Editorial: Artificial Intelligence is Awesome, but Good Teaching Should Always Come First.. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 20(7). https://doi.org/10.53761/1.20.7.01 · DOI · Paper page
- Dwivedi, Y. K., Kshetri, N., Hughes, L., Slade, E. L., Jeyaraj, A., Kar, A. K., Baabdullah, A. M., Koohang, A., Raghavan, V., & Ahuja, M. (2023). "So what if ChatGPT wrote it?" Multidisciplinary perspectives on opportunities, challenges and implications of generative conversational AI for research, practice and policy. International Journal of Information Management, 71, 102642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102642 · DOI · Paper page
- Eke, D. O. (2023). ChatGPT and the rise of generative AI: threat to academic integrity? Journal of Responsible Technology, 13, 100060. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrt.2023.100060 · DOI · Paper page
- Foroughi, B., Senali, M. G., Iranmanesh, M., Khanfar, A., Ghobakhloo, M., Annamalai, N., & Naghmeh-Abbaspour, B. (2023). Determinants of intention to use ChatGPT for educational purposes: Findings from PLS-SEM and fsQCA. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2023.2226495 · DOI
- Galletta, A. (2013). Mastering the semi-structured interview and beyond: From research design to analysis and publication (Vol. 18). NYU press.
- Ganga, D., & Scott, S. (2006, May). Cultural" insiders" and the issue of positionality in qualitative migration research: Moving" across" and moving" along" researcher- participant divides. In Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research (Vol. 7, No. 3). https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-7.3.134 · DOI
- Gill, P., Stewart, K., Treasure, E., & Chadwick, B. (2008). Methods of data collection in qualitative research: Interviews and focus groups. British Dental Journal, 204(6), 291- 295. https://doi.org/10.1038/bdj.2008.192 · DOI
- Ilieva, G., Yankova, T., Klisarova-Belcheva, S., Dimitrov, A., Bratkov, M., & Angelov, D. (2023). Effects of Generative Chatbots in Higher Education. Information, 14(9), 492. https://doi.org/10.3390/info14090492 · DOI
- Kallio, H., Pietilä, A.-M., Johnson, M., & Kangasniemi, M. (2016). Systematic methodological review: Developing a framework for a qualitative semi-structured interview guide. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 72(12), 2954-2965. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.13031 · DOI · Paper page
- Lingo, R. (2023). The Role of ChatGPT in Democratizing Data Science: An Exploration of AI- facilitated Data Analysis in Telematics. arXiv Preprint arXiv:2308.02045. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2308.02045 · DOI
- Maguire, M., & Delahunt, B. (2017). Doing a thematic analysis: A practical, step-by-step guide for learning and teaching scholars. All Ireland Journal of Higher Education, 9(3).
- Maicher, K. R., Stiff, A., Scholl, M., White, M., Fosler-Lussier, E., Schuler, W., Serai, P., Sunder, V., Forrestal, H., & Mendella, L. (2023). Artificial intelligence in virtual standardised patients: Combining natural language understanding and rule based dialogue management to improve conversational fidelity. Medical Teacher, 45(3), 279-285. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2022.2130216 · DOI · Paper page
- Megahed, F. M., Chen, Y.-J., Ferris, J. A., Knoth, S., & Jones-Farmer, L. A. (2023). How generative ai models such as chatgpt can be (mis) used in spc practice, education, and research? An exploratory study. Quality Engineering, 1-29. https://doi.org/10.1080/08982112.2023.2206479 · DOI
- Mergenthaler, E., & Stinson, C. (1992). Psychotherapy transcription standards. Psychotherapy Research, 2(2), 125-142. https://doi.org/10.1080/10503309212331332904 · DOI
- Mohamed, A. M. (2023). Exploring the potential of an AI-based Chatbot (ChatGPT) in enhancing English as a Foreign Language (EFL) teaching: Perceptions of EFL Faculty Members. Education and Information Technologies, 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11917-z · DOI · Paper page
- Morocco-Clarke, A., Sodangi, F. A., & Momodu, F. (2023). The implications and effects of ChatGPT on academic scholarship and authorship: A death knell for original academic publications? Information & Communications Technology Law, 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600834.2023.2239623 · DOI
- Ngo, T. T. A. (2023). The Perception by University Students of the Use of ChatGPT in Education. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 18(17). https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v18i17.39019 · DOI
- Oguz, F. E., Ekersular, M. N., Sunnetci, K. M., & Alkan, A. (2023). Can Chat GPT be Utilised in Scientific and Undergraduate Studies? Annals of Biomedical Engineering, 1-3. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-023-03333-8 · DOI
- Patel, S. B., & Lam, K. (2023). ChatGPT: the future of discharge summaries? The Lancet Digital Health, 5(3), e107-e108. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2589-7500(23)00021-3 · DOI · Paper page
- Paul, J., Ueno, A., & Dennis, C. (2023). ChatGPT and consumers: Benefits, pitfalls and future research agenda. In International Journal of Consumer Studies (Vol. 47, Issue 4, pp. 1213-1225). Wiley Online Library. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12928 · DOI · Paper page
- Wardat, Y., Tashtoush, M. A., AlAli, R., & Jarrah, A. M. (2023). ChatGPT: A revolutionary tool for teaching and learning mathematics. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 19(7), em2286. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/13272 · DOI
- Williamson, B., & Eynon, R. (2020). Historical threads, missing links, and future directions in AI in education. In Learning, Media and Technology (Vol. 45, Issue 3, pp. 223-235). Taylor & Francis. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2020.1798995 · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Kangwa, D., Msafiri, M. M., & Fute, A. (2025) · Journal of Computer Assisted Learning · doi:10.1111/jcal.70109 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
Toward Partnership Ethics for Generative Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education
Gillette, M., Wackenhut, A., & Olsson, E. (2026) · Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice · doi:10.53761/yf2gt848
“…this, Gillette and Wackenhut performed a round of inductive coding, a method employed by other scholars interested in experiences of genAI (e.g., Isiaku et al., 2024; Lee et al., 2024), and two rounds of deductive coding, one based on whether research participants were positive, negative, or…”
Influential
- Authors
- Isiaku, L., Kwala, A. F., Sambo, K. U., & Isiaku, H. H.
- Affiliations
- Cyprus International University (CY)
- Ahmadu Bello University (NG)
- Venue
- Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice
- Published
- 2024-04-19
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 06
- ISSN
- 1449-9789 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4394949500
- Cited by
- 21
- References
- 20
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 2
- FWCI
- 7.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice (publishedVersion, cc-by-nd)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Academic integrity and plagiarism
- Keywords
- ChatGPT, generative AI in higher education, academic integrity, research ethics, AI-assisted learning, overreliance on AI, responsible AI use
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
