Research Article

Behavioral and ethical predictors of continuous intention to use generative AI responsibly in higher education

Ibrahim Arpaci 1 2 , Mustafa Baloglu 3 *
More Detail
1 Department of Computer Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Bursa Uludag University, Bursa, TURKEY2 Department of Computer Science and Engineering, College of Informatics, Korea University, Seoul, SOUTH KOREA3 Department of Special and Gifted Education, College of Education, United Arab Emirates University, Al Ain, UNITED ARAB EMIRATES* Corresponding Author
Contemporary Educational Technology, 18(3), July 2026, ep673, https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/18951
Published: 13 July 2026
OPEN ACCESS   84 Views   37 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

This study examined factors that support the sustainable and responsible integration of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) into higher education. The research model was based on the theory of planned behavior (TPB) and was extended to include ethical considerations, such as authenticity, originality, responsibility, and confidentiality. In the qualitative phase, structured interviews with faculty members across various departments examined the potential benefits, limitations, and ethical concerns of GenAI use in higher education. The qualitative findings informed the development of the theoretical framework and the research model. In the quantitative phase, PLS-SEM was used to test the model with data from 1,261 GenAI users. The results showed that authenticity, originality, responsibility, and confidentiality significantly predicted attitudes (ATs) toward GenAI, while ATs, perceived behavioral control, and subjective norms significantly predicted continuous intention. The findings contribute by testing an ethically grounded extension of the TPB for the responsible integration of GenAI in higher education. They also emphasize the need for clear behavioral rules and ethical guidelines, developed with relevant stakeholders, to support sustainable and responsible use of GenAI.
Keywords: artificial intelligence, AI ethical use, sustainability, mixed methods

CITATION (APA)

Arpaci, I., & Baloglu, M. (2026). Behavioral and ethical predictors of continuous intention to use generative AI responsibly in higher education. Contemporary Educational Technology, 18(3), ep673. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/18951

REFERENCES

  1. Adhikari, K., Naik, N., Hameed, B. Z., Raghunath, S. K., & Somani, B. K. (2024). Exploring the ethical, legal, and social implications of ChatGPT in urology. Current Urology Reports, 25, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-023-01185-2
  2. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
  3. Ajzen, I. (2002). Perceived behavioral control, self-efficacy, locus of control, and the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32(4), 665-683. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2002.tb00236.x
  4. Ajzen, I. (2012). The theory of planned behavior. In P. A. M. Van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology (vol. 1, pp. 438-459). SAGE. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446249215.n22
  5. AlAfnan, M. A., Samira Dishari, Marina Jovic, & Koba Lomidze. (2023). ChatGPT as an educational tool: Opportunities, challenges, and recommendations for communication, business writing, and composition courses. Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Technology, 3(2), 60-68. https://doi.org/10.37965/jait.2023.0184
  6. Alalwan, A. A., Dwivedi, Y. K., Rana, N. P., & Algharabat, R. (2018). Examining factors influencing Jordanian customers’ intentions and adoption of Internet banking: Extending UTAUT2 with risk. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 40, 125-138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2017.08.026
  7. Al-Emran, M., Al-Maroof, R., Al-Sharafi, M. A., & Arpaci, I. (2022). What impacts learning with wearables? An integrated theoretical model. Interactive Learning Environments, 30(10), 1897-1917. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1753216
  8. Al-Emran, M., Al-Nuaimi, M. N., Arpaci, I., Al-Sharafi, M. A., & Anthony Jnr, B. (2023). Towards a wearable education: Understanding the determinants affecting students’ adoption of wearable technologies using machine learning algorithms. Education and Information Technologies, 28(3), 2727-2746. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11294-z
  9. Al-Emran, M., Arpaci, I., & Salloum, S. A. (2020). An empirical examination of continuous intention to use m-learning: An integrated model. Education and Information Technologies, 25(4), 2899-2918. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-10094-2
  10. Ali, I. M., & Arpaci, I. (2025). The role of moral intention and moral obligation in predicting attitudes toward avoiding AIgiarism: A protection motivation theory perspective. Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 18, Article 100681. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2025.100681
  11. Alkaissi, H., & McFarlane, S. I. (2023). Artificial hallucinations in ChatGPT: Implications in scientific writing. Cureus. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.35179
  12. Al-Maroof, R. A., Arpaci, I., Al-Emran, M., Salloum, S. A., & Shaalan, K. (2021). Examining the acceptance of WhatsApp stickers through machine learning algorithms. Studies in Systems, Decision and Control, 295, 209-221. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-47411-9_12
  13. Al-Qaysi, N., Al-Emran, M., Al-Sharafi, M. A., Iranmanesh, M., Ahmad, A., & Mahmoud, M. A. (2025). Determinants of ChatGPT use and its impact on learning performance: An integrated model of BRT and TPB. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 41(9), 5462-5474. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2024.2361210
  14. Al-Sharafi, M. A., Al-Emran, M., Arpaci, I., Marques, G., Namoun, A., & Iahad, N. A. (2023). Examining the impact of psychological, social, and quality factors on the continuous intention to use virtual meeting platforms during and beyond COVID-19 pandemic: A hybrid SEM-ANN approach. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 39(13), 2673-2685. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2022.2084036
  15. Ariyaratne, S., Iyengar, K. P., Nischal, N., Chitti Babu, N., & Botchu, R. (2023). A comparison of ChatGPT-generated articles with human-written articles. Skeletal Radiology, 52(9), 1755-1758. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-023-04340-5
  16. Arpaci, I. (2019). A hybrid modeling approach for predicting the educational use of mobile cloud computing services in higher education. Computers in Human Behavior, 90, 181-187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.09.005
  17. Arpaci, I. (2024). A multianalytical SEM-ANN approach to investigate the social sustainability of AI chatbots based on cybersecurity and protection motivation theory. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 71, 1714-1725. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2023.3339578
  18. Arpaci, I., & Kusci, I. (2025). A hybrid SEM-ANN approach for predicting the impact of psychological needs on satisfaction with generative AI use. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 30, 2329-2350. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-025-09817-x
  19. Arpaci, I., & Sevinc, K. (2022). Development of the cybersecurity scale (CS-S): Evidence of validity and reliability. Information Development, 38(2), 218-226. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266666921997512
  20. Arpaci, I., Al-Emran, M., Al-Qaysi, N., & Al-Sharafi, M. A. (2025). What drives the use of generative artificial intelligence to promote educational sustainability? Evidence from SEM-ANN approach. TechTrends, 69(5), 957-971. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-025-01089-7
  21. Arpaci, I., Aslan, O., & Oner, I. E. (2025). Cybersecurity awareness scale (CSAS) for social media users: Development, validity and reliability study. Information Development. https://doi.org/10.1177/02666669251336562
  22. Atkins, S., Badrie, I., & Otterloo, S. (2021). Applying ethical AI frameworks in practice: Evaluating conversational AI chatbot solutions. Computers and Society Research Journal, 1. https://doi.org/10.54822/QXOM4114
  23. Belkina, M., Daniel, S., Nikolic, S., Haque, R., Lyden, S., Neal, P., Grundy, S., & Hassan, G. M. (2025). Implementing generative AI (GenAI) in higher education: A systematic review of case studies. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 8, Article 100407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100407
  24. Bender, E. M., Gebru, T., McMillan-Major, A., & Shmitchell, S. (2021). On the dangers of stochastic parrots. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (pp. 610-623). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3442188.3445922
  25. Bin-Nashwan, S. A., Sadallah, M., Benlahcene, A., & Ma’aji, M. M. (2025). ChatGPT and academic integrity: The role of personal best goals, academic competence, and workplace stress. Foresight, 27(4), 675-691. https://doi.org/10.1108/FS-04-2024-0089
  26. Bouschery, S. G., Blazevic, V., & Piller, F. T. (2023). Augmenting human innovation teams with artificial intelligence: Exploring transformer‐based language models. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 40(2), 139-153. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12656
  27. Carvalho, I., & Ivanov, S. (2024). ChatGPT for tourism: Applications, benefits and risks. Tourism Review, 79(2), 290-303. https://doi.org/10.1108/TR-02-2023-0088
  28. 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
  29. Chiu, T. K. F., Xia, Q., Zhou, X., Chai, C. S., & Cheng, M. (2023). Systematic literature review on opportunities, challenges, and future research recommendations of artificial intelligence in education. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 4, Article 100118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100118
  30. Chowdhury, M. M., Rifat, N., Ahsan, M., Latif, S., Gomes, R., & Rahman, M. S. (2023). ChatGPT: A threat against the CIA triad of cyber security. In Proceedings of the 2023 IEEE International Conference on Electro Information Technology (pp. 1-6). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/eIT57321.2023.10187355
  31. Cotton, D. R. E., Cotton, P. A., & Shipway, J. R. (2023). Chatting and cheating: Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 61(2), 228-239. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2190148
  32. Dave, T., Athaluri, S. A., & Singh, S. (2023). ChatGPT in medicine: An overview of its applications, advantages, limitations, future prospects, and ethical considerations. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2023.1169595
  33. Deptula, A., Hunter, P. T., & Johnson-Sheehan, R. (2025). Rhetorics of authenticity: Ethics, ethos, and artificial intelligence. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 39(1), 51-74. https://doi.org/10.1177/10506519241280639
  34. Dwivedi, Y. K., Kshetri, N., Hughes, L., Slade, E. L., Jeyaraj, A., Kar, A. K., Baabdullah, A. M., Koohang, A., Raghavan, V., Ahuja, M., Albanna, H., Albashrawi, M. A., Al-Busaidi, A. S., Balakrishnan, J., Barlette, Y., Basu, S., Bose, I., Brooks, L., Buhalis, D., … Wright, R. (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, Article 102642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102642
  35. Elkhatat, A. M. (2023). Evaluating the authenticity of ChatGPT responses: A study on text-matching capabilities. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 19, Article 15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-023-00137-0
  36. English, R., Nash, R., & Mackenzie, H. (2025). ‘A rather stupid but always available brain-storming partner’: Use and understanding of generative AI by UK postgraduate researchers. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 63(1), 193-207. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2024.2446236
  37. Farina, M., Yu, X., & Lavazza, A. (2024). Ethical considerations and policy interventions concerning the impact of generative AI tools in the economy and in society. AI and Ethics, 5, 737-745. https://doi.org/10.1007/S43681-023-00405-2
  38. Farrokhnia, M., Banihashem, S. K., Noroozi, O., & Wals, A. (2023). A SWOT analysis of ChatGPT: Implications for educational practice and research. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 61(3), 460-474. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2195846
  39. Floridi, L. and Cowls, J. (2022). A unified framework of five principles for AI in society. In S. Carta (Ed.), Machine learning and the city. Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119815075.ch45
  40. Gaffar, H., & Albarashdi, S. (2024). Copyright protection for AI-generated works: Exploring originality and ownership in a digital landscape. Asian Journal of International Law, 15(1), 23-46. https://doi.org/10.1017/S2044251323000735
  41. Ganguly, A., Johri, A., Ali, A., & McDonald, N. (2025). Generative artificial intelligence for academic research: Evidence from guidance issued for researchers by higher education institutions in the United States. AI and Ethics, 5, 3917-3933 . https://doi.org/10.1007/S43681-025-00688-7
  42. Gašević, D., Siemens, G., & Sadiq, S. (2023). Empowering learners for the age of artificial intelligence. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 4, Article 100130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100130
  43. Gibreel, O., & Arpaci, I. (2025). Development and validation of the prompt engineering competence scale (PECS). Information Development. https://doi.org/10.1177/02666669251336455
  44. Graf, A., & Bernardi, R. E. (2023). ChatGPT in research: Balancing ethics, transparency and advancement. Neuroscience, 515, 71-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroscience.2023.02.008
  45. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Cengage Learning.
  46. Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115-135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
  47. Hill, J., Randolph Ford, W., & Farreras, I. G. (2015). Real conversations with artificial intelligence: A comparison between human-human online conversations and human-chatbot conversations. Computers in Human Behavior, 49, 245-250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.02.026
  48. Hoffmann, S., Lasarov, W., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2024). AI-empowered scale development: Testing the potential of ChatGPT. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 205, Article 123488. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2024.123488
  49. Huang, W., Hew, K. F., & Fryer, L. K. (2022). Chatbots for language learning—Are they really useful? A systematic review of chatbot‐supported language learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 38(1), 237-257. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12610
  50. Hutson, M. (2021). Robo-writers: The rise and risks of language-generating AI. Nature, 591(7848), 22-25. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-00530-0
  51. Hwang, Y., & Jeong, S. H. (2025). Generative artificial intelligence and misinformation acceptance: An experimental test of the effect of forewarning about artificial intelligence hallucination. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 28(4), 284-289. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2024.0407
  52. Hwang, Y., Shin, D., & Lee, J. H. (2025). Who owns AI-generated artwork? Revisiting the work of generative AI based on human-AI cocreation. Telematics and Informatics, 98, Article 102266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2025.102266
  53. Janssen, M. (2025). Responsible governance of generative AI: Conceptualizing GenAI as complex adaptive systems. Policy and Society, 44(1), 38-51. https://doi.org/10.1093/polsoc/puae040
  54. Jin, Y., Yan, L., Echeverria, V., Gašević, D., & Martinez-Maldonado, R. (2025). Generative AI in higher education: A global perspective of institutional adoption policies and guidelines. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 8, Article 100348. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100348
  55. Johnson, D. G., & Noorman, M. (2014). Recommendations for future development of artificial agents. IEEE Technology and Society Magazine, 33(4), 22-28. https://doi.org/10.1109/MTS.2014.2363978
  56. Kasneci, E., Sessler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., Gasser, U., Groh, G., Günnemann, S., Hüllermeier, E., Krusche, S., Kutyniok, G., Michaeli, T., Nerdel, C., Pfeffer, J., Poquet, O., Sailer, M., Schmidt, A., Seidel, T., … Kasneci, G. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103, Article 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274
  57. Khalil, M., & Er, E. (2023). Will ChatGPT get you caught? Rethinking of plagiarism detection. In P. Zaphiris, & A. Ioannou (Eds.), Learning and collaboration technologies. HCII 2023. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 14040 (pp. 475-487). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-34411-4_32
  58. Kim, J., Yu, S., Detrick, R., & Li, N. (2024). Exploring students’ perspectives on generative AI-assisted academic writing. Education and Information Technologies, 30, 1265-1300. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12878-7
  59. King, M. R. (2023). A conversation on artificial intelligence, chatbots, and plagiarism in higher education. Cellular and Molecular Bioengineering, 16, 1-2. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12195-022-00754-8
  60. Kohnke, L., Moorhouse, B. L., & Zou, D. (2023). ChatGPT for language teaching and learning. RELC Journal, 54(2), 537-550. https://doi.org/10.1177/00336882231162868
  61. Kuhail, M. A., Alturki, N., Alramlawi, S., & Alhejori, K. (2023). Interacting with educational chatbots: A systematic review. Education and Information Technologies, 28(1), 973-1018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11177-3
  62. Kumar, S., Rao, P., Singhania, S., Verma, S., & Kheterpal, M. (2024). Will artificial intelligence drive the advancements in higher education? A tri-phased exploration. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 201, Article 123258. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TECHFORE.2024.123258
  63. Lund, B. D., & Wang, T. (2023). Chatting about ChatGPT: How may AI and GPT impact academia and libraries? Library Hi Tech News, 40(3), 26-29. https://doi.org/10.1108/LHTN-01-2023-0009
  64. Maras, M.-H., & Alexandrou, A. (2019). Determining authenticity of video evidence in the age of artificial intelligence and in the wake of deepfake videos. The International Journal of Evidence & Proof, 23(3), 255-262. https://doi.org/10.1177/1365712718807226
  65. McDonald, N., Johri, A., Ali, A., & Collier, A. H. (2025). Generative artificial intelligence in higher education: Evidence from an analysis of institutional policies and guidelines. Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans, 3, Article 100121. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CHBAH.2025.100121
  66. McGreevey, J. D., Hanson, C. W., & Koppel, R. (2020). Clinical, legal, and ethical aspects of artificial intelligence-assisted conversational agents in health care. JAMA, 324(6), Article 552. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2020.2724
  67. McTear, M. (2021). Conversational AI. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-02176-3
  68. Mhlanga, D. (2023). Open AI in education, the responsible and ethical use of ChatGPT towards lifelong learning. SSRN. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4354422
  69. Mohawesh, R., Ottom, M. A., & Salameh, H. B. (2025). A data-driven risk assessment of cybersecurity challenges posed by generative AI. Decision Analytics Journal, 15, Article 100580. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.DAJOUR.2025.100580
  70. Nguyen, K. V. (2025). The use of generative AI tools in higher education: Ethical and pedagogical principles. Journal of Academic Ethics, 23, 1435-1455. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10805-025-09607-1
  71. Nguyen, T. H., Waizenegger, L., & Techatassanasoontorn, A. A. (2022). “Don’t neglect the user!” – Identifying types of human-chatbot interactions and their associated characteristics. Information Systems Frontiers, 24(3), 797-838. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-021-10212-x
  72. Paul, J., Ueno, A., & Dennis, C. (2023). ChatGPT and consumers: Benefits, pitfalls and future research agenda. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 47(4), 1213-1225. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12928
  73. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2012). Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of Psychology, 63(1), 539-569. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100452
  74. Prinz, K. D. (2025). Managing the legal risks of artificial intelligence on intellectual property and confidential information. Consulting Psychology Journal, 77(2), 169-179. https://doi.org/10.1037/cpb0000287
  75. Qin, F., Li, K., & Yan, J. (2020). Understanding user trust in artificial intelligence‐based educational systems: Evidence from China. British Journal of Educational Technology, 51(5), 1693-1710. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12994
  76. Roberts, H., Cowls, J., Morley, J., Taddeo, M., Wang, V., & Floridi, L. (2021). The Chinese approach to artificial intelligence: An analysis of policy, ethics, and regulation. AI & SOCIETY, 36(1), 59-77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-020-00992-2
  77. Ryan, M. (2020). In AI we trust: Ethics, artificial intelligence, and reliability. Science and Engineering Ethics, 26(5), 2749-2767. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-020-00228-y
  78. Safi, R. (2025). Detecting plagiarism in the age of generative AI: An exploratory experiment. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 56(1), 594-612. https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.05624
  79. Sharma, M., & Sharma, S. (2023). Transforming maritime health with ChatGPT-powered healthcare services for mariners. Annals of Biomedical Engineering, 51(6), 1123-1125. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-023-03195-0
  80. Shen, Y., Heacock, L., Elias, J., Hentel, K. D., Reig, B., Shih, G., & Moy, L. (2023). ChatGPT and other large language models are double-edged swords. Radiology, 307(2), Article e230163. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.230163
  81. Söllner, M., Arnold, T., Benlian, A., Bretschneider, U., Knight, C., Ohly, S., Rudkowski, L., Schreiber, G., & Wendt, D. (2025). ChatGPT and beyond: Exploring the responsible use of generative AI in the workplace: An interdisciplinary perspective. Business and Information Systems Engineering, 67(2), 289-303. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-025-00932-8
  82. Stokel-Walker, C., & Van Noorden, R. (2023). What ChatGPT and generative AI mean for science. Nature, 614(7947), 214-216. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-00340-6
  83. Storey, V. C. (2024). Knowledge management in a world of generative AI: Impact and implications. ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems, 16(3), Article 26. https://doi.org/10.1145/3719209
  84. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2012). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.). Pearson.
  85. Ulnicane, I. (2025). Governance fix? Power and politics in controversies about governing generative AI. Policy and Society, 44(1), 70-84. https://doi.org/10.1093/POLSOC/PUAE022
  86. Vorobyeva, K. I., Belous, S., Savchenko, N. V., Smirnova, L. M., Nikitina, S. A., & Zhdanov, S. P. (2025). Personalized learning through AI: Pedagogical approaches and critical insights. Contemporary Educational Technology, 17(2), Article ep574. https://doi.org/10.30935/CEDTECH/16108
  87. Wang, C., Liu, S., Yang, H., Guo, J., Wu, Y., & Liu, J. (2023). Ethical considerations of using ChatGPT in health care. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 25, Article e48009. https://doi.org/10.2196/48009
  88. Wang, J., & Fan, W. (2025). The effect of ChatGPT on students’ learning performance, learning perception, and higher-order thinking: Insights from a meta-analysis. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 12, Article 621. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-04787-y
  89. Wu, H., & Dong, Z. (2025). What motivates second language majors to use generative AI for informal learning? Insights from the theory of planned behavior. IEEE Access, 13, 34877-34886. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2025.3544489
  90. Yeh, H.-C. (2025). The synergy of generative AI and inquiry-based learning: Transforming the landscape of English teaching and learning. Interactive Learning Environments, 33(1), 88-102. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2024.2335491
  91. Zhai, C., Wibowo, S., & Li, L. D. (2024). The effects of over-reliance on AI dialogue systems on students’ cognitive abilities: A systematic review. Smart Learning Environments, 11, Article 28. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-024-00316-7
  92. Zhou, J., Ke, P., Qiu, X., Huang, M., & Zhang, J. (2024). ChatGPT: Potential, prospects, and limitations. Frontiers of Information Technology & Electronic Engineering, 25(1), 6-11. https://doi.org/10.1631/fitee.2300089
  93. Zhou, J., Müller, H., Holzinger, A., & Chen, F. (2023). Ethical ChatGPT: Concerns, challenges, and commandments. Electronics, 13(17), Article 3417. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics13173417