Exploring the Nexus of Students' Attitudes Toward AI in Academic Tasks and Academic Integrity Awareness: A Mixed-Methods Study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.46328/ijte.5792Keywords:
Artificial intelligence, Academic integrity, Higher education, Attitudes, Mixed-methodsAbstract
The widespread adoption of Artificial Intelligence (AI), with its high accessibility, has led to a significant rise in its use in academia, raising significant concerns related to academic integrity, which is imperative for promoting sustainable learning practices. However, there is a critical need for studies exploring students’ attitudes toward AI in relation to academic integrity awareness. This study aimed to examine higher education students’ attitudes and academic integrity awareness regarding AI use in academic tasks and explore their correlation. Moreover, this study utilizes the Theory of Planned Behavior. A convergent parallel mixed-methods design, including a questionnaire (n = 248) and a focus group discussion (n = 8), was employed. The findings revealed that students had positive attitudes but low academic integrity awareness related to AI use in academia. Moreover, they showed a positive but weak relationship between these variables. This indicates that the more students are exposed to descriptions of “ethical AI use” that decrease violations of academic integrity, the more likely they are to utilize AI in academia. Additionally, it suggests that factors other than integrity awareness might play a bigger role in shaping students’ attitudes. Recommendations and implications are discussed.
References
Ababneh, K. I., Ahmed, K., & Dedousis, E. (2022). Predictors of cheating in online exams among business students during the COVID pandemic: Testing the theory of planned behavior. International Journal of Management Education, 20(3), Article 100713. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2022.100713
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
Alexander, K., Savvidou, C., & Alexander, C. (2023). Who wrote this essay? Detecting AI-generated writing in second language education in higher education. Teaching English with Technology, 23(2), 25-43. https://doi.org/10.56297/BUKA4060/XHLD5365
Allen, B., McGough, A. S., & Devlin, M. (2021). Toward a framework for teaching artificial intelligence to a higher education audience. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE), 22(2), 1-29. https://doi.org/10.1145/3485062
Aziz, A., Mahmood, D., Qureshi, M. S., Qureshi, M. B., & Kim, K. (2024). AI-based peak power demand forecasting model focusing on economic and climate features. Frontiers in Energy Research, 12, 1328891. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenrg.2024.1328891
Azzutti, A. (2022). AI trading and the limits of EU law enforcement in deterring market manipulation. Computer Law & Security Review, 45, 105690. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2022.105690
Bajwa, N. (2024). Examining the Theory of Planned Behavior as an explanation for why some creatives learn to use generative AI tools (Theses, dissertations, and culminating projects). Montclair State University. https://digitalcommons.montclair.edu/etd/1437/
Beck, L., & Ajzen, I. (1991). Predicting dishonest actions using the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Research in Personality, 25(3), 285–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-6566(91)90021-H
Bretag, T. (2018). Academic integrity. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Business and Management. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190224851.013.147
Burkhard, M. (2022). Student perceptions of AI-powered writing tools: Towards individualized teaching strategies. International Association for Development of the Information Society. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED626893
Cavaliere, P., De Souza, D., Fenton, A. L., Giridharan, B., Gralla, C., Inshakova, N., ... & Zaharuk, G. (2020). Academic misconduct and plagiarism: Case studies from universities around the world. Rowman & Littlefield. Retrieved from https://books.google.com.sa/books?hl=en&lr=&id=GZsAEAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PR5&dq=Canada,+Sweden+and+Australia+due+to+the+lack+of+clear+guidance+on+how+to+use+ai+misconduct+&ots=OvqigQLDDL&sig=Lia0F1HdmiAzNpJ81mpQMBy2CbQ&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false
Chassignol, M., Khoroshavin, A., Klimova, A., & Bilyatdinova, A. (2018). Artificial intelligence trends in education: A narrative overview. Procedia Computer Science, 136, 16-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2018.08.233
Chaudhry, I. S., Sarwary, S. A. M., El Refae, G. A., & Chabchoub, H. (2023). Time to revisit existing student’s performance evaluation approach in higher education sector in a new era of ChatGPT — a case study. Cogent Education, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2210461
Chen, L., Chen, P., & Lin, Z. (2020). Artificial intelligence in education: A review. IEEE Access, 8, 75264–75278. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2988510
Cınkara, E., & Bagcecı, B. (2013). Learners’ attitudes towards online language learning; and corresponding success rates. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 14(2), 118-130. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/131634/
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage Publications.
Davis, M., & Morley, J. (2015). Phrasal intertextuality: The responses of academics from different disciplines to students’ re-use of phrases. Journal of Second Language Writing, 28, 20-35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2015.02.004
Demir, K., & Güraksın, G. E. (2022). Determining middle school students’ perceptions of the concept of artificial intelligence: A metaphor analysis. Participatory Educational Research, 9(2), 297-312. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.22.41.9.2
Du Boulay, B. (2016). Artificial intelligence as an effective classroom assistant. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 31(6), 76-81. https://doi.org/10.1109/MIS.2016.93
Fast, E., & Horvitz, E. (2017, February). Long-term trends in the public perception of artificial intelligence. In Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence (Vol. 31, No. 1). https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v31i1.10635
Fraser, W., & Killen, R. (2005). The perceptions of students and lecturers of some factors influencing academic performance at two South African universities. Perspectives in Education, 23(1), 25-40. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/98313/
Fošner, A. (2024). University Students’ Attitudes and Perceptions towards AI Tools: Implications for Sustainable Educational Practices. Sustainability, 16(19), 8668. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16198668
Kashive, N., Powale, L., & Kashive, K. (2020). Understanding user perception toward artificial intelligence (AI) enabled e-learning. The International Journal of Information and Learning Technology, 38(1), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJILT-05-2020-0090
Keyser, R. S., & Doyle, B. S. (2020). Clever methods students use to cheat and ways to neutralize them. Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice, 20(16). https://articlearchives.co/index.php/JHETP/article/view/2850
Kim, J., Merrill, K., Xu, K., & Sellnow, D. D. (2020). My teacher is a machine: Understanding students’ perceptions of ai teaching assistants in online education. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 36(20), 1902-1911. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2020.1801227
Kumar, R., Eaton, S.E., Mindzak, M., Morrison, R. (2024). Academic Integrity and Artificial Intelligence: An Overview. In: Eaton, S.E. (eds) Second Handbook of Academic Integrity. Springer International Handbooks of Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-54144-5_153
Kwong, T., Ng, H. M., Mark, K. P., & Wong, E. (2010). Students’ and faculty’s perception of academic integrity in Hong Kong. Campus-Wide Information Systems, 27(5), 341-355. https://doi.org/10.1108/10650741011087766
Lima, G., Kim, C., Ryu, S., Jeon, C., & Cha, M. (2020). Collecting the public perception of AI and robot rights. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 4(CSCW2), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1145/3415206
Luckin, R., Holmes, W., Griffiths, M., & Forcier, L. B. (2016). Intelligence unleashed. An argument for AI in Education, 18. Retrieved June 3, 2024 from https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/1475756/
Macfarlane, B., Zhang, J., & Pun, A. (2012). Academic integrity: A review of the literature. Studies in Higher Education, 39(2), 339-358. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2012.709495
McAfee, A., Brynjolfsson, E., Davenport, T. H., Patil, D. J., & Barton, D. (2012). Big data: The management revolution. Harvard Business Review, 90(10), 60-66, 68, 128. PMID: 23074865
McCabe, D. L., & Trevino, L. K. (1997). Individual and contextual influences on academic dishonesty: A multicampus investigation. Research in Higher Education, 38, 379-396. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024954224675
Mhlanga, D. (2023). Open AI in education, the responsible and ethical use of ChatGPT towards lifelong learning. In FinTech and artificial intelligence for sustainable development: The role of smart technologies in achieving development goals (pp. 387-409). Springer Nature Switzerland.
Montebello, M. (2018). AI injected e-learning: The future of online education (Vol. 745, pp. 15-25). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67928-0_3
Moyo, C., & Saidi, A. (2019). The snowball effects of practices that compromise the credibility and integrity of higher education. South African Journal of Higher Education, 33(5), 249-263. https://doi.org/10.20853/33-5-3574
Nigam, A., Pasricha, R., Singh, T., & Churi, P. (2021). A systematic review on AI-based proctoring systems: Past, present and future. Education and Information Technologies, 26(5), 6421-6445. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10597-x
Oravec, J. A. (2023). Artificial intelligence implications for academic cheating: Expanding the dimensions of responsible human-AI collaboration with ChatGPT. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 34(2), 213-237. https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/222340/
Porter, B., & Grippa, F. (2020). A platform for AI-enabled real-time feedback to promote digital collaboration. Sustainability, 12(24), 10243. https://doi.org/10.3390/su122410243
Pratama, M. P., Sampelolo, R., & Lura, H. (2023). Revolutionizing education: Harnessing the power of artificial intelligence for personalized learning. Klasikal: Journal of Education, Language Teaching and Science, 5(2), 350-357. https://doi.org/10.52208/klasikal.v5i2.877
Rashid, A. B., & Kausik, A. K. (2024). AI revolutionizing industries worldwide: A comprehensive overview of its diverse applications. Hybrid Advances, 7, 100277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hybadv.2024.100277
Rogerson, A. M., & McCarthy, G. (2017). Using Internet based paraphrasing tools: Original work, patchwriting or facilitated plagiarism? International Journal for Educational Integrity, 13(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-0160013-y
Sarirete, A., Balfagih, Z., Brahimi, T., Mousa, M. E. A., Lytras, M., & Visvizi, A. (2021). Artificial intelligence: Towards digital transformation of life, work, and education. Procedia Computer Science, 194, 18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2021.11.001
Shi, L. (2012). Rewriting and paraphrasing source texts in second language writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(2), 134-148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2012.03.003
Singh, M., Joshi, M., Tyagi, K. D., & Tyagi, V. B. (2024). Future professions in agriculture, medicine, education, fitness, research and development, transport, and communication. Topics in Artificial Intelligence Applied to Industry 4.0, 181–202. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781394216147.ch10
Stone, A. (2023).Student Perceptions of Academic Integrity: A Qualitative Study of Understanding, Consequences, and Impact. Journal of Academic Ethics, 21(3), 357-375. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-022-09461-5
Sullivan, M., Kelly, A., & McLaughlan, P. (2023). ChatGPT in higher education: Considerations for academic integrity and student learning. Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching, 6(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.17
Tidjon, L. N., & Khomh, F. (2023). The different faces of AI ethics across the world: A principle-to-practice gap analysis. IEEE Transactions on Artificial Intelligence, 4(4), 820–839. https://doi.org/10.1109/TAI.2022.3225132
Ventayen, R. J. M. (2023). OpenAI ChatGPT-generated results: Similarity index of artificial intelligence-based contents. In G. Ranganathan, Y. EL Allioui, & S. Piramuthu (Eds.), Soft computing for security applications. ICSCS 2023. Advances in intelligent systems and computing (pp. 215-226). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-3608-3_15
Wang, Y. Y., Wang, Y. S., & Wang, Y. M. (2022). What drives students’ Internet ethical behaviour: An integrated model of the theory of planned behaviour, personality, and Internet ethics education. Behaviour & Information Technology, 41(3), 588–610. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2020.1829053
Whittaker, M., Crawford, K., Dobbe, R., Fried, G., Kaziunas, E., Mathur, V., Mysers West, S., Richardson, R., Schultz, J., & Schwartz, O. (2018). AI now report 2018 (pp. 1-62). New York: AI Now Institute at New York University. https://www.stc.org/roundtable/wp-content/uploads/sites/34/2019/06/AI_Now_2018_Report.pdf
Williamson, B., & Piattoeva, N. (2020). Objectivity as standardization in data-scientific education policy, technology and governance. In The Datafication of Education (pp. 81-93). Routledge.
Yu, Eunjyu. (2023). Intelligent enough? Artificial intelligence for online learners. Journal of Educators Online, 20(1), n1. https://doi.org/10.9743/jeo.2023.20.1.16
Yusliza, M. Y., Fawehinmi, O., Mat, N. H. N., & Mohamed, M. (2022). Exploring the intention to cheat among undergraduate students through the lens of the theory of planned behaviour. International Journal of Business and Society, 23(2), 1042–1065. https://doi.org/10.33736/ijbs.4857.2022
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 International Journal of Technology in Education
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Articles may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Authors alone are responsible for the contents of their articles. The journal owns the copyright of the articles. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of the research material.
The author(s) of a manuscript agree that if the manuscript is accepted for publication in the International Journal of Technology in Education (IJTE), the published article will be copyrighted using a Creative Commons “Attribution 4.0 International” license. This license allows others to freely copy, distribute, and display the copyrighted work, and derivative works based upon it, under certain specified conditions.
Authors are responsible for obtaining written permission to include any images or artwork for which they do not hold copyright in their articles, or to adapt any such images or artwork for inclusion in their articles. The copyright holder must be made explicitly aware that the image(s) or artwork will be made freely available online as part of the article under a Creative Commons “Attribution 4.0 International” license.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
