article · PLoS ONE
A global survey of 23,218 higher education students across 109 countries and territories examined early reactions to ChatGPT. Students primarily used the tool to brainstorm, summarise text, and locate research papers, valuing its ability to simplify complex concepts while remaining sceptical of its reliability for accurate information and classroom support. Participants reported positive feelings, dominated by curiosity and calmness, and anticipated gains in study efficiency, grades, and access to knowledge. However, they expressed strong concerns regarding plagiarism, cheating, and social isolation, leading to broad support for AI regulation across all levels. While students noted potential improvements in their digital communication, content creation, and AI literacy, they considered the technology ineffective for cultivating critical thinking, decision-making, and numeracy. Perception differences were also linked to geographic and socio-demographic factors.
Generative artificial intelligence is rapidly entering universities worldwide, altering how students study, research, and complete coursework. By gathering direct feedback from tens of thousands of learners across diverse regions, this evidence highlights where AI genuinely supports learning and where it falls short. It gives educators and policymakers concrete data to design realistic classroom guidelines, modernise assessment methods, and prepare students for an AI-enabled workforce.
The findings offer immediate guidance for education technology developers, university administrators, and policy designers seeking to build or integrate generative AI tools. Edtech developers can target validated user needs such as document summarisation, brainstorming aids, and research discovery. While the research itself is an empirical perception survey rather than a deployable technology, the resulting insights are ready for immediate application in curriculum design, academic integrity guidelines, and institutional digital strategy.
AI-generated from the published abstract. Always read the original work before citing.
The paper presents the most comprehensive and large-scale global study to date on how higher education students perceived the use of ChatGPT in early 2024. With a sample of 23,218 students from 109 countries and territories, the study reveals that students primarily used ChatGPT for brainstorming, summarizing texts, and finding research articles, with a few using it for professional and creative writing. They found it useful for simplifying complex information and summarizing content, but less reliable for providing information and supporting classroom learning, though some considered its information clearer than that from peers and teachers. Moreover, students agreed on the need for AI regulations at all levels due to concerns about ChatGPT promoting cheating, plagiarism, and social isolation. However, they believed ChatGPT could potentially enhance their access to knowledge and improve their learning experience, study efficiency, and chances of achieving good grades. While ChatGPT was perceived as effective in potentially improving AI literacy, digital communication, and content creation skills, it was less useful for interpersonal communication, decision-making, numeracy, native language proficiency, and the development of critical thinking skills. Students also felt that ChatGPT would boost demand for AI-related skills and facilitate remote work without significantly impacting unemployment. Emotionally, students mostly felt positive using ChatGPT, with curiosity and calmness being the most common emotions. Further examinations reveal variations in students' perceptions across different socio-demographic and geographic factors, with key factors influencing students' use of ChatGPT also being identified. Higher education institutions' managers and teachers may benefit from these findings while formulating the curricula and instructions/regulations for ChatGPT use, as well as when designing the teaching methods and assessment tools. Moreover, policymakers may also consider the findings when formulating strategies for secondary and higher education system development, especially in light of changing labor market needs and related digital skills development.
This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0315011
Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.
Discussion
Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.
No discussion yet. Open the first thread.
New to MARATTO™? Create a free account.
