What ChatGPT means for universities: Perceptions of scholars and students
This study investigates the implications of ChatGPT, an AI-powered language model, for students and universities by examining the perceptions of scholars and students. The responses of seven scholars and 14 PhD students from four countries – Turkey, Sweden, Canada and Australia – are analysed using a thematic content analysis approach. Nine key themes emerge from the findings. According to their frequency of recurrence, these themes are: “Evolution of learning and education systems”, “changing r
Record details
Published: 19 April 2023
Source: OpenAlex
Category: Research
Topics: Children & education · Finance, VC & PE
Retrieved: 14 July 2026
Related evidence
These records share source-supplied organisations, an exact publisher byline, automatic topics or regions. The reason is shown on every link; related does not mean supporting, agreeing with or verifying this record.
ChatGPT Utility in Healthcare Education, Research, and Practice: Systematic Review on the Promising Perspectives and Valid Concerns
OpenAlex · 19 March 2023
Impact of ChatGPT on Learning Motivation:
OpenAlex · 7 March 2023
New Era of Artificial Intelligence in Education: Towards a Sustainable Multifaceted Revolution
OpenAlex · 16 August 2023
The impact of Generative AI (GenAI) on practices, policies and research direction in education: a case of ChatGPT and Midjourney
OpenAlex · 4 September 2023
A multinational study on the factors influencing university students’ attitudes and usage of ChatGPT
OpenAlex · 23 January 2024
Incorporating AI in foreign language education: An investigation into ChatGPT’s effect on foreign language learners
OpenAlex · 19 March 2024
How to cite this record
ethics.ai (19 April 2023), “What ChatGPT means for universities: Perceptions of scholars and students,” evidence record 9380, https://ethics.ai/record/9380 (originally published by OpenAlex).
Use and limitations
This page is a stable index and citation surface for a source record. ethics.ai did not author the underlying report and has not independently verified every claim. Automatic topics may be imperfect. For consequential use, quote and cite the original publisher.