Unveiling the GAIS Constructs: A Qualitative Investigation into the Real-World Manifestations of Effective Generative AI Integration in Scholarly Works
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background and Aim: The integration of Generative AI (GenAI) in scholarly works presents transformative opportunities alongside ethical, cognitive, and institutional challenges. This qualitative study investigates the real-world manifestations of effective Generative AI adoption through the Generative AI Integration in Scholarly Works (GAIS) framework, aiming to explore how scholars operationalize AI tools while addressing critical concerns such as ethical integrity, equity, and governance.
Materials and Methods: Adopting an interpretivist paradigm, the study conducted focus group discussions involving 15 scholars drawn from two graduate institutions. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis to identify key dimensions of Generative AI integration in scholarly works.
Results: Six central themes emerged: (1) Productivity and Creativity (efficiency vs. over-reliance risks); (2) Ethical Integrity (transparency, plagiarism, authorship); (3) Equity (access disparities, algorithmic bias); (4) Personalized Learning (adaptive knowledge scaffolding); (5) Cognitive Trade-offs (efficiency vs. critical thinking erosion); and (6) Institutional Governance (policy gaps in privacy and oversight). Findings highlight Generative AI’s potential to augment scholarship but reveal tensions in ethical accountability, access inequality, and academic self-efficacy.
Conclusion: Significant access disparities persist, intensifying academic inequities. While Generative AI aids personalized learning and knowledge construction, its over-reliance risks diminishing critical thinking and self-efficacy. Institutional governance remains inconsistent, highlighting an urgent need for clear policies, structured oversight, and inclusive training. Practical recommendations include (a) institutional policies on Generative AI ethics, (b) cross-disciplinary Generative AI literacy programs, and (c) inclusive governance models. Future research should pursue longitudinal studies on GAIS evolution and broader stakeholder engagement to ensure equitable and sustainable AI adoption in scholarly works.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Copyright on any article in the Journal of Education and Learning Reviews is retained by the author(s) under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. Permission to use text, content, images, etc. of publication. Any user to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose. But do not use it for commercial use or with the intent to benefit any business.
References
Abbas, J., Jam, F. A., & Khan, M. N. (2023). Implications of generative AI on critical thinking skills in higher education: A double-edged sword. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1), 45–62. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00440-1
Abbott, R. B., & Rothman, E. (2023). Disrupting creativity: Copyright law in the age of generative artificial intelligence. Florida Law Review, 75(6). https://ssrn.com/abstract=4183613
Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2007). Blending in: The extent and promise of blended education in the United States. Sloan Consortium. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED529930.pdf
Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(2), 357–376. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.45.2.357
Amirjalili, F. (2023). The limitations of AI-generated text in academic writing. Journal of Academic Integrity, 18(2), 45–59.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215.
Bender, E. M., Gebru, T., McMillan-Major, A., & Shmitchell, S. (2021). On the dangers of stochastic parrots: Can language models be too big? In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (pp. 610–623). https://doi.org/10.1145/3442188.3445922
Biggs, J. (2003). Aligning teaching for constructing learning. The Higher Education Academy. https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/system/files/resources/id477_aligning_teaching_for_constructing_learning.pdf
Biswas, S. (2023). ChatGPT as an AI reviewer: Implications for academic publishing. Research Ethics Review, 19(3), 210–225.
Bommasani, R., Hudson, D. A., Adeli, E., Altman, R., Arora, S., von Arx, S., ... & Liang, P. (2021). On the opportunities and risks of foundation models. arXiv Preprint, arXiv:2108.07258.
Bonnet, S., & Teuteberg, F. (2025). Unfolding the potential of generative artificial intelligence: Design principles for chatbots in academic teaching and research. International Journal of Knowledge Management, 21(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJKM.368223
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.
Carr, N. (2011). The shallows: What the internet is doing to our brains. W. W. Norton & Company.
Casper, S., Davies, X., Shi, C., Gilbert, T. K., Scheurer, J., Rando, J., Freedman, R., Korbak, T., Lindner, D., Freire, P., Wang, T., Marks, S., Ségérie, C., Carroll, M., Peng, A., Christoffersen, P., Damani, M., Slocum, S., Anwar, U., … Hadfield-Menell, D. (2023). Open problems and fundamental limitations of reinforcement learning from human feedback. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2307.15217
Chai, M., Herron, E., Cervantes, E., & Ghosal, T. (2024). Exploring scientific hypothesis generation with Mamba. Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on NLP for Science (NLP4Science), 197–207. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2024.nlp4science-1.17
Cochran, W. G. (1977). Sampling techniques (3rd ed.). Wiley.
Crawford, K. (2022). Atlas of AI: Power, politics, and the planetary costs of artificial intelligence. MIT Press.
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.
Doğru, T., Line, N., Mody, M., Hanks, L., Abbott, J. A., Acikgoz, F., Assaf, A., Bakir, S., Berbekova, A., & Bilgihan, A. (2023). Generative artificial intelligence in the hospitality and tourism industry: Developing a framework for future research. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/10963480231188663
Eaton, S. (2023). Academic integrity and artificial intelligence: Implications for plagiarism and academic writing [Conference session]. PUPP.
Fabrigar, L. R., Wegener, D. T., MacCallum, R. C., & Strahan, E. J. (1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 4(3), 272–299. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.4.3.272
Fazil, M. (2023). Exploring the broad impact of AI technologies on student engagement and academic performance in university settings in Afghanistan. Riggs: Journal of Research and Innovation in Global Governance, 2(2), 105–117. https://journal.ilmudata.co.id/index.php/RIGGS/article/view/268
Floridi, L. (2023). AI as agency without intelligence: On ChatGPT, large language models, and other generative models. Philosophy and Technology, 36(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-023-00621-y
Floridi, L., Cowls, J., Beltrametti, M., Chatila, R., Chazerand, P., Dignum, V., & Vayena, E. (2018). AI4People—An ethical framework for a good AI society: Opportunities, risks, principles, and recommendations. Minds and Machines, 28(4), 689–707.
Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32(4), 365–387.
Fyfe, P. (2023). How to cheat on your final paper: Assigning AI for student writing. AI & Society, 38(4), 1395–1405. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-022-01397-z
Gallant, T. B. (2017). Academic integrity as a teaching & learning issue: From theory to practice. Theory Into Practice, 56(2), 88–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2017.1283571
Gallant, T. B. (Ed.). (2008). Academic integrity in the twenty-first century: A teaching and learning imperative (ASHE Higher Education Report, Vol. 33, No. 5). Jossey Bass.
Gasparini, A., & Kautonen, H. (2022). Understanding artificial intelligence in research libraries: An extensive literature review. LIBER Quarterly: The Journal of the Association of European Research Libraries, 32(1), Article e-ISSN 2213 056X. https://doi.org/10.53377/lq.10934 septentrio.uit.no+14
Goodhue, D. L., & Thompson, R. L. (1995). Task-technology fit and individual performance. MIS Quarterly, 19(2), 213–236.
Grassini, S. (2023). Shaping the future of education: Exploring the potential and consequences of AI and ChatGPT in educational settings. Education Sciences, 13(7), Article 692. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13070692
Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? Field Methods, 18(1), 59–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X05279903
Hmoud, M. (2024). Developing rubrics for AI chatbot evaluation in education. Educational Technology Research, 42(1), 78–92.
Hristov, K. (2017). Artificial intelligence and the copyright dilemma. IDEA – The Journal of the Franklin Pierce Center for Intellectual Property, 57, 431–466.
IEEE. (2019). Ethically aligned design: A vision for prioritizing human well-being with autonomous and intelligent systems (1st ed.). IEEE Standards Association.
Jafari, F., & Keykha, A. (2024). Identifying the opportunities and challenges of artificial intelligence in higher education: A qualitative study. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 16(4), 1228–1245. https://doi.org/10.1108/JARHE-09-2023-0426
Jafari, N. (2023). AI-enhanced pedagogical strategies in higher education. Journal of Educational Technology, 45(2), 112–128.
Jaramillo, J. J., & Chiappe, A. (2024). The AI-driven classroom: A review of 21st-century curriculum trends. Prospects, 54, 645–660. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-024-09704-w
Jarrah, A. M., Wardat, Y., & Fidalgo, P. (2023). Using ChatGPT in academic writing is (not) a form of plagiarism: What does the literature say? Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 13(4), e202346. https://doi.org/10.30935/ojcmt/13572
Jobin, A., Ienca, M., & Vayena, E. (2019). The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines. Nature Machine Intelligence, 1(9), 389–399. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-019-0088-2
Kadaruddin, K. (2023). Empowering education through generative AI: Innovative instructional strategies for tomorrow's learners. International Journal of Business, Law, and Education, 4(2), 618-625.
Kadaruddin. (2023). Empowering education through generative AI: Innovative instructional strategies for tomorrow's learners. International Journal of Business, Law, and Education, 4(2), 618-625.
Kish, L. (1965). Survey sampling. John Wiley & Sons.
Kronivets, A. (2024). Legal dimensions of AI adoption in academia. International Journal of Law and Technology, 18(1), 45–62.
Kronivets, T., Yakovenko, O., Tymoshenko, Y., & Ilnytskyi, M. (2024). Dimensions of legal and moral use of artificial intelligence in education. Review of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 5(00), e25. https://doi.org/10.37497/rev.artif.intell.educ.v5i00.25
Kumar, M., Kaur, S., & Singh, G. (2023). Artificial Intelligence in Education: Transforming Learning Experiences. AGPE: The Royal Gondwana Research Journal, 5(10), 1–10.
Lemley, M. A., & Casey, B. (2020). Fair learning. SSRN. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3534282
Li, M., Xie, Q., Enkhtur, A., Meng, S., Chen, L., Yamamoto, B. A., Cheng, F., & Murakami, M. (2025). A framework for developing university policies on generative AI governance: A cross national comparative study. ArXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.02636
Likert, R. (1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of Psychology, 140, 1–55.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE Publications.
Liu Schuppener, X. (2023). Artificial intelligence and digitalization in China’s education system: A systematic analysis of the policy framework and underlying strategies. Working Papers on East Asian Studies, 136. University of Duisburg–Essen. https://doi.org/10.17185/duepublico/78369
Lohr, S. L. (2019). Sampling: Design and analysis (2nd ed.). CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429291449
Lund, B. (2023). AI in scholarly publishing: Copyright and authorship challenges. Journal of Information Ethics, 32(4), 112–128.
Lundie, D. (2024). The ethics of research and teaching in an age of big data. Journal of Comparative & International Higher Education, 16(2), 86-94. https://doi.org/10.32674/jcihe.v16i2.5779
Martinez, A. (2023). Impact of artificial intelligence in promoting academic integrity in higher education [Conference presentation]. PEARL Repository, University of Plymouth.
Matthews, J., & Volpe, C. R. (2023). Academics’ perceptions of ChatGPT-generated written outputs: A practical application of Turing’s Imitation Game. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5), 82–96. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.8896
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for integrating technology in teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x
Nasution, N. E. A. (2023). Using artificial intelligence to create biology multiple-choice questions for higher education. Agricultural and Environmental Education, 2(1), em002. https://doi.org/10.29333/agrenvedu/13071
Nazaretsky, T., Ariely, M., Cukurova, M., & Alexandron, G. (2022). Teachers’ trust in AI-powered educational technology and a professional development program to improve it. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(4), 914–931. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13232 arxiv.org+10
Nicholas, D., Świgoń, M., & Rowlands, I. (2024). The impact of generative AI on the scholarly communications of early career researchers (ECRs): Insights from six countries. Learned Publishing, 37(1), 16–24. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1628
Noble, S. U. (2018). Algorithms of oppression: How search engines reinforce racism. New York University Press.
Paul, M., Kumar, V., & Goyal, N. (2022). Artificial intelligence in education: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Educational Management, 36(4), 854–876. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-10-2021-0421
Perrigo, B. (2023, January 18). OpenAI used Kenyan workers on less than $2 per hour to make ChatGPT less toxic. Time Magazine. https://time.com/6247678/openai-chatgpt-kenya-workers/
Popenici, S. A., & Kerr, S. (2017). Exploring the impact of artificial intelligence on teaching and learning in higher education. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 12(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41039-017-0062-8
Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Harvard University Press.
Salah, U. A., Chatzistamatis, N., & Xanthopoulou, A. (2023). Generative AI in education: Assessing usability and ethical implications from students’ perspectives. Social Sciences, 14(12), 267. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci1412267
Selwyn, N. (2019). Approches critiques des technologies en éducation: Un aperçu. Formation et Profession, 27(3), 6–21.
Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1). http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Jan_05/article01.htm
Sindermann, C., Sha, P., Zhou, M., Wernicke, J., Schmitt, H., Li, M., … Montag, C. (2020). Assessing the attitude towards artificial intelligence: Introduction of a short measure in German, Chinese, and English language [KI – Künstliche Intelligenz, 35(1), 49–58]. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13218-020-00689-0
Suh, J., & Ahn, J. (2023). Artificial intelligence and the future of education: Critical reflections on ChatGPT from the perspective of critical digital pedagogy. British Journal of Educational Technology, 54(6), 1434–1448. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13232
Thompson, L. (2024). Comparative analysis of AI policies in higher education. International Journal of Educational Policy, 15(2), 89–104.
Thompson, R. L., Higgins, C. A., & Howell, J. M. (1995). Influence of experience on personal computer utilization: Testing a conceptual model. Journal of Management Information Systems, 11(1), 167–187. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.1994.11518035
Uddin, M. M., & Abu, S. E. (2024). Navigating ethical frameworks to mitigate academic misconduct while leveraging generative AI. Research Square. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4607113/v1
UNESCO. (2021). AI and education: Guidance for policy-makers. UNESCO Publishing.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes (M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman, Eds.). Harvard University Press.
Warschauer, M. (2004). Technology and social inclusion: Rethinking the digital divide. MIT Press.
Wiredu, J. K., Seidu, N. A., & Zakaria, H. (2024). Impact of generative AI in academic integrity and learning outcomes: A case study in the Upper East Region. Asian Journal of Research in Computer Science, 17(7), 214–232. https://doi.org/10.9734/AJRCOS/2024/V17I7491
Yeo, M. (2023). An ethical framework for AI authorship in academia. Research Ethics, 19(4), 1–18.
Zuboff, S. (2019). The age of surveillance capitalism: The fight for a human future at the new frontier of power. PublicAffairs.
