logo

Articles

Vol. 4 No. 1 (2025): Generative AI and education

A narrative review of the potential use of generative artificial intelligence in educational research practices in higher education

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21428/8c225f6e.4428aafb
Submitted
13 August 2026
Published
15-08-2026

Abstract

In recent years, generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) has been rapidly advancing and becoming increasingly prevalent in various fields, including academic research. This paper reviews the existing body of literature on the application of GenAI in the context of contemporary educational research practices. It delves into the literature to understand the possibilities of GenAI in academic research contexts. It explores how researchers in higher education contexts recognise its potential and use GenAI tools in their research practices. This narrative literature review addresses the usage of GenAI in scholarly practices and provides key insights into its uses, limitations, and ethical implications. The findings suggest that while researchers increasingly leverage GenAI tools to support them with various stages of the research process, the use of these tools is accompanied by a range of limitations and ethical considerations that require careful attention. The discussion emphasises the importance of researchers using these tools in research activities in conjunction with human intelligence while exercising caution to maintain academic integrity and research ethics. This paper offers up-to-date insights on the potential uses of GenAI in an educational research context to scholars and researchers who are authors, reviewers, editors, and readers. More broadly, it intends to contribute to ongoing discussions within the research community on the potential application of GenAI tools, their associated implications, ethical challenges, and future considerations in a new era of AI-assisted research.

References

  1. Al-Zahrani, A. M. (2023). The impact of generative AI tools on researchers and research: Implications for academia in higher education. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2271445
  2. Alshater, M. M. (2022). Exploring the role of artificial intelligence in enhancing academic performance: A case study of ChatGPT. SSRN. https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4312358
  3. Anderson, N., Belavy, D. L., Perle, S. M., Hendricks, S., Hespanhol, L., Verhagen, E., & Memon, A. R. (2023). AI did not write this manuscript, or did it? Can we trick the AI text detector into generated texts? The potential future of ChatGPT and AI in Sports & Exercise Medicine manuscript generation. BMJ Open Sport & Exercise Medicine, 9(1), e001568e001568. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjsem-2023-001568
  4. Baidoo-Anu, D., & Owusu Ansah, L. (2023). Education in the Era of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI): Understanding the Potential Benefits of ChatGPT in Promoting Teaching and Learning [Education in the Era of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI): Understanding the Potential Benefits of ChatGPT in Promoting Teaching and Learning]. Journal of AI, 7(1), 52-62. https://doi.org/10.61969/jai.1337500
  5. Berg, C. (2023). The case for generative AI in scholarly practice. SSRN. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4407587
  6. Burger, B., Kanbach, D. K., Kraus, S., Breier, M., & Corvello, V. (2023). On the use of AI-based tools like ChatGPT to support management research. European Journal of Innovation Management, 26(7), 233-241. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-02-2023-0156
  7. Carabantes, D., González-Geraldo, J. L., & Jover, G. (2023). ChatGPT could be the reviewer of your next scientific paper. Evidence on the limits of AI-assisted academic reviews. Profesional de la información/Information Professional, 32(5). https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2023.sep.16
  8. Celik, I., Dindar, M., Muukkonen, H., & Järvelä, S. (2022). The Promises and Challenges of Artificial Intelligence for Teachers: a Systematic Review of Research. TechTrends, 66(4), 616-630. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-022-00715-y
  9. Chan, C. K. Y., & Hu, W. (2023). Students’ voices on generative AI: Perceptions, benefits, and challenges in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1), 43. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00411-8
  10. Checco, A., Bracciale, L., Loreti, P., Pinfield, S., & Bianchi, G. (2021). AI-assisted peer review. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 8(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-020-00703-8
  11. Cotton, D. R., 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
  12. Crawford, J., Cowling, M., Ashton-Hay, S., Kelder, J.-A., Middleton, R., & Wilson, G. S. (2023). Artificial intelligence and authorship editor policy: ChatGPT, bard bing AI, and beyond. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 20(5), 1. https://doi.org/10.53761/1.20.5.01
  13. Dalalah, D., & Dalalah, O. M. (2023). The false positives and false negatives of generative AI detection tools in education and academic research: The case of ChatGPT. The International Journal of Management Education, 21(2), 100822. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2023.100822
  14. Davison, R. M., Laumer, S., Tarafdar, M., & Wong, L. H. (2023). Pickled eggs: Generative AI as research assistant or co‐author? Information Systems Journal, 33(5), 989-994. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12455
  15. Dergaa, I., Chamari, K., Zmijewski, P., & Saad, H. B. (2023). From human writing to artificial intelligence generated text: examining the prospects and potential threats of ChatGPT in academic writing. Biology of Sport, 40(2), 615-622. https://doi.org/10.5114/biolsport.2023.125623
  16. Dogru, 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, 10963480231188663. https://doi.org/10.1177/10963480231188663
  17. Dowling, M., & Lucey, B. (2023). ChatGPT for (finance) research: The Bananarama conjecture. Finance Research Letters, 53, 103662. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2023.103662
  18. 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). Opinion Paper: “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, 102642. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102642
  19. Farrelly, T., & Baker, N. (2023). Generative artificial intelligence: Implications and considerations for higher education practice. Education Sciences, 13(11), 1109. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13111109
  20. Ferrari, R. (2015). Writing narrative style literature reviews. Medical Writing, 24(4), 230-235. https://doi.org/10.1179/2047480615Z.000000000329
  21. Green, B. N., Johnson, C. D., & Adams, A. (2006). Writing narrative literature reviews for peer-reviewed journals: secrets of the trade. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine, 5(3), 101-117. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0899-3467(07)60142-6
  22. Haman, M., & Školník, M. (2023). Using ChatGPT to conduct a literature review. Accountability in Research, 1-3. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2023.2185514
  23. Holmes, W., & Tuomi, I. (2022). State of the art and practice in AI in education. European Journal of Education, 57(4), 542-570. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12533
  24. Kim, S.-K. A., & Wong, U.-H. (2023). ChatGPT impacts on academia. 2023 International Conference on System Science and Engineering (ICSSE). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSSE58758.2023.10227188
  25. Knopf, J. W. (2006). Doing a literature review. PS: Political Science & Politics, 39(1), 127-132. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096506060264
  26. Kooli, C. (2023). Chatbots in education and research: A critical examination of ethical implications and solutions. Sustainability, 15(7), 5614. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15075614
  27. Lin, Z. (2023). Why and how to embrace AI such as ChatGPT in your academic life. Royal Society Open Science, 10(8), 230658. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.230658
  28. Lodge, J. M., Thompson, K., & Corrin, L. (2023). Mapping out a research agenda for generative artificial intelligence in tertiary education. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 39(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.8695
  29. Lund, B. D., Wang, T., Mannuru, N. R., Nie, B., Shimray, S., & Wang, Z. (2023). ChatGPT and a new academic reality: Artificial Intelligence‐written research papers and the ethics of the large language models in scholarly publishing. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 74(5), 570-581. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24750
  30. Morocco-Clarke, A., Sodangi, F. A., & Momodu, F. (2023). The implications and effects of ChatGPT on academic scholarship and authorship: a death knell for original academic publications? Information & Communications Technology Law, 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600834.2023.2239623
  31. Nakazawa, E., Udagawa, M., & Akabayashi, A. (2022). Does the use of AI to create academic research papers undermine researcher originality? AI, 3(3), 702-706. https://doi.org/10.3390/ai3030040
  32. Niszczota, P., & Conway, P. (2023). Judgements of research co-created by Generative AI: Experimental evidence. Economics and Business Review, 9(2), 101-114. https://doi.org/10.18559/ebr.2023.2.744
  33. Nguyen, A., Ngo, H. N., Hong, Y., Dang, B., & Nguyen, B.-P. T. (2023). Ethical principles for artificial intelligence in education. Education and Information Technologies, 28(4), 4221-4241. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11316-w
  34. O'Connor, S. (2022). Open artificial intelligence platforms in nursing education: Tools for academic progress or abuse? Nurse Education in Practice, 66, 103537-103537. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2022.103537
  35. Peres, R., Schreier, M., Schweidel, D., & Sorescu, A. (2023). On ChatGPT and beyond: How generative artificial intelligence may affect research, teaching, and practice. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 40(2), 269-275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2023.03.001
  36. Qasem, F. (2023). ChatGPT in scientific and academic research: future fears and reassurances. Library Hi Tech News, 40(3), 30-32. https://doi.org/10.1108/LHTN-03-2023-0043
  37. Rusandi, M. A., Ahman, Saripah, I., Khairun, D. Y., & Mutmainnah. (2023). No worries with ChatGPT: building bridges between artificial intelligence and education with critical thinking soft skills. Journal of Public Health, 45(3), e602-e603. https://doi.org/10.1093/pubmed/fdad049
  38. Rane, N. L., Choudhary, S. P., Tawde, A., & Rane, J. (2023). ChatGPT is not capable of serving as an author: Ethical concerns and challenges of large language models in education. International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering Technology and Science, 5(10), 851-874. https://www.doi.org/10.56726/IRJMETS45212
  39. Tang, A., Li, K. K., Kwok, K. O., Cao, L., Luong, S., & Tam, W. (2023). The importance of transparency: Declaring the use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) in academic writing. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 56(2), 314-318. https://doi.org/10.1111/jnu.12938
  40. Thomas, R., Bhosale, U., Shukla, K., & Kapadia, A. (2023). Impact and perceived value of the revolutionary advent of artificial intelligence in research and publishing among researchers: a survey-based descriptive study. Science Editing, 10(1), 27-34. https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.294
  41. Thorp, H. H. (2023). ChatGPT is fun, but not an author. Science, 379(6630), 313. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adg7879
  42. Wang, S., Scells, H., Koopman, B., & Zuccon, G. (2023). Can ChatGPT write a good boolean query for systematic review literature search? Proceedings of the 46th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. https://doi.org/10.1145/3539618.3591703
  43. Whitfield, S., & Hofmann, M. A. (2023). Elicit: AI literature review research assistant. Public Services Quarterly, 19(3), 201-207. https://doi.org/10.1080/15228959.2023.2224125
  44. Zawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M., & Gouverneur, F. (2019). Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education–where are the educators? International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1), 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0