AI evidence extraction

Exploring Mexican Students’ Perceptions, Experiences and Concerns with ChatGPT in Academic Writing: A Mixed-Methods Study

Etic net Revista científica electrónica de Educación y Comunicación en la Sociedad del Conocimiento · 2025

AI-generated evidence extraction, verified across multiple analytical personas. Not a substitute for the peer-reviewed original.

7/10

Relevance

0/4

Quality (LMQS)

Evidence

Citations

0.00

FWCI

This is an AI analysis. Read the peer-reviewed original at the publisher: https://doi.org/10.30827/eticanet.v25i2.31946

Methodology & findings

Study design

Mixed-methods study combining closed and open-ended survey questions to explore student perceptions, experiences, and uses of ChatGPT in academic writing

Sample

N = 432, 2 groups

Main result

The findings show that "while students view ChatGPT as beneficial for academic writing and beyond, they also express concerns about its potential risks and uncertainties, stemming from mistrust of the technology. This ambivalence underscores a nuanced view, as the students simultaneously recognize both advantages and drawbacks of the tool."

Reports effect sizes.

Research paradigm

Mixed-methods (pragmatist)

Author conclusions

The study's conclusions are embedded in the key findings: "students view ChatGPT as beneficial for academic writing and beyond, they also express concerns about its potential risks and uncertainties, stemming from mistrust of the technology," indicating that institutional policies need to address this ambivalence in academic contexts.

Risk of bias

Potential selection bias: sample drawn from single institution (National Polytechnic Institute of Mexico); Self-selection bias: voluntary survey participation; Recall bias: retrospective reporting of ChatGPT experiences; Social desirability bias: students may over-report or under-report concerns depending on perceived institutional stance; Selection bias: Students from a single institution (National Polytechnic Institute of Mexico) may not be representative of all Mexican students; Potential response bias in self-reported perceptions and experiences; No control group mentioned for comparison; Selection bias: single institution (National Polytechnic Institute of Mexico); Self-selection bias in voluntary survey participation; Social desirability bias in self-reported perceptions and experiences

Open questions raised

The authors identify that "Further research is needed to better understand how students' concerns, risks, and challenges impact on academic writing, educational practices and institutional policies."
The authors identify a need for further research to better understand how students' concerns, risks, and challenges with ChatGPT impact academic writing, educational practices, and institutional policies.
The abstract states that "Further research is needed to better understand how students' concerns, risks, and challenges impact on academic writing, educational practices and institutional policies."

Data: not_statedCode: not_statedExtracted from: pdfAgreement 62%

Explore related topics

AI Manuscript Writing Academic Writing Mixed Methods