AI evidence extraction

Perceptions Of Generative AI in the Global South: A Scoping Review

Tuan Anh Nguyen, Mike Perkins · Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice · 2026

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

7/10

Relevance

1/4

Quality (LMQS)

Evidence

Citations

0.00

FWCI

This is an AI analysis. Read the peer-reviewed original at the publisher: https://doi.org/10.53761/f22j6648

Methodology & findings

Study design

Scoping review following PRISMA-ScR methodology, analysing 75 papers published between 2022-2025.

Sample

N = 75, 1 group

Primary method

Qualitative synthesis and thematic categorisation following PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) methodology; no quantitative statistical analysis reported.

Main result

The scoping review found that "GenAI offers transformative possibilities for personalised learning, research support, and administrative efficiency in higher education across the Global South, but its implementation faces significant barriers, including infrastructure limitations, human capital deficiencies, ethical concerns, inadequate policy frameworks, and contextual challenges." Additionally, the analysis revealed that "equity considerations have received the least research attention despite their critical importance in inclusive education."

Reports effect sizes.

Research paradigm

Interpretivist/qualitative synthesis

Author conclusions

The authors recommend that "future research prioritise equity-centred approaches, methodological diversity, contextual specificity, implementation science, and interdisciplinary collaboration to better understand how Generative AI can enhance educational opportunities without reinforcing existing disparities across the diverse contexts of the Global South."

Risk of bias

Publication bias toward Global North perspectives; Limited geographic representation across Global South regions; Stakeholder imbalance in included studies; Potential selection bias in paper inclusion criteria; Publication bias (only published papers included); Language bias (likely English-language papers predominantly); Geographic representation bias (limited coverage across Global South regions); Stakeholder imbalance in existing literature; Selection bias: limited geographic representation across Global South contexts; Publication bias: potential skew towards English-language publications; Stakeholder imbalance: uneven representation of different stakeholder perspectives; Temporal limitation: focus on recent publications (2022-2025) may miss foundational work

Limitations

The review identified "substantial gaps in the literature, including limited geographic representation, stakeholder imbalance, and insufficient exploration of long-term outcomes."

Open questions raised

Limited geographic representation across Global South contexts
Stakeholder imbalance in research participation
Insufficient exploration of long-term outcomes
Equity considerations receiving least research attention
Need for equity-centred approaches
Methodological diversity gaps

Data: not_statedCode: not_statedExtracted from: pdfAgreement 74%

Explore related topics

AI Literacy Training Human-AI Collaboration Literature Review