Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background/Objectives: Artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming nursing, with generative AI (GenAI) tools such as ChatGPT offering opportunities to enhance education through personalized learning pathways. This study aimed to explore nursing students’ use of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) and their perceptions of its use in nursing education, including its advantages, disadvantages, and perceived support needs. Methods: This study employed an online survey. The participants were 99 undergraduate nursing students in New York City. Data was collected online through self-report measures using semi-structured, open-ended questions. The data was analyzed using content analysis. Results: Most participants (92%) used GenAI tools to access accurate information, clarify nursing concepts, and support clinical tasks such as diagnoses and health assessments, as well as schoolwork, grammar checks, and health promotion. They valued GenAI as a quick, accessible resource that simplified complex information and supported learning through definitions, practice questions, and writing improvements. However, the participants noted drawbacks, such as subscription costs, over-reliance, information overload, and accuracy issues, leading to trust concerns. The participants suggested financial support, early guidance, and instructional modules to better integrate AI into nursing education. Conclusions: The results indicate that GenAI positively impacts nursing education and highlight the need for guidelines on critical evaluation. To integrate GenAI effectively, educators should consider introductory sessions, support programs, and a GenAI-friendly environment, promoting responsible AI use and preparing students for its application in nursing education.

The latest development of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI), particularly ChatGPT, has drawn the attention of educational researchers and practitioners. We have witnessed many innovative uses of ChatGPT in STEM classrooms. However, studies regarding students’ perceptions of ChatGPT as a virtual tutoring tool in STEM education are rare. The current study investigated undergraduate students’ perceptions of using ChatGPT in a physics class as an assistant tool for addressing physics questions. Specifically, the study examined the accuracy of ChatGPT in answering physics questions, the relationship between students’ ChatGPT trust levels and answer accuracy, and the influence of trust on students’ perceptions of ChatGPT. Our finding indicates that despite the inaccuracy of GenAI in question answering, most students trust its ability to provide correct answers. Trust in GenAI is also associated with students’ perceptions of GenAI. In addition, this study sheds light on students’ misconceptions toward GenAI and provides suggestions for future considerations in AI literacy teaching and research.

This study delves into the factors that drive teachers’ adoption of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) technologies in higher education. Anchored by the technology acceptance model (TAM), the research expands its inquiry by integrating the constructs of intelligent technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK), AI literacy, and perceived trust. Data were gathered from a sample of 237 university teachers through a structured questionnaire. The study employed structural equation modeling (SEM) to determine the relationships among the constructs. The results revealed that both AI literacy and perceived ease were the most influential factors affecting teachers’ acceptance of GenAI. Notably, intelligent TPACK and perceived trust were found to be pivotal mediators in this relationship. The findings underscore the importance of fostering AI literacy and adapting intelligent TPACK frameworks to better equip educators in the age of AI. Furthermore, there is a clear need for targeted professional development initiatives focusing on practical training that enhances AI literacy. These programs should provide hands-on experience with GenAI tools, boosting educators’ confidence and ability to integrate them into their teaching practices.

The work in this paper investigates (a) the (emerging) creative self-perceptions of GenAI chatbots, (b) their creative potential, (c) their ability to self-assess the creativity of their own outcomes and that of their peers, and (d) how their creative outcomes can be improved. To this end, an exploratory study was implemented involving three popular commercial chatbots: ChatGPT (GPT-4o - paid) by OpenAI, Claude (3.5 Sonnet - paid) by Anthropic and Gemini (1.5 Flash - free) by Google. The study included four phases and employed well-established methods and tools from the scientific domain of (human) creativity research, including the Short Scale of Creative Self (SSCS) questionnaire, a verbal test of convergent-integrative thought from the Evaluation of Potential Creativity (EPoC) battery which was scored by the chatbots and human experts, and the Dynamic Assessment (DA) approach and humor as means for enhancing the chatbots’ creative outcomes. The results of the study are encapsulated in 21 original and, sometimes, surprising observations and in 6 practical insights regarding the use of GenAI chatbots as creativity-support tools.

The rapid integration of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) into education highlights the need for empirical insights into student perspectives to inform institutional policies, pedagogical strategies, and social practices. This study explored Italian university students’ perceptions of GenAI’s benefits and risks across personal, social, and academic domains. A total of 1,347 students from 24 Italian universities completed an online questionnaire. This manuscript focuses on two open-ended questions investigating perceived advantages and disadvantages of ChatGPT and similar systems, analyzed through manual coding using MaxQDA software. Results show students predominantly adopt an instrumental view of GenAI: operational benefits made up 41.6% of responses, followed by informational (14.3%) and educational advantages (10.9%). The most cited disadvantages were cognitive and learning risks (29.6%), problematic behaviors (23.6%), and technical limitations (15.4%). These findings reveal an ambivalent stance: students value GenAI’s efficiency and learning support but express concerns about intellectual dependency, diminished critical thinking, and threats to academic integrity. This study makes several key contributions: it provides the first large-scale qualitative investigation (N=1,347) of GenAI perceptions in Italian higher education, bridging the gap between qualitative depth and quantitative generalizability; it offers culturally situated insights from a non-Anglophone context, enriching the predominantly Anglo-centric literature; and it delivers evidence-based recommendations for institutional policy development grounded in actual student experiences rather than theoretical assumptions. Such insights are crucial for understanding the views of a key stakeholder group in higher education and for guiding the development of ethical usage policies, structured teacher training, and tailored student orientation initiatives. These measures aim to promote technological governance skills that preserve intellectual autonomy while harnessing GenAI’s operational benefits. La rápida integración de la Inteligencia Artificial Generativa (IAG) en el ámbito educativo pone de relieve la necesidad de obtener evidencias empíricas sobre las percepciones del estudiantado, con el fin de orientar políticas institucionales, estrategias pedagógicas y prácticas sociales. Este estudio exploró las percepciones de estudiantes universitarios italianos respecto a los beneficios y riesgos de la IAG en los ámbitos personal, social y académico. Un total de 1.347 estudiantes de 24 universidades italianas respondió un cuestionario en línea. Este artículo se centra en el análisis de dos preguntas abiertas dirigidas a indagar las ventajas y desventajas percibidas de ChatGPT y sistemas similares, mediante codificación manual con el software MaxQDA. Los resultados muestran que el estudiantado adopta principalmente una visión instrumental de la IAG: los beneficios operativos representaron el 41,6 % de las respuestas, seguidos de ventajas informativas (14,3 %) y educativas (10,9 %). Las desventajas más mencionadas fueron los riesgos cognitivos y de aprendizaje (29,6 %), comportamientos problemáticos (23,6 %) y limitaciones técnicas (15,4 %). Estos hallazgos revelan una postura ambivalente: si bien valoran la eficiencia y el apoyo al aprendizaje que ofrece la IAG, también expresan preocupaciones por la dependencia intelectual, la disminución del pensamiento crítico y las amenazas a la integridad académica. Este estudio aporta varias contribuciones clave: constituye la primera investigación cualitativa a gran escala (N = 1.347) sobre las percepciones de la GenAI en la educación superior italiana, al tender un puente entre la profundidad cualitativa y la generalizabilidad cuantitativa; ofrece perspectivas culturalmente situadas desde un contexto no anglófono, enriqueciendo así una literatura predominantemente anglocéntrica; y proporciona recomendaciones fundamentadas empíricamente para el desarrollo de políticas institucionales, basadas en las experiencias reales del estudiantado más que en supuestos teóricos. Estos datos ofrecen orientaciones valiosas para desarrollar políticas éticas de uso, formación docente estructurada e iniciativas de acompañamiento estudiantil orientadas a promover competencias de gobernanza tecnológica.

The rapid evolution of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) is transforming health care globally. In China, hospitals are rapidly embracing digital transformation. Senior leaders are pivotal in influencing and deciding the adoption of GenAI technologies in professional settings. However, evidence on their perceptions and attitudes and how they evolve over time is lacking. This study aims to investigate senior Chinese hospital leaders' perceptions relating to GenAI and their attitudes toward adopting GenAI technologies in professional settings and to document how their perspectives evolve. A longitudinal, descriptive qualitative study was conducted using a phenomenological approach. Senior leaders, including hospital directors/deputies and department heads/deputies, from 3 tertiary hospitals across the Hebei, Guangdong, and Sichuan provinces were purposively sampled. Data were collected through semistructured telephone interviews at two time points (baseline and 6 months later). Interview transcriptions were analyzed using Colaizzi's method to extract themes related to knowledge acquisition, attitudinal shifts, and evolving barriers and facilitators to GenAI adoption. A total of 32 participants were interviewed in August 2024 and February 2025, including 11 (34.4%) participants from Hebei, 12 (37.5%) from Sichuan, and 9 (28.1%) from Guangdong. Their roles included 8 (25%) hospital directors/deputies and 24 (75%) department heads/deputies. The analysis of the interview transcriptions revealed three primary themes. First, participants' understanding of GenAI improved markedly over time as they engaged with diverse information sources and gained practical experience. Second, despite widespread support for personal use, senior leaders shifted from initial reluctance to formal institutional adoption. Third, initial obstacles, such as limited technical literacy and resource constraint concerns, diminished over time, while new drivers, including peer influence and technological breakthroughs such as DeepSeek, emerged to catalyze adoption. Senior Chinese hospital leaders' perceptions and attitudes toward GenAI have evolved significantly over time. Improved knowledge through diverse information channels has enhanced their comprehension and shifted their stance from cautious personal experimentation toward formal institutional adoption. The dynamic interplay between diminishing obstacles and emerging catalysts, notably the influence of peer practices and technological breakthroughs such as DeepSeek, underscores the potential for transformative change in health care management. Targeted educational initiatives, pilot projects, and robust policy frameworks are needed to facilitate GenAI integration.

Students’ perceptions of tools with which they learn affect the outcomes of this learning. GenAI tools are new tools that have promise for students’ learning, especially higher education students. Examining students’ perceptions of GenAI tools as learning tools can help instructors better plan activities that utilize these tools in the higher education context. The present research considers four components of students’ perceptions of GenAI tools: efficiency, interaction, affect, and intention. To triangulate data, it combines the quantitative and the qualitative methodologies, by using a questionnaire and by conducting interviews. A total of 153 higher education students responded to the questionnaire, while 10 higher education students participated in the interview. The research results indicated that the means of affect, interaction, and efficiency were significantly medium, while the mean of intention was significantly high. The research findings showed that in efficiency, affect, and intention, male students had significantly higher perceptions of AI tools than female students, but in the interaction component, the two genders did not differ significantly. Moreover, the degree affected only the perception of interaction of higher education students, where the mean value of interaction was significantly different between B.A. and Ph.D. students in favor of Ph.D. students. Moreover, medium-technology-knowledge and high-technology-knowledge students differed significantly in their perceptions of working with AI tools in the interaction component only, where this difference was in favor of the high-technology-knowledge students. Furthermore, AI knowledge significantly affected efficiency, interaction, and affect of higher education students, where they were higher in favor of high-AI-knowledge students over low-AI-knowledge students, as well as in favor of medium-AI-knowledge students over low-AI-knowledge students.

Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) is transforming higher education, yet concerns remain about its ethical use. The perceptions of students about GenAI may differ depending on the university degree in which they are enrolled. Thus, field-specific training approaches are essential to ensure an effective GenAI adoption. The objective of this research is to analyze the use of GenAI by undergraduate Education and Architecture students, evaluate the potential and associated risks, and identify proposals for its safe use. A qualitative study was conducted with 165 Education and Architecture students, considering similarities and differences in their perceptions through an open-ended questionnaire. GenAI tools, especially ChatGPT, are mostly used on computers. Architecture students use a wide variety of GenAI tools, while those from Education degrees, who started using GenAI later, focus on text generators. The benefits identified by future educators mainly have an impact on the academic level, while future architects value their personal benefit. However, all participants agree on the negative repercussions of GenAI on their personal development. While some Education students encourage promoting the use of these tools, Architecture students call for training initiatives that should be differentiated according to the field of study.

As artificial intelligence transforms the educational landscape, generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools have become influential in enhancing learning experiences. Despite their growing presence in higher education, limited research explores how university students, especially learners in non-Western contexts, perceive these tools. This study investigates students' perceptions at a university in the UAE, focusing on five dimensions: perceived benefits, institutional support, technological self-efficacy, ethical considerations and user satisfaction. The findings reveal that students generally expressed strong agreement regarding the benefits of GenAI, demonstrated a clear sense of ethical awareness and felt confident in their technological abilities. While satisfaction levels were generally high, perceptions of institutional support were more moderate. The study also identified notable differences across academic disciplines, particularly among students in Natural and Health Sciences and Interdisciplinary Studies. These insights contribute to understanding the evolving role of GenAI tools in shaping intelligent learning environments and offer practical recommendations for educators and policymakers seeking to integrate these technologies in higher education.

This study explores how computing science students (n = 335) use ChatGPT, their trust in its information, their navigation of plagiarism issues, and their confidence in addressing plagiarism and academic integrity. A mixed-methods approach was used, combining quantitative survey data with a qualitative thematic analysis of student comments to provide a comprehensive understanding of these issues. The findings reveal that ChatGPT has become integral to students’ academic routines, with 87.8% using it weekly with variable frequency. Most students (70.3%) believe the university should allow ChatGPT use, and 66.6% think it is fair to use it for academic purposes despite 57.4% distrusting its information. Additionally, 53.8% worry about accidentally plagiarising when using ChatGPT. Overall, students have moderate confidence in addressing these academic integrity issues, with no differences between undergraduate and postgraduate students. Male students reported higher confidence in handling plagiarism and academic integrity issues than female students, suggesting underlying differences in how students perceive and interact with generative AI technologies. A thematic analysis of 74 student comments on their ChatGPT experience revealed four themes: (a) Usage and Role of ChatGPT, (b) Ethical and Responsible Use, (c) Limitations and Accuracy, and (d) Impact on Education and Need for Clear Guidelines. This study contributes to the ongoing debate on accepting and using ChatGPT, highlighting the need for institutions to provide clear guidelines and ethical considerations to ensure responsible use within educational contexts.