An international survey study involving more than 23,000 higher education students reveals trends in how they use and experience ChatGPT, highlighting both positive perceptions and awareness of the AI chatbot's limitations. Dejan Ravšelj of the University of Ljubljana, Slovenia, and colleagues present these findings in the open-access journal PLOS One on February 5, 2025.
Prior research suggests that ChatGPT can enhance learning, despite concerns about its role in academic integrity, potential impacts on critical thinking, and occasionally inaccurate responses. However, the few studies exploring student perceptions of ChatGPT in higher education have been limited in scope. Ravšelj and colleagues designed an anonymous online survey study aiming to provide a broader view.
From October 2023 to February 2024—a period soon after the public release of ChatGPT in late 2022—23,218 students representing 109 countries and territories took the survey, which asked about perceptions of various aspects of ChatGPT, such as how they use it, ethical concerns, and views on its potential labor market impacts.
Analysis of the survey results revealed several trends. For instance, overall, participants tended to feel positively about ChatGPT, finding it valuable for brainstorming, summarizing texts, academic writing, and simplifying complex information. However, they reported concerns about ChatGPT's reliability, its potential to erode critical thinking skills, and ethical issues around its use, such as cheating and privacy. While participants reported a preference for human interaction, they anticipated rising demand for AI-related skills.
Interestingly, less than a third of students (29%) reported using ChatGPT for brainstorming, and only one in ten (11%) for creative writing. However, most students (70%) found ChatGPT interesting to use, and a quarter (25%) found it easier to interact with ChatGPT than with colleagues.
The students' perceptions varied across sociodemographic and geographic factors. For instance, those in lower-income regions were more likely to perceive ChatGPT as essential support in the context of limited educational resources, while students in high-income regions placed greater value on ChatGPT's innovative and advanced features.
In all, the researchers note, these findings could help inform the design of higher education curricula and policies to harness the benefits of ChatGPT equitably across diverse student populations. Future research could address some of this study's limitations, such as by tracking students' perceptions over time and including more students from low-income countries.
The authors add: "A new milestone in generative artificial intelligence research in higher education: Early global perceptions of ChatGPT, drawn from over 23,000 students across 109 countries and territories, highlight its role as an engaging learning tool while raising ethical concerns that require further attention. The study examines student perspectives on its usage, capabilities, regulation, satisfaction, attitudes, study outcomes, skills development, labor market implications, and emotional responses."
In your coverage, please use this URL to provide access to the freely available article in PLOS One: https://plos.io/40HWLCZ
Citation: Ravšelj D, Keržič D, Tomaževič N, Umek L, Brezovar N, A. Iahad N, et al. (2025) Higher education students' perceptions of ChatGPT: A global study of early reactions. PLoS ONE 20(2): e0315011. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0315011
Author countries: Slovenia, Malaysia, Tanzania, Russia, Guatemala, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Spain, Ghana, Romania, Türkiye, Chile, Tunisia, Slovakia, Republic of North Macedonia, Brazil, Italy, Zambia, Ecuador, Colombia, China, Cyprus, Romania, Mexico, Portugal, Canada, Croatia, Indonesia, Philippines, Jordan, Japan, Luxembourg, Bangladesh, Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Nigeria, Georgia, India, Palestine, Ukraine, Bulgaria, Latvia, Mozambique, Rwanda, Albania, Thailand, Israel, Poland, Cape Verde, U.K., Serbia, Algeria, Estonia, Zimbabwe
Funding: The authors acknowledge the financial support from the Slovenian Research and Innovation Agency (research core funding No. P5-0093 and project No. Z5-4569). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
