Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Purpose The escalating integration of AI tools like ChatGPT within academia poses a critical challenge regarding their impact on faculty members’ and researchers’ academic performance levels. This paper aims to delve into academic performance within the context of the ChatGPT era by exploring the influence of several pivotal predictors, such as academic integrity, academic competence, personal best goals and perceived stress, as well as the moderating effect of ChatGPT adoption on academic performance. Design/methodology/approach This study uses a quantitative method to investigate the impact of essential variables on academic integrity, academic competence, perceived stress and personal best goals by analysing 402 responses gathered from ResearchGate and Academia.edu sites. Findings While affirming the established direct positive relationship between academic integrity and performance since adopting AI tools, this research revealed a significant moderating role of ChatGPT adoption on this relationship. Additionally, the authors shed light on the positive relationship between academic competence and performance in the ChatGPT era and the ChatGPT adoption-moderated interaction of competence and performance. Surprisingly, a negative association emerges between personal best goals and academic performance within ChatGPT-assisted environments. Notably, the study underscores a significant relationship between heightened performance through ChatGPT and increased perceived stress among academicians. Practical implications The research advocates formulating clear ethical guidelines, robust support mechanisms and stress-management interventions to maintain academic integrity, enhance competence and prioritise academic professionals’ well-being in navigating the integration of AI tools in modern academia. Originality/value This research stands out for its timeliness and the apparent gaps in current literature. There is notably little research on the use of ChatGPT in academic settings, making this investigation among the first to delve into how faculty and researchers in education use OpenAI.
Sadallah et al. (Thu,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: