Evaluating the Impact of AI Dependency on Cognitive Ability among Generation Z in Higher Educational Institutions: A Conceptual Framework
Abstract
This research aims to examine the factors of AI dependency (AID) and to investigate the relationship between AI dependency on cognitive ability (CA) among Generation Z (Gen Z) in higher educational institutions. The factors involved are academic self-efficacy (ASE), academic stress (AS), and performance expectation (PE). In this research, the proposed research design is a quantitative method. A self?administered questionnaire will be distributed to respondents, a group of students who were born between 1997 to 2012, and the AI user. The questionnaire will be utilizing the Google Form platform for easier data collection. A snowball sampling method will be applied. Then, the data collected will be analyzed through the partial least square (PLS-SEM) technique. The research findings are expected to highlight the significant emphasis on the contributing factors of AI dependency among Gen Z students. Then, the findings will also provide a model to understand better the impact of AI dependency on cognitive ability. Additionally, it is foreseen that the findings will help various parties, including the government, to create better models for helping Gen Z students apply AI in decent ways to help them increase their cognitive ability. It is also considered a long-term strategy to become a nation with numbers of high cognitive ability citizens. Further, a practical framework based on AI dependency on cognitive ability will be developed as a guideline to support the effort of the government or industry practitioners to increase awareness among Gen Z students on how crucial to possess high cognitive ability.
Downloads
References
Ahmad, S. F., Han, H., Alam, M. M., Rehmat, M. K., Irshad, M., Arrano-Munoz, M., & Ariza-Montes, A. (2023). Impact of artificial intelligence on human loss in decision making, laziness, and safety in education. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 10(311). doi://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01787-8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01787-8
Alneyadi, S., Wardat, Y., Alshannag, Q., . . . Ahmad. (2023). The effect of using smart e-learning app on the academic achievement of eighth-grade students. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 19(4). DOI: https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/13067
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Benitez, J., Henseler, J., Castillo, A., & Schuberth, F. (2020). How to Perform and Report an Impactful Analysis Using Partial Least Squares: Guidelines for Confirmatory and Explanatory Research. Information & Management, 57(2), 103168. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2019.05.003
Buçinca, Z., Malaya, M. B., & Gajos, K. Z. (2021). To trust or to think: Cognitive forcing functions can reduce overreliance on AI in ai-assisted decision-making. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 5(CSCW1), 1-21. doi:10.1145/3449287 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3449287
Chan, C., & Lee, K. (2023). The AI generation gap: Are Gen Z students more interested in adopting generative AI such as ChatGPT in teaching and learning than their Gen X and millennial generation teachers? Smart Learning Environments, 10(60). doi:10.1186/s40561-023-00269-3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-023-00269-3
Chen, L., Chen, P., & Lin, Z. (2020). Artificial Intelligence in Education: A Review. IEEE Access, 8, 75264-75278. doi:10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2988510 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2988510
Chen, Y., Jensen, S., Albert, L. J., Gupta, S., & Lee, T. (2023). Artificial intelligence (AI) student assistants in the classroom: Designing chatbots to support student success. Information Systems Frontiers, 25, 161–182. doi:10.1007/s10796-022-10291-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-022-10291-4
Cheng, Y.-Y. (2020). Academic self-efficacy and assessment. Educational Psychology, 40(4), 389-391. doi:10.1080/01443410.2020.1755501 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2020.1755501
Dash, G., & Paul, J. (2021). CB-SEM vs PLS-SEM Methods for Research in Social Sciences and Technology Forecasting. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 173, 121092. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121092
Dwivedi, Y. K., Rana, N. P., Jeyaraj, A., Clement, M., & Williams, M. D. (2019). Re-examining the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT): Towards a revised theoretical model. Information Systems Frontiers, 21, 719–734. doi:10.1007/s10796-017-9774-y DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-017-9774-y
Hair, J., Astrachan, C., Moisescu, O., Radomir, L., Sarstedt, M., Vaithilingam, S., & Ringle, C. (2021). Executing and Interpreting Applications of PLS-SEM: Updates for Family Business Researchers. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 2(3), 100392. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfbs.2020.100392
Hakim, A. L., Fajri, M. B., & Faizah, E. N. (2022). Evaluation Of Implementation Of MBKM: Does Academic Stress Affect Student Learning Outcomes? International Journal of Educational Research & Social Sciences, 3(1), 1-16. doi:10.51601/ijersc.v3i1.246
Harry, A., & Sayudin. (2023). Role of AI in Education. Injuruty: Interdisciplinary Journal and Humanity, 2(3), 260-268. DOI: https://doi.org/10.58631/injurity.v2i3.52
Hernandez-de-Menendez, M., Díaz, C., & Morales-Menendez, R. (2020). Educational experiences with Generation Z. International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM), 14, 847–859. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12008-020-00674-9
Hong, W., Liu, R. D., Ding, Y., Jiang, S., Yang, X., & Sheng, X. (2021). Academic procrastination precedes problematic mobile phone use in Chinese adolescents: A longitudinal mediation model of distraction cognitions. Addictive Behaviors, 121, 106993. doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2021.106993 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2021.106993
Lund, B., & Wang, T. (2023). Chatting about ChatGPT: How May AI and GPT Impact Academia and Libraries? Library Hi Tech News, 40(3), 26-29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/LHTN-01-2023-0009
Miao, F., & Holmes, W. (2021). AI and education: Guidance for policy-makers. UNESCO. Retrieved from UNESCO: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000376709
National Science Teaching Association (NSTA). (2024). Retrieved from Performance Expectations Resources: https://www.nsta.org/topics/performance-expectations#:~:text=Performance%20Expectations %20Resources,not%20prescribe%20curriculum%20or%20lessons.
Nikolopoulou, K. (2023, June 22). Scribbr. Retrieved from What Is Snowball Sampling? | Definition & Examples: https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/snowball-sampling/#:~:text=Snowball%20sampling %20is%20a%20non,people%20with%20a%20rare%20disease).
Parmaks?z, ?. (2022). The mediating role of personality traits on the relationship between academic self-efficacy and digital addiction. Education and Information Technologies, 27(6), 8883–8902. doi:10.1007/s10639-022-10996-8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-10996-8
Rahman, M. M., & Watanobe, Y. (2023). ChatGPT for education and research: Opportunities, threats, and strategies. Applied Sciences, 13(9), 5783. doi:10.3390/app13095783 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/app13095783
Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C., & Hair, J. (2022). Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling. In C. Homburg, M. Klarmann, & A. Vomberg, Handbook of Market Research (pp. 587-632). Cham: Springer International Publishing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57413-4_15
Schunk, D. H., & DiBenedetto, M. K. (2022). Academic Self-Efficacy. In K.-A. Allen, M. J. Furlong, D. Dianne Vella-Brodrick, & S. Suldo, Handbook of Positive Psychology in Schools (p. 15). London: Taylor & Francis Group.
Slepian, R. C., Vincent, A. C., Patterson, H., & Furman, H. (2024). 4.02 - “Social media, wearables, telemedicine, and digital health,”—A Gen Y and Z perspective. Comprehensive Precision Medicine, 1, 524-544. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-824010-6.00072-1
Soufi, N., & See, B. H. (2019). Does explicit teaching of critical thinking improve the critical thinking skills of English language learners in higher education? A critical review of causal evidence. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 60, 140–162. doi:10.1016/j.stueduc.2018.12.006 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2018.12.006
Stryker, C., & Kavlakoglu, E. (2024, August 16). IBM. Retrieved from What is artificial intelligence (AI)?: https://www.ibm.com/topics/artificial-intelligence#:~:text=Artificial%20intelligence%20(AI)%20is%20technology,and%20respond%20to%20human%20language.
Üstün, A. G., & Yavuz, M. (2024). Artificial Intelligence-Supported Teacher Tools to Increase Participation in Online Courses. In R. Bansal, A. Chakir, A. H. Ngah, F. Rabby, & A. Jain, AI Algorithms and ChatGPT for Student Engagement in Online Learning (p. 292). United States: IGI Global. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3693-4268-8.ch005
Yang, C., Chen, A., & Chen, Y. (2021). College students’ stress and health in the COVID-19 pandemic: the role of academic workload, separation from school, and fears of contagion. PloS ONE, 16(e0246676). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0246676 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0246676
Zhai, C., Wibowo, S., & Li, L. (2024). The effects of over-reliance on AI dialogue systems on students' cognitive abilities: a systematic review. Smart Learning Environments, 11(28). doi:10.1186/s40561-024-00316-7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-024-00316-7
Zhai, X., Chu, X., Chai, C., Jong, M., Istenic, A., Spector, M., . . . Li, Y. (2021). A Review of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Education from 2010 to 2020. Complexity, 1-18. doi:https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/8812542
Zhang, K., & Aslan, A. (2021). AI technologies for education: Recent research & future directions. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 2, 100025. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2021.100025 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2021.100025
Zhang, S., Zhao, S., Zhou, T., & Kim, J. H. (2024). Do you have AI dependency? The roles of academic self-efficacy, academic stress, and performance expectations on problematic AI usage behavior. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21(34), 1-14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00467-0
Zhu, Z., Qin, S., Yang, L., Dodd, A., & Conti, M. (2023). Emotion regulation tool design principles for arts and design university students. Procedia CIRP, 119, 115–120. doi:10.1016/j.procir.2023.03.085 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2023.03.085
Copyright (c) 2024 Suraya Ika Tamrin, Nor Farehan Omar, Khairul Nazlin Kamaruzaman, Azlul Kalilah Zaghlol, Muhammad Ridzuan Abdul Aziz
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Author (s) should affirm that the material has not been published previously. It has not been submitted and it is not under consideration by any other journal. At the same time author (s) need to execute a publication permission agreement to assume the responsibility of the submitted content and any omissions and errors therein. After submission of revised paper in the light of suggestions of the reviewers, the editorial team edits and formats manuscripts to bring uniformity and standardization in published material.
This work will be licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) and under condition of the license, users are free to read, copy, remix, transform, redistribute, download, print, search or link to the full texts of articles and even build upon their work as long as they credit the author for the original work. Moreover, as per journal policy author (s) hold and retain copyrights without any restrictions.
