ETHICAL USE OF ChatGPT IN RESEARCH WRITING
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18623/rvd.v23.4903Resumo
The exponential integration of generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools such as ChatGPT into academic contexts has raised critical ethical and pedagogical questions regarding their responsible use in research writing. This study explored the lived experiences of 150 students across secondary, undergraduate, and graduate levels in a Science and Technology University in the Philippines concerning the ethical use of ChatGPT in academic paper writing. Guided by hermeneutic phenomenology, the research sought to interpret how students understand instructor guidance, negotiate trust in AI outputs, and manage tensions between assistance and academic integrity. Data were collected through open-ended survey responses and analyzed thematically using an interpretive approach. Findings revealed five essential structures of experience: (a) holding ethical boundaries, (b) conditional trust through verification, (c) prompting as an acquired skill, (d) tension between helpfulness and dependence, and (e) access-driven workarounds. Participants consistently framed ChatGPT as a supportive yet potentially risky tool, requiring verification, transparent acknowledgment, and sustained authorship of thinking. The study concludes that ethical AI use is not merely rule compliance but an evolving moral and epistemic practice shaped by instruction, infrastructure, and academic culture. This research contributes to the body of knowledge by advancing a phenomenological understanding of ethical AI engagement across academic levels and by conceptualizing responsible AI use as a negotiated practice of boundary-setting, verification, and authorship preservation.
Referências
An, Y., Yu, J., & James, S. (2025). Investigating the higher education institutions’ guidelines and policies regarding the use of generative AI in teaching, learning, research, and administration. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 22(10), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-025-00507-3
Aydin, Ö., & Karaarslan, E. (2023). Is ChatGPT leading generative AI? What is beyond expectations? SSRN Electronic Journal, 11(3). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4341500
Baidoo-Anu, D., & Owusu Ansah, L. (2023). Education in the era of generative artificial intelligence (AI): Understanding the potential benefits of ChatGPT in promoting teaching and learning. Journal of AI, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.61969/jai.1337500
Bearman, M., Ryan, J., & Ajjawi, R. (2023). Discourses of artificial intelligence in higher education: A critical literature review. Higher Education, 369–385. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-022-00937-2
Bozkurt, A. (2023). Generative artificial intelligence (AI) powered conversational educational agents: The inevitable paradigm shift. Asian Journal of Distance Education. Retrieved from https://www.asianjde.com/ojs/index.php/AsianJDE/article/view/718
Branzuela, N. F., Namoco, S. O., & San Diego, A. L. (2022). A multiple regression analysis of the factors affecting academic performance of computer-aided designing students in flexible learning program in Philippines. Science International Lahore, 34(6), 525–530.
BrowserCat. (2025, February 19). ChatGPT's rapid growth and usage among students (2020–2025). Retrieved from https://www.browsercat.com/post/chatgpt-usage-statistics-2020-2025
Cabuguin, J. C., Manabat, M., Acidre, M., Aruta, M. H., Sangutan, J., & Beltran Yu, R. F. (2024). The role of ChatGPT on academic research: Perspectives from Filipino students. Salud Ciencia y Tecnología - Serie de Conferencias. https://doi.org/10.56294/sctconf2024.1205
Cabunita, G. T., & Namoco, S. O. (2026). Navigating the new frontier: A case study of drivers and barriers to generative AI adoption among educators in public higher education institution in Southern Mindanao. International Journal of Humanities and Education Research, 7(2), 280–288.
Castillo, L. (2025). Challenges of students in conducting social studies research. Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies in Education, 14(4). Retrieved from https://www.ojed.org/jise/article/view/7892
CHED. (2019). Policies, standards, and guidelines for graduate programs. CHED Memorandum Order No. 15, s. 2019.
Cotton, D., Cotton, P. A., & Shipway, J. R. (2024). Chatting and cheating: Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 61(2), 228–239. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2190148
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2025). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions (5th ed.). SAGE Publications, Inc.
Dela Cruz, L. F., Nano, J. V., Bagro, M. R., De Castro, A. P., Lucinio, G. V., Canlas, G. B., & Salting, R. S. (2024). Challenges experienced by Grade 11 students in Filipino research. Research Journal on Education, Technology and Innovation, 2(1). Retrieved from https://ejournals.ph/article.php?id=27461
DepEd. (2025, May 21). The strengthened senior high school program. Department of Education. Retrieved from https://www.deped.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/SHAPE-PAPER-BCD-a_o-May-22.pdf
Ferguson, L. M., Yonge, O., & Myrick, F. (2004). Students' involvement in faculty research: Ethical and methodological issues. 3(4), 56–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690400300405
Freeman, J. (2025). Student generative AI survey 2025. Higher Education Policy Institute. Retrieved from https://www.hepi.ac.uk/reports/student-generative-ai-survey-2025/
Kasneci, E., Sessler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Demetieva, D., Fischer, F., et al. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103, 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274
Li, C., & Alias, A. (2025). Generative artificial intelligence and cognitive load in second language learning: A narrative review. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 14(4). https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARPED/v14-i4/27007
Malloy, T., & Gonzalez, C. (2024). Applying generative artificial intelligence to cognitive models of decision making. Frontiers in Psychology, 15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1387948
Mariani, M., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2024). Generative artificial intelligence in innovation management: A preview of future research developments. Journal of Business Research, 175, 114542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2024.114542
McLeod, S. (2025, October 16). Vygotsky’s theory of cognitive development. Retrieved from https://www.simplypsychology.org/vygotsky.html
Mollick, E., & Mollick, L. (2023). Assigning AI: Seven approaches for students, with prompts. Computers and Society. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2306.10052
Morgan, D. (2023). Exploring the use of artificial intelligence for qualitative data analysis: The case of ChatGPT. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 22, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069231211248
Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Sage Publications, Inc.
Naeem, M., Ozuem, W., & Ranfagni, S. (2023). A step-by-step process of thematic analysis to develop a conceptual model in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 22, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069231205789
Noddings, N. (2013). Caring: A relational approach to ethics and moral education. University of California Press.
Opoku, K. (2025). Inclusive governance in the digital era: Navigating equity and innovation in intelligent societies. Intelligent Society and Digital Transformation, 1(1), 44–57.
Osuntade, O. B. (2025). Ethic of care. Retrieved from https://leadershipethics.pressbooks.tru.ca/chapter/ethic-of-care/
Patton, M. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Sage Publications.
Pierce, G. L., & Cleary, P. F. (2024). The persistent educational digital divide and its impact on societal inequality. PLoS One, 19(4), e0286795. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0286795
Pum, M. (2026). The perceived impact of AI-assisted writing tools on writing autonomy, confidence, and creativity among Cambodian first-year university students: A quantitative study. SAGE Open, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440251415304
Rudolph, J., Tan, S., & Tan, S. (2023). ChatGPT: Bullshit spewer or the end of traditional assessments in higher education? Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching, 6, 342–363. https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.9
Selwyn, N. (2024). On the limits of artificial intelligence (AI) in education. Nordisk Tidsskrift for Pedagogikk og Kritikk, 10, 3–14.
Stokel-Walker, C., & Van Noorden, R. (2023). What ChatGPT and generative AI mean for science. Nature, 614(7947), 214–216. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-00340-6
Stonier, J. (2024, October 16). A framework for advancing data equity in a digital world. Retrieved from https://www.weforum.org/stories/2024/10/digital-technology-framework-advancing-data-equity/
Van Manen, M. (2016). Researching lived experience: Human science for an action sensitive pedagogy (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Yao, G., & Fan, L. (2025). Cognitive load scale for AI-assisted L2 writing: Scale development and validation. Frontiers in Psychology, 16. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1666974
Zieve-Cohen, M., Huynh, N., & Giaimo, G. N. (2025). Balancing efficiency and ethics: Student perspectives on ChatGPT. The Peer Review, 9(1). Retrieved from https://thepeerreview-iwca.org/issues/issue-9-1/tpr-ai-special-issue-introduction-two-years-on-from-generative-ai/
Downloads
Publicado
Como Citar
Edição
Seção
Licença
Submeto (emos) o presente trabalho, texto original e inédito, de minha (nossa) autoria, à avaliação de Veredas do Direito - Revista de Direito, e concordo (amos) que os direitos autorais a ele referentes se tornem propriedade exclusiva da Revista Veredas, sendo vedada qualquer reprodução total ou parcial, em qualquer outra parte ou outro meio de divulgação impresso ou eletrônico, dissociado de Veredas do Direito, sem que a necessária e prévia autorização seja solicitada por escrito e obtida junto ao Editor-gerente. Declaro (amos) ainda que não existe conflito de interesse entre o tema abordado, o (s) autor (es) e empresas, instituições ou indivíduos.
Reconheço (Reconhecemos) ainda que Veredas está licenciada sob uma LICENÇA CREATIVE COMMONS:
Licença Creative Commons Attribution 3.0
