KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli Üniversitesi SBE Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 14 Sayı: 1

KABÜL MÜ, RET Mİ? AKADEMİSYENLER YAYINLARDA CHATGPT'NİN KULLANIMI KONUSUNDA NE DÜŞÜNÜYORLAR?

ACCEPT OR REJECT? WHAT DO ACADEMICS THINK ABOUT UTILISING CHATGPT PUBLICATIONS?

Manolya Tunçer(AFYON KOCATEPE UNIVERSITY)0000-0002-8406-9595
Gülin Zeybek(ISPARTA UYGULAMALI BİLİMLER ÜNİVERSİTESİ, YABANCI DİLLER YÜKSEKOKULU)0000-0002-6863-7169
Sayfa
203–218
Yayın Tarihi
2024-03-25
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Elde edilen bulgular, akademisyenlerin ChatGPT' yi taslak hazırlama prosedürlerine dahil etme konusunda herhangi bir sorun algılamamasına rağmen, akademik bir kişilik oluşturarak ve bilimsel çalışmalar üzerinde işbirliği yaparak bu teknolojiyi benimseme konusunda tereddüt ettiklerini göstermektedir.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Chat Generative Pre-Trained Transformer (ChatGPT), 2022 yılında Amerika Birleşik Devletleri'nde ilk kez kullanıma sunuldu.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Bu çalışma, Türkiye'nin farklı bölgelerindeki üniversitelerle bağlantısı olan, çeşitli akademik unvanlara sahip akademisyenlerin, ChatGPT'nin bilimsel yayınlarda kullanımına ilişkin bakış açılarını incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Elde edilen bulgular, akademisyenlerin ChatGPT' yi taslak hazırlama prosedürlerine dahil etme konusunda herhangi bir sorun algılamamasına rağmen, akademik bir kişilik oluşturarak ve bilimsel çalışmalar üzerinde işbirliği yaparak bu teknolojiyi benimseme konusunda tereddüt ettiklerini göstermektedir.
🔬Tür:Laboratuvar & Saha Deneyi
📍Kapsam:2022 Verileri
⚙️Değişkenler:Yapay Zeka · ChatGPT · Türk Akademisyenler

Özet

Chat Generative Pre-Trained Transformer (ChatGPT), 2022 yılında Amerika Birleşik Devletleri'nde ilk kez kullanıma sunuldu. İnsan geri bildirimlerini bir araya getirerek oluşturulan ve milyonlarca kullanıcıya ulaşan ChatGPT, geniş bir çevrimiçi kaynak havuzundan yararlanarak ve sıklıkla kullanıcıdan ek girdi gerektirmeden bağımsız olarak bir yanıt oluşturabilmektedir. Bireylerin bilimsel yayınlar oluşturmak için ChatGPT'yi kullandığı bilinen ChatGPT, büyük ölçüde internette mevcut olan önceden var olan metinsel verilere dayanmaktadır. Bunun sonucunda, elde edilen ürünlerin özgünlük, güvenirlilik ve kesinlik sağlamak zorlu ve belirsiz olabilmektedir. Bu çalışma, Türkiye'nin farklı bölgelerindeki üniversitelerle bağlantısı olan, çeşitli akademik unvanlara sahip akademisyenlerin, ChatGPT'nin bilimsel yayınlarda kullanımına ilişkin bakış açılarını incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Araştırmaya toplamda 121 akademisyen katılmış olup hem nicel hem de nitel formatta veri toplanmıştır. Elde edilen bulgular, akademisyenlerin ChatGPT' yi taslak hazırlama prosedürlerine dahil etme konusunda herhangi bir sorun algılamamasına rağmen, akademik bir kişilik oluşturarak ve bilimsel çalışmalar üzerinde işbirliği yaparak bu teknolojiyi benimseme konusunda tereddüt ettiklerini göstermektedir.

Abstract

The Chat Generative Pre-Trained Transformer (ChatGPT), a chatbot with artificial intelligence, made its debut in the United States in 2022. The platform created by incorporating human feedback has garnered millions of interactions. ChatGPT can generate a response autonomously, drawing from a vast pool of online sources and frequently without requiring additional input from the user. It has been reported that individuals have utilised ChatGPT to generate academic essays and scholarly publications. AI tools utilising extensive language models, such as ChatGPT, heavily rely on pre-existing textual data available on the internet. Consequently, ensuring their results’ authenticity, credibility, and precision poses a challenging and uncertain task. This study aims to examine the viewpoints of scholars holding various academic titles and affiliated with universities located in diverse regions of Turkey regarding the utilisation of ChatGPT in scholarly publications. A total of 121 academicians participated in the study, and data were gathered in both quantitative and qualitative formats. The findings have indicated that while scholars did not perceive any issue with incorporating ChatGPT into their manuscript drafting procedures, they remained hesitant to embrace this technology by establishing an academic persona and collaborating on scholarly works.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Tunçer, M., Zeybek, G. (2024). KABÜL MÜ, RET Mİ? AKADEMİSYENLER YAYINLARDA CHATGPT'NİN KULLANIMI KONUSUNDA NE DÜŞÜNÜYORLAR?. Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli Üniversitesi SBE Dergisi, Cilt: 14 Sayı: 1, 203–218. https://doi.org/10.30783/nevsosbilen.1413539

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (32)

  1. Abd-Elaal, E.-S., Gamage, S. H., & Mills, J. E. (2022). Assisting academics to identify computer generated writing. European Journal of Engineering Education, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2022.2046709
  2. Bommasani, R., Hudson, D. A., Adeli, E., Altman, R., Arora, S., von Arx, S., Bernstein, M. S., Bohg, J., Bosselut, A., Brunskill, E., Brynjolfsson, E., Buch, S., Card, D., Castellon, R., Chatterji, N., Chen, A., Creel, K., Davis, J. Q., Demszky, D., … Liang, P. (2022). On the Opportunities and Risks of Foundation Models (arXiv:2108.07258). arXiv. http://arxiv.org/abs/2108.07258
  3. Chowdhary, K. (2020). Natural language processing. In Fundamentals of artificial intelligence (pp. 603–649). Springer.
  4. Chubb, J., Cowling, P., & Reed, D. (2022). Speeding up to keep up: exploring the use of AI in the research process. AI & society, 37(4), 1439-1457. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-021-01259-0
  5. Cox, C., & Tzoc, E. (2023). ChatGPT: Implications for academic libraries. College & Research Libraries News, 84(3), 99. https://doi.org/10.5860/crln.84.3.99
  6. Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2015). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (4th ed.) SAGE.
  7. Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational Research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Pearson Education.
  8. Dale, R. (2021). GPT-3: What’s it good for?. Natural Language Engineering, 27(1), 113-118. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1351324920000601
  9. Doskaliuk, B., & Zimba, O. (2023). Beyond the Keyboard: Academic Writing in the Era of ChatGPT. Journal of Korean Medical Science, 38(26). https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2023.38.e207
  10. Dwivedi, Y., Kshetri, N., Hughes, L., Slade, E. L., Jeyaraj, A.,. & Wright, R. (2023). “So what if ChatGPT wrote it?” Multidisciplinary perspectives on opportunities, challenges and implications of generative conversational AI for research, practice and policy. International Journal of Information Management, 71, 102642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102642
  11. Fitria, T. N. (2021). Grammarly as AI-powered English Writing Assistant: Students’ Alternative for Writing English. Metathesis: Journal of English Language, Literature, and Teaching, 5(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.31002/metathesis.v5i1.3519
  12. Gayed, J. M., Carlon, M. K. J., Oriola, A. M., & Cross, J. S. (2022). Exploring an AI-based writing Assistant’s impact on English language learners. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 3, 100055. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100055 Gao, C. A., Howard, F. M., Markov, N. S., Dyer, E. C., Ramesh, S., Luo, Y., & Pearson, A. T. (2022). Comparing scientific abstracts generated by ChatGPT to original abstracts using an artificial intelligence output detector, plagiarism detector, and blinded human reviewers. BioRxiv, 2022-12. https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.12.23.521610
  13. Habibzadeh, F. (2023). The future of scientific journals: The rise of UniAI. Learned Publishing, 36(2), 326-330.
  14. Haenlein, M., & Kaplan, A. (2019). A brief history of artificial intelligence: On the past, present, and future of artificial intelligence. California Management Review, 61(4), 5–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/0008125619864925
  15. Hwang, S. I., Lim, J. S., Lee, R. W., Matsui, Y, Iguchi, T., Hiraki, T., & Ahn, H. (2023). Is ChatGPT a “Fire of Prometheus” for Non-Native English-Speaking Researchers in Academic Writing? Korean Journal of Radiology, 24(10), 952-959. https://doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2023.0773
  16. Li, Y., & Zhang, S. (2022). Qualitative data analysis. In Applied Research Methods in Urban and Regional Planning (pp. 149-165). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
  17. Lu, Y. (2019). Artificial intelligence: A survey on evolution, models, applications and future trends. Journal of Management Analytics, 6(1), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/23270012.2019.1570365
  18. Lund, B. D., Wang, T., Mannuru, N. R., Nie, B., Shimray, S., & Wang, Z. (2023). ChatGPT and a new academic reality: Artificial Intelligence‐written research papers and the ethics of the large language models in scholarly publishing. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 74(5), 570-581. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24750
  19. Mintz, Y., & Brodie, R. (2019). Introduction to artificial intelligence in medicine. Minimally Invasive Therapy & Allied Technologies, 28(2), 73–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645706.2019.1575882
  20. Mohammed, A., Al-ghazali, A., & Alqohfa, K. (2023). Exploring ChatGPT uses in higher studies: A case study of Arab postgraduates in India. Journal of English Studies in Arabia Felix, 2(2), 8–15. https://doi.org/10.56540/jesaf.v2i2.55
  21. Nakazawa, E., Udagawa, M., & Akabayashi, A. (2022). Does the Use of AI to Create Academic Research Papers Undermine Researcher Originality?. AI, 3(3), 702-706. https://doi.org/10.3390/ai3030040
  22. Nobles, S., & Paganucci, L. (2015). Do Digital Writing Tools Deliver? Student Perceptions of Writing Quality Using Digital Tools and Online Writing Environments. Computers and Composition, 38, 16–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2015.09.001
  23. Perkins, M. (2023). Academic Integrity considerations of AI Large Language Models in the post-pandemic era: ChatGPT and beyond. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 20(2). https://doi.org/10.53761/1.20.02.07
  24. Quintans-Júnior, L. J., Gurgel, R. Q., Araújo, A. A. D. S., Correia, D., & Martins-Filho, P. R. (2023). ChatGPT: the new panacea of the academic world. Revista da Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical, 56, https://doi.org/10.1590/0037-8682-0060-2023
  25. Rogerson, A. M., & McCarthy, G. (2017). Using Internet based paraphrasing tools: Original work, patchwriting or facilitated plagiarism? International Journal for Educational Integrity, 13(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-016-0013-y Salvagno, M., Taccone, F. S., & Gerli, A. G. (2023). Can artificial intelligence help for scientific writing? Critical Care, 27(1), 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-023-04380-2
  26. Tomlinson, B., Torrance, A. W., & Black, R. W. (2023). ChatGPT and Works Scholarly: Best Practices and Legal Pitfalls in Writing with AI. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.03722. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2305.03722
  27. Tsigaris, P., & da Silva, J. A. T. (2023). The role of ChatGPT in scholarly editing and publishing. European Science Editing, 49(101-121). https://doi.org/10.3897/ese.2023.e101121
  28. Uzun, L. (2023). ChatGPT and Academic Integrity Concerns: Detecting Artificial Intelligence Generated Content. Language Education & Technology (LET Journal), 3(1), 45-54.
  29. Van Dis, E. A., Bollen, J., Zuidema, W., van Rooij, R., & Bockting, C. L. (2023). ChatGPT: five priorities for research. Nature, 614(7947), 224-226.
  30. Vaswani, A., Shazeer, N., Parmar, N., Uszkoreit, J., Jones, L., Gomez, A. N., Kaiser, Ł., & Polosukhin, I. (2017). Attention is All you Need. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 30.
  31. Zohery, M. (2023). ChatGPT in Academic Writing and Publishing: A Comprehensive Guide. In Artificial Intelligence in Academia, Research and Science: ChatGPT as a Case Study. (First Edition). Achtago Publishing. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7803703
  32. Dwivedi, Y., Kshetri, N., Hughes, L., Slade, E. L., Jeyaraj, A.,. & Wright, R. (2023). “So what if ChatGPT wrote it?” Multidisciplinary perspectives on opportunities, challenges and implications of generative conversational AI for research, practice and policy. International Journal of Information Management, 71, 102642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102642