Abstract
In this review, we discuss the psychological aspects of using generative AI and Large Language Models (LLMs) in higher education. Although these technologies may appear unprecedented, we argue that they align with the recurring _Sisyphean Cycle of Technology Panic_: a well-documented phenomenon characterized by fear and skepticism toward major technological changes. Our primary focus is on the psychological dimensions of LLM accessibility for educators and students, which are often overlooked in favor of technological, legal, or economic considerations. We identify and examine ten key psychological areas relevant to the use of generative AI in academia: accessibility, ethical judgments, determinants of trust in AI, cognitive offloading, cognitive biases, creativity, social relationships, educational motivation, well-being, and potential clinical risks. We provide a balanced analysis for each of these areas, considering the potential benefits and risks associated with integrating AI algorithms into academic practices. We emphasize the necessity of addressing both perspectives when implementing technological solutions in education and suggest directions for future research. We believe this review offers a comprehensive overview of the psychological implications of generative AI in academic contexts.
Full text
621 characters
· extracted from
oa-doi-fallback
· click to expand
There is a newer version available for this {{ publicationType }}. View latest version
{{ publication.field_name }}
{{ publication.subfield_name }}
Copyright: © {{ publicationYear }} {{ publication.presentation_authors[0].full_name + (publication.presentation_authors.length > 1 ? ' et al' : '') }}. This is an open access publication distributed under the terms of the CC BY 4.0 License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Check the {{ publicationType | capitalize }} Source for copyright and license information.
Listen on
Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below.
Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure
cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can
have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy
(via DOI)
is the canonical version.