Students’ Perceptions of Ethical Use of Artificial Intelligence and Its Influence on Psychological Safety and Trust in Nigerian Tertiary Institutions in Ondo State

Students’ Perceptions of Ethical Use of Artificial Intelligence and Its Influence on Psychological Safety and Trust in Nigerian Tertiary Institutions in Ondo State | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Students’ Perceptions of Ethical Use of Artificial Intelligence and Its Influence on Psychological Safety and Trust in Nigerian Tertiary Institutions in Ondo State Ademola Sunday Adedeji, Seye Amos Olawoyin This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-8901509/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Under Review Version 1 posted 13 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract The growing trend of artificial intelligence (AI) use in post-secondary education offers both potential opportunities to support learning and the issues of ethics, trust, and psychological security. This study investigated the perceptions of undergraduate students towards the utilisation of ethical AI and its impact on their psychological safety and trust. The quantitative descriptive survey research design was used and a structured questionnaire was used involving 300 undergraduate students in Ondo state. Data gathered was analysed using SPSS software version 28. The outcome showed that the students tend to view AI as an ethically utilised tool, whose average of the ethical use items is 4.0. The psychological safety and trust in AI were also found to be high with mean scores being 3.95 in both constructs. The correlation analysis found that there were significant positive relationships between ethical AI use and psychological safety (r = 0.62, p < 0.05) and trust (r = 0.60, p < 0.05), and psychological safety was significantly related to trust (r = 0.58, p < 0.05). The application of AI ethics was found to be a significant predictor of psychological safety and trust, which were explained by the multiple regression (R 2 = 0.45, F (1, 298) = 122.5, p < 0.05). The results suggest that AI that is used ethically can make students more engaged, better, and more confident about learning technologies. To ensure confidence and psychological safety, institutions are recommended to develop clear ethical guidelines, training modules, in addition to clear AI policies. Ethical AI Psychological Safety Trust Higher Education Nigeria Introduction The recent rise in the development of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies has greatly changed the educational environment, where both learners and institutions are exposed to new opportunities and ethical dilemmas. Generative language models and adaptive learning systems represent AI applications that are becoming increasingly integrated into the teaching and evaluation process in tertiary education, enabling students to receive individualised learning experiences and administrators to work more efficiently [ 4 , 5 ]. This kind of integration is not confined to high-income settings; tertiary institutions of the Niger Delta, as in the rest of the world, are experiencing an AI boom to facilitate curricular delivery and feedback services and are confronted with the unresolved questions of ethical and governance [ 2 ]. In parallel to these advancements, the issues of transparency, fairness, data privacy, and academic integrity have grown, indicating the necessity to have evidence-based frameworks that direct the responsible use of AI in educational institutions [ 1 , 3 ]. At the same time, psychological concepts, including trust and psychological safety have become essential factors in the adoption and successful adoption of AI in education. Trust determines the readiness of students to work with AI-powered tools, and psychological safety determines their comfort and a feeling of security in technology-mediated learning practises [ 4 , 5 ]. It has been suggested that, when proper trust and perceived psychological safety is lacking, even ethically sound AI systems will not achieve the transformative potential of such systems [ 5 ]. Nevertheless, the majority of empirical research up to date has been interested in the teacher perspective or broad adoption of technology, thus creating a significant gap in more rigorous and quantitative evidence on how undergraduate students perceive ethical AI use and the impact of these perceptions on their psychological safety and trust, specifically in the Nigerian context. This is a huge gap since students are the first to experience the use of AI and their perception of ethical limits, credibility, and emotional ease can influence not only the academic use of AI but also the final results of technology use in the long term. Therefore, the study will aim to investigate how students are affected by the perception of the ethical use of artificial intelligence and how it affects psychological safety and trust in Nigerian tertiary institutions. Through the description of these relations, the study will guide policy, support moral guidelines, and create a platform of responsible AI implementation that would be capable of promoting both student welfare and academic integrity. Objectives of the Study The broad objective of the study is to examine students’ perceptions of the ethical use of artificial intelligence and its influence on psychological safety and trust in Nigerian tertiary institutions. The specific objectives of the study are to: 1. Assess students’ perceptions of the ethical use of artificial intelligence in teaching, learning, and academic administration in Nigerian tertiary institutions. 2. Determine the level of psychological safety experienced by students in AI-supported learning environments in Nigerian tertiary institutions. 3. Examine the level of trust students have in artificial intelligence systems used for academic purposes in Nigerian tertiary institutions. 4. Investigate the influence of perceived ethical use of artificial intelligence on students’ psychological safety in Nigerian tertiary institutions. 5. Examine the influence of perceived ethical use of artificial intelligence on students’ trust in AI-driven educational systems. 6. Determine the relationship between psychological safety and trust among students in AI-mediated learning environments. 7. Test the combined predictive effect of ethical AI use on psychological safety and trust among students in Nigerian tertiary institutions. Research Questions 1. What are students’ perceptions of the ethical use of artificial intelligence in teaching, learning, and academic administration in Nigerian tertiary institutions? 2. What is the level of psychological safety experienced by students in AI-supported learning environments in Nigerian tertiary institutions? 3. What is the level of trust students have in artificial intelligence systems used for academic purposes in Nigerian tertiary institutions? Null Hypotheses H ₀₁ : Perceived ethical use of artificial intelligence has no significant influence on students’ psychological safety in Nigerian tertiary institutions. H ₀₂ : Perceived ethical use of artificial intelligence has no significant influence on students’ trust in AI-driven educational systems in Nigerian tertiary institutions. H ₀₃ : There is no significant relationship between students’ psychological safety and their trust in AI-mediated learning environments in Nigerian tertiary institutions. H ₀₄ : Perceived ethical use of artificial intelligence has no significant combined predictive effect on students’ psychological safety and trust in Nigerian tertiary institutions. Methodology This research is a quantitative research, which embraced a descriptive survey research design, used to understand the perceptions of undergraduate students on the ethical use of artificial intelligence and the impact of artificial intelligence on psychological safety and trust in tertiary institutions in Ondo State in Nigeria. The quantitative design was deemed suitable because it allows gathering quantitative data and testing the relationship between variables with the help of statistical methods [ 6 ]. The study population was made up of all the undergraduate students of Ondo State that were enrolled in both public and private tertiary institutions in the state such as universities and polytechnics as well as colleges of education. The respondents of the study were chosen as a sample of 300 undergraduate students. Multistage sampling method was adopted: initially, institutions were identified using the stratified sampling method depending on the type of institution after which the respondents at each institution were selected using the simple random sampling. The study tool was a structured questionnaire that was presented in four parts, including demographic data, perceived ethical usefulness of artificial intelligence, psychological safety, and trust in artificial intelligence. Measures of response were recorded on a five-point Likert scale from Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree. Content and face validity were determined to establish the validity of the instrument, where the questionnaire was checked by the experts in the field of educational technology and measurement and evaluation to make sure that the constructs are clear, relevant, and cover enough. Cronbach’s alpha was adopted to calculate the reliability of the instrument, which was coefficient of 0.87 and acceptable. The self-administered questionnaires were used to collect data that was distributed physically and electronically to the respondents. Descriptive statistics (mean and standard deviation) were applied to answer the research questions and test the null hypotheses at 0.05 using the inferential statistics (Pearson correlation and multi-regression analysis). Findings Demographic Analysis of Participants Table 1: Gender distribution Gender Frequency Percentage Male 150 50% Female 150 50% Total 300 100% Table 1 shows that the sample has an equal distribution of male and female respondents (50% each), ensuring gender balance in the study. Table 2: Age distribution Age Frequency Percentage 18 – 22 years 180 60% 23 – 27 years 90 30% 28 years and above 30 10% Total 300 100% Table 2 shows that most respondents (60%) are aged 18 – 22, reflecting the typical age range of undergraduate students in Nigerian tertiary institutions. Research Questions Analysis Research Question 1: What are students’ perceptions of the ethical use of AI in Nigerian tertiary institutions? Table 4: Descriptive statistics showing students’ perceptions of the ethical use of AI in Nigerian tertiary institutions S/N Items Mean Std. D. Remarks 1 AI tools used in my institution are applied in a fair and unbiased manner. 4.20 0.70 Positive 2 The use of AI in my institution respects students’ privacy and data protection. 4.00 0.80 Positive 3 Students are adequately informed about how AI systems are used in teaching and assessment. 3.80 0.90 Positive 4 AI technologies in my institution are used transparently, without hidden intentions. 3.90 0.80 Positive 5 The use of AI in academic activities promotes academic integrity rather than encouraging misconduct. 4.10 0.70 Positive 6 Lecturers use AI tools ethically and responsibly in teaching and assessment. 3.90 0.80 Positive Weighted Average Mean 4.00 Positive Decision Rule: 0 – 2.99 = Negative, 3.00 – 5.00 = Positive Table 4 shows that there is a positive perception to all the items in the table, indicating that students have positive perceptions of the ethical use of AI in Nigerian tertiary institutions (weighted average mean = 4.00). Respondents generally perceive AI in their institutions as ethically used, with transparency, fairness, and respect for data privacy. Research Question 2: What is the level of psychological safety experienced by students in AI-supported learning environments? Table 5: Descriptive statistics showing the level of psychological safety experienced by students in AI-supported learning environments S/N Items Mean Std. D. Remarks 1 I feel safe expressing my opinions in classes where AI tools are used. 4.10 0.70 High 2 The use of AI in learning does not make me feel intimidated or monitored excessively. 3.90 0.80 High 3 I am comfortable making mistakes when using AI-based learning tools. 4.00 0.70 High 4 AI-supported learning environments make me feel respected and valued as a student. 3.80 0.80 High 5 I do not fear being unfairly judged or penalised by AI systems. 3.90 0.80 High 6 The presence of AI tools enhances my confidence in participating in learning activities. 4.00 0.70 High Weighted Average Mean 3.95 High Decision Rule: 0 – 2.99 = low, 3.00 – 5.00 = high Table 5 reveals that there is a high level of psychological safety experienced by students in AI-supported learning environments (with the weighted average mean score of 3.95), indicating comfort in interacting with AI-supported learning environments. Research Question 3: What is the level of trust students have in AI systems used for academic purposes? Table 6: Descriptive statistics showing the level of trust students have in AI systems used for academic purposes S/N Items Mean Std. D. Remarks 1 I trust AI tools used in my institution to produce accurate academic outcomes. 4.00 0.80 High 2 I believe AI systems used in my institution are reliable for learning and assessment purposes. 3.90 0.70 High 3 I trust that AI tools are used in my institution in students’ best interests. 3.80 0.80 High 4 I am confident that AI systems treat all students equally and fairly. 4.00 0.70 High 5 I feel comfortable relying on AI technologies for academic support. 3.90 0.80 High 6 I have confidence in the use of AI within my institution. 4.10 0.70 High Weighted Average Mean 3.95 High Decision Rule: 0 – 2.99 = low, 3.00 – 5.00 = high Table 6 shows that there is a high level of trust students have in AI systems used for academic purposes (weighted average mean = 3.95). This implies that, students generally trust AI systems in academic contexts, reflecting confidence in fairness, accuracy, and reliability. Null Hypotheses Testing H ₀₁ : Perceived ethical use of artificial intelligence has no significant influence on students’ psychological safety in Nigerian tertiary institutions. Table 7: Pearson correlation of influence of artificial intelligence on students’ psychological safety in Nigerian tertiary institutions Variable N Mean Std. D. df r Sig p Ethical use of AI 300 4.00 0.80 .62* .000 <0.05 Psychological Safety 300 3.95 0.75 298 *Correlation is significant at the 0.05 (2-tailed) Table 7 shows that there is a strong and positive correlation between ethical AI use and psychological safety of students (r = 0.62, p < 0.05). Null hypothesis 1 was rejected. This implies that, ethical AI use significant enhances psychological safety of students. H ₀₂ : Perceived ethical use of artificial intelligence has no significant influence on students’ trust in AI-driven educational systems in Nigerian tertiary institutions. Table 8: Pearson correlation of influence of artificial intelligence on students’ trust in AI-driven educational systems in Nigerian tertiary institutions = Variable N Mean Std. D. df r Sig p Ethical use of AI 300 4.00 0.80 .60* .000 <0.05 Students’ Trust in AI 300 3.95 0.75 298 *Correlation is significant at the 0.05 (2-tailed) Table 8 shows that there is a strong and positive correlation between ethical AI use and students’ trust in AI-driven educational systems (r = 0.60, p < 0.05). Null hypothesis 2 was rejected. This infers that, ethical AI use is significantly associated with higher trust among students. H ₀₃ : There is no significant relationship between students’ psychological safety and their trust in AI-mediated learning environments in Nigerian tertiary institutions. Table 9: Pearson correlation between students’ psychological safety and their trust in AI-mediated learning environments in Nigerian tertiary institutions Variable N Mean Std. D. df r Sig p Psychological Safety 300 3.95 0.75 .58* .000 <0.05 Students’ Trust in AI 300 3.95 0.75 298 *Correlation is significant at the 0.05 (2-tailed) Table 9 indicates that there is a moderate and positive correlation between psychological safety of students and their trust in AI-driven educational systems (r = 0.58, p < 0.05). Null hypothesis 3 was rejected. This shows that, students with higher psychological safety tend to trust AI systems more. H ₀₄ : Perceived ethical use of artificial intelligence has no significant combined predictive effect on students’ psychological safety and trust in Nigerian tertiary institutions. Table 10: Regression analysis showing artificial intelligence and its combined predictive effect on students’ psychological safety and trust in Nigerian tertiary institutions R = 0.67 R Square = 0.45 Adjusted R Square = 0.449 Std. Error = 0.583 Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Regression 85.5 1 85.5 122.5 0.000 b Residual 104.5 298 0.351 Total 190.0 299 a. Predictors: (Constant), Ethical use of AI b. Dependent Variable: Students’ psychological safety and trust Coefficients Predictor Unstandardized B Std. Error Beta t Sig. Ethical use of AI 0.65 0.059 0.67 11.07 0.000 Table 10 reveals that ethical AI use significantly predicts both psychological safety and trust of students [R 2 = 0.45, F (1, 298) = 122.5, sig. = 0.000, p < 0.05]. Ethical AI use predicts 45% of variance in psychological safety and trust collectively. Null hypothesis 4 was rejected. Discussion The results indicate that the perception of ethical application of artificial intelligence among the undergraduate students in Ondo State is positive with an average of over the neutral mark on the ethical AI questions. This is an indication that the majority of students are confident in the equal, transparent, and responsible use of AI in academic processes, which is consistent with the findings of the research that indicated a growing student consciousness of ethical aspects of AI use, and the urgent necessity of effective ethical standards applied in the educational field [6]. Research points to the fact that ethical issues like privacy, fairness, and accountability are the issues that continue to occupy the centre of student perception of AI despite the benefits of using AI in education [3, 6]. These findings suggest that students do not simply follow AI passively but critically assess the ethical consequences of AI, which is why there is a need to introduce ethical principles into AI practise into institutions [3]. In general, the positive ethical perceptions highlight a willingness of students to work with AI tools, although their application should not be out-of-step with the main ethical principles. Students reported that the levels of psychological safety in learning environments improved by AI are high, which is an indicator of comfort and confidence in handling AI tools. This result is consistent with studies highlighting the importance of psychological considerations in technology adoption; such as psychological safety and trust, proven to contribute to further use and positive interaction with AI tools in education [5]. Psychological safety helps in cutting down anxiety and increasing the desire to contribute, which is essential since the research shows that emotional and psychological support affects attitudes towards educational technologies and their adoption [5]. These results confirm the applicability of psychological constructs in theories of technology acceptance as well as indicate that in a secure and respected environment, AI tools may facilitate learning engagement instead of suppressing it. The trust rates of AI devices among the questioned respondents are similar to those demonstrated by the overall educational literature that trust is a critical factor in the process of adopting and successfully implementing AI technologies [2]. The concept of trust also affects the attitudes of students regarding AI and their intentions to use these systems to support learning and academic activities. Research based on the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) also finds that trust is highly enhanced by digital literacy and perceived usefulness and leads to positive behavioural intentions towards AI [2, 3]. These findings imply that the trust of AI among students is not a mere passive attitude but rather determined by the impressions of reliability, equity, and capabilities of the tools, which means that AI technologies should be created with the consideration of transparency and pedagogical compatibility. The hypothesis test indicated a statistically significant positive correlation between the ethical AI use and psychological safety, which rejected null hypothesis 1. This claims that ethically designed and clearly implemented AI systems help users more and more to achieve psychological comfort and safe learning. This is in tandem with previous study that revealed that, when students presume that AI tools have ethical integrity, they will be more inclined to use these tools without any fear of a prejudice and misuse [5]. These results support the idea that ethical principles are not any ideal but some practical determinants of the psychological well-being in the AI-mediated education. The fact that there is a positive correlation of perceived ethical use of AI and trust supports the rejection of null hypothesis 2 as revealed by the findings of the study. This is buttressed by previous study that, trust is a fundamental mediating element in the relationship between people and smart technologies; transparency and ethical design are essential to achieving this trust [4]. AI tools are more trusted by students because they believe that they are not prejudiced or discriminating, which reduces scepticism and boosts the engagement. This is in line with systematic reviews which have found out that trust is a key barrier or enabler to learning of educational AI [1]. The relationship between psychological safety and trust in the AI among the students was found to be significant in a positive way, which rejected the null hypothesis 3 as revealed by the study. This is in agreement with research that trust and psychological safety are mutually enhancing attributes in educational technology situations [5]. Anxiety may be reduced and perceived reliability of AI tools may be enhanced with the help of a psychologically safe space, which will help build more trust. These results highlight that trust is not only cognitive, but also it has to be affected by the affective and the psychological experiences present in the conditions of AI implementation. Regression analysis revealed that the use of ethical AI accounted a significant percentage of variation in the psychological safety and trust, which rejected null hypothesis 4, as shown in the study findings. This compound influence justifies hypothetical arguments about the fact that considerations of ethics are the basis of favourable educational technology experiences [3]. Trust and comfort are encouraged in ethical AI practises that, in turn, encourage positive interaction and active adoption. The existence of such mixed impacts makes the concept of comprehensive AI governance frameworks gripping the aspects of ethics, trust, and psychological well-being more significant [6]. Implications of the Study This research highlights that ethical AI practises have positive effects in promoting the psychological safety and trust of the students in the tertiary institutions of Nigeria. The findings highlight the need of universities to adopt AI strategies in transparency and fairness. Reliable AI systems and psychologically secure learning environments can enhance student engagement and academic learning as well as academic integrity. In addition, these findings can be used by policymakers and administrators to develop institutional-level guidelines and training systems to encourage ethical AI literacy. The study can be relevant to understand the role of ethical AI, trust, and psychological safety in a more comprehensive view of technology adoption in higher education, focusing on student well-being and pedagogical effectiveness. This knowledge can also inform the AI developers to establish user-centred, reliable and ethically focused educational tools. Recommendations 1. The institutions should come up with clear ethical frameworks on the use of AI, which should include fairness, transparency, and privacy. 2. Students and staff should receive regular training and awareness programmes on how to become AI literate and use it responsibly. 3. Universities should put into place monitoring systems to ascertain that ethical practises have been adhered to such as the responsible management of student information and artificial intelligence-based tests. 4. The creators of AI educational tools should consider the aspect of trust-building, including explainable algorithms and feedback. 5. There should be policies that encourage student participation in decision-making concerning the adoption of AI, making sure that the perceptions they hold are used to design implementation policies. 6. There should be collaboration between policymakers, AI developers, and educational institutions in ensuring the upholding of ethical standards, the creation of the environment of psychological safety, and the establishment of trust, which will eventually enhance the experiences of students and their learning outcomes in a more positive way. Conclusion This paper confirms the fact that the way undergraduate students view the use of ethically AI can be one of the determinants of their psychological security and confidence in educational environments. The results show that ethically deployed AI does not only instil trust in technology, but it also increases engagement and wellness. The studies connect ethical AI practises to the outcomes in psychology and trust, which makes the research evidence that responsible AI implementation, is essential to achieve academic effectiveness of tertiary institutions in Nigeria. The research proves that institutions should correspond to technological progress and ethical values, and the integration of AI is the most efficient in case students are safe and believe in its use. Altogether, the study brings to the picture the interaction between ethics, trust and psychological safety to create the meaningful and responsible use of AI in higher education. Limitations of the Study The study is restricted to undergraduate students in chosen higher institutions in Ondo State which could limit the externalisation of findings to other regions or people. The data was collected based on self-reported questionnaires, meaning that it is prone to social desirability or response bias. The cross-sectional design will not allow making causal inferences, and only associations will be obtained between ethical AI use, psychological safety, and trust. Besides, the research concentrates on AI perceptions only, irrespective of behavioural application or engagement patterns. The sample size was also restricted by the resource and time limits and was limited to 300 respondents. In spite of these shortcomings, the study has interesting contributions to the perceptions of students and sets the groundwork of further studies in the area of AI ethics and educational technology. Suggestions for Further Studies Further studies should to consider longitudinal studies to determine the changes in perception towards ethical AI over a period of time and their efficacy on academic performance. Research might be extended to post-graduate students, faculty and administrative personnel as this would be able to capture to a wider institutional outlook. A comparative study of the various states in Nigeria or even other African nations would be able to bring about regional differences in the perception and trust in AI. Qualitative methods like interviews or focus groups can be part of future research to gain better insights on how students experience the life with AI and what ethical issues they have. Declarations Ethical Statements This study involved human participants and was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the participating tertiary institutions in Ondo State, Nigeria. The research protocol was reviewed and approved in accordance with the committee’s ethical guidelines and the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. Participation was voluntary, informed consent was obtained, and confidentiality of respondents was strictly maintained. Funding Statement I hereby declare that this research did not receive any funding or grant. Consent to Publish Declaration Not applicable. Data Availability Any data produced and discussed in this paper can be found with the author on a reasonable request. The data were also anonymised to allow preserving the privacy of the participants, and the dataset comprises demographics, answers to the structured questionnaire, and coded Likert-scale questions. The data is only offered to academics, researchers, and verifiers as dictated by principles of ethics and institutional laws. Author Contribution Adedeji Ademola Sunday wrote the methodology, did the Data Analysis, data interpretation and discussion of findings. He also wrote the remaining aspects of the work. Olawoyin, Seye Amos wrote the introduction, objectives, research questions, and hypothese Both Adedeji, A.S. and Olawoyin, S.A did the proofreading of the entire manuscript. References Afolabi A. Ethical issues in artificial intelligence adoption in African higher education institutions in Nigeria. Afr J Inform Knowl Manage. 2024;3(2):22–33. Agbarakwe HA, Ogbonna O. Leveraging Artificial Intelligence for Enhanced Assessment and Feedback Mechanisms in Nigeria Higher Education System. Int J Res Innov Social Sci. 2024;142–51. https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2024.809012 . Alnsour MM, Qouzah L, Aljamani S, AL–Omiri MK. AI in education: enhancing learning potential and addressing ethical considerations among academic staff—a cross–sectional study at the University of Jordan. Int J Educational Integr. 2025;21:16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-025-00189-4 . Nazaretsky T, Mejia–Domenzain P, Swamy V, Frej J, Käser T. The critical role of trust in adopting AI–powered educational technology for learning: An instrument for measuring student perceptions. Computers Education: Artif Intell. 2025;8:100368. Shen L, Qiu N, Wang Z. Psychological safety and trust as drivers of teachers’ continued use of AI tools in classrooms. Sci Rep. 2025;15:31426. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-13789-4 . Yang T, Cheon J, Cho MH, et al. Undergraduate students’ perspectives of generative AI ethics. Int J Educational Technol High Educ. 2025;22:35. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-025-00533-1 . Additional Declarations Competing interest reported. Funding Cite Share Download PDF Status: Under Review Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Revision requested 21 Apr, 2026 Reviews received at journal 16 Apr, 2026 Reviews received at journal 13 Apr, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 13 Apr, 2026 Reviews received at journal 10 Apr, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 07 Apr, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 06 Apr, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 19 Mar, 2026 Reviewers invited by journal 12 Mar, 2026 Editor invited by journal 25 Feb, 2026 Editor assigned by journal 24 Feb, 2026 Submission checks completed at journal 24 Feb, 2026 First submitted to journal 24 Feb, 2026 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-8901509","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":604974721,"identity":"97074745-ad40-4ee2-846c-8ab0ebb3655e","order_by":0,"name":"Ademola Sunday Adedeji","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"National Open University of Nigeria","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Ademola","middleName":"Sunday","lastName":"Adedeji","suffix":""},{"id":604974723,"identity":"54224f95-1aa0-49c8-80cb-70ff53e3a135","order_by":1,"name":"Seye Amos Olawoyin","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Federal Polytechnic Nekede","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Seye","middleName":"Amos","lastName":"Olawoyin","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2026-02-17 13:23:47","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8901509/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8901509/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":105033821,"identity":"ed1d9e11-15f3-472c-8162-3250f147699c","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-03-20 07:21:50","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1307681,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8901509/v1/b79aebf0-2b71-4bbd-8071-029063f39528.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"Competing interest reported. Funding","formattedTitle":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStudents’ Perceptions of Ethical Use of Artificial Intelligence and Its Influence on Psychological Safety and Trust in Nigerian Tertiary Institutions in Ondo State\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe recent rise in the development of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies has greatly changed the educational environment, where both learners and institutions are exposed to new opportunities and ethical dilemmas. Generative language models and adaptive learning systems represent AI applications that are becoming increasingly integrated into the teaching and evaluation process in tertiary education, enabling students to receive individualised learning experiences and administrators to work more efficiently [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e]. This kind of integration is not confined to high-income settings; tertiary institutions of the Niger Delta, as in the rest of the world, are experiencing an AI boom to facilitate curricular delivery and feedback services and are confronted with the unresolved questions of ethical and governance [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e]. In parallel to these advancements, the issues of transparency, fairness, data privacy, and academic integrity have grown, indicating the necessity to have evidence-based frameworks that direct the responsible use of AI in educational institutions [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAt the same time, psychological concepts, including trust and psychological safety have become essential factors in the adoption and successful adoption of AI in education. Trust determines the readiness of students to work with AI-powered tools, and psychological safety determines their comfort and a feeling of security in technology-mediated learning practises [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e]. It has been suggested that, when proper trust and perceived psychological safety is lacking, even ethically sound AI systems will not achieve the transformative potential of such systems [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e]. Nevertheless, the majority of empirical research up to date has been interested in the teacher perspective or broad adoption of technology, thus creating a significant gap in more rigorous and quantitative evidence on how undergraduate students perceive ethical AI use and the impact of these perceptions on their psychological safety and trust, specifically in the Nigerian context.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis is a huge gap since students are the first to experience the use of AI and their perception of ethical limits, credibility, and emotional ease can influence not only the academic use of AI but also the final results of technology use in the long term. Therefore, the study will aim to investigate how students are affected by the perception of the ethical use of artificial intelligence and how it affects psychological safety and trust in Nigerian tertiary institutions. Through the description of these relations, the study will guide policy, support moral guidelines, and create a platform of responsible AI implementation that would be capable of promoting both student welfare and academic integrity.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eObjectives of the Study\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe broad objective of the study is to examine students’ perceptions of the ethical use of artificial intelligence and its influence on psychological safety and trust in Nigerian tertiary institutions. The specific objectives of the study are to:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e1. \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Assess students’ perceptions of the ethical use of artificial intelligence in teaching, learning, and academic administration in Nigerian tertiary institutions.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2. \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Determine the level of psychological safety experienced by students in AI-supported learning environments in Nigerian tertiary institutions.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e3. \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Examine the level of trust students have in artificial intelligence systems used for academic purposes in Nigerian tertiary institutions.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e4. \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Investigate the influence of perceived ethical use of artificial intelligence on students’ psychological safety in Nigerian tertiary institutions.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e5.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;Examine the influence of perceived ethical use of artificial intelligence on students’ trust in AI-driven educational systems.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e6. \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Determine the relationship between psychological safety and trust among students in AI-mediated learning environments.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e7. \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Test the combined predictive effect of ethical AI use on psychological safety and trust among students in Nigerian tertiary institutions.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResearch Questions\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e1. \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;What are students’ perceptions of the ethical use of artificial intelligence in teaching, learning, and academic administration in Nigerian tertiary institutions?\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2. \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; What is the level of psychological safety experienced by students in AI-supported learning environments in Nigerian tertiary institutions?\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e3. \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; What is the level of trust students have in artificial intelligence systems used for academic purposes in Nigerian tertiary institutions?\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNull Hypotheses\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eH\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e₀₁\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e:\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp; Perceived ethical use of artificial intelligence has no significant influence on students’ psychological safety in Nigerian tertiary institutions.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eH\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e₀₂\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e:\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp; Perceived ethical use of artificial intelligence has no significant influence on students’ trust in AI-driven educational systems in Nigerian tertiary institutions.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eH\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e₀₃\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e:\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp; There is no significant relationship between students’ psychological safety and their trust in AI-mediated learning environments in Nigerian tertiary institutions.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eH\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e₀₄\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e:\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp; Perceived ethical use of artificial intelligence has no significant combined predictive effect on students’ psychological safety and trust in Nigerian tertiary institutions.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Methodology","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis research is a quantitative research, which embraced a descriptive survey research design, used to understand the perceptions of undergraduate students on the ethical use of artificial intelligence and the impact of artificial intelligence on psychological safety and trust in tertiary institutions in Ondo State in Nigeria. The quantitative design was deemed suitable because it allows gathering quantitative data and testing the relationship between variables with the help of statistical methods [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe study population was made up of all the undergraduate students of Ondo State that were enrolled in both public and private tertiary institutions in the state such as universities and polytechnics as well as colleges of education. The respondents of the study were chosen as a sample of 300 undergraduate students. Multistage sampling method was adopted: initially, institutions were identified using the stratified sampling method depending on the type of institution after which the respondents at each institution were selected using the simple random sampling.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe study tool was a structured questionnaire that was presented in four parts, including demographic data, perceived ethical usefulness of artificial intelligence, psychological safety, and trust in artificial intelligence. Measures of response were recorded on a five-point Likert scale from Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eContent and face validity were determined to establish the validity of the instrument, where the questionnaire was checked by the experts in the field of educational technology and measurement and evaluation to make sure that the constructs are clear, relevant, and cover enough. Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s alpha was adopted to calculate the reliability of the instrument, which was coefficient of 0.87 and acceptable.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe self-administered questionnaires were used to collect data that was distributed physically and electronically to the respondents. Descriptive statistics (mean and standard deviation) were applied to answer the research questions and test the null hypotheses at 0.05 using the inferential statistics (Pearson correlation and multi-regression analysis).\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Findings","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDemographic Analysis of Participants\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eTable 1: Gender distribution\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGender\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFrequency\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePercentage\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMale\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e150\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e50%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e150\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e50%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTotal\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e300\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e100%\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 1 shows that the sample has an equal distribution of male and female respondents (50% each), ensuring gender balance in the study.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eTable 2: Age distribution\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAge\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFrequency\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePercentage\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e18 – 22 years\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e180\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e60%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e23 – 27 years\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e90\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e30%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e28 years and above\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e30\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTotal\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e300\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e100%\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 2 shows that most respondents (60%) are aged 18 – 22, reflecting the typical age range of undergraduate students in Nigerian tertiary institutions.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResearch Questions Analysis\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResearch Question 1:\u003c/strong\u003e What are students’ perceptions of the ethical use of AI in Nigerian tertiary institutions?\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eTable 4: Descriptive statistics showing students’ perceptions of the ethical use of AI in Nigerian tertiary institutions\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eS/N\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eItems\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMean\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStd. D.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRemarks\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAI tools used in my institution are applied in a fair and unbiased manner.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.20\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.70\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePositive\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe use of AI in my institution respects students’ privacy and data protection.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.80\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePositive\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStudents are adequately informed about how AI systems are used in teaching and assessment.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.80\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.90\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePositive\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAI technologies in my institution are used transparently, without hidden intentions.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.90\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.80\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePositive\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe use of AI in academic activities promotes academic integrity rather than encouraging misconduct.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.70\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePositive\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLecturers use AI tools ethically and responsibly in teaching and assessment.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.90\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.80\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePositive\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eWeighted Average Mean\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e4.00\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePositive\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eDecision Rule:\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;0 – 2.99 = Negative, 3.00 – 5.00 = Positive\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 4 shows that there is a positive perception to all the items in the table, indicating that students have positive perceptions of the ethical use of AI in Nigerian tertiary institutions (weighted average mean = 4.00). Respondents generally perceive AI in their institutions as ethically used, with transparency, fairness, and respect for data privacy.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResearch Question 2:\u003c/strong\u003e What is the level of psychological safety experienced by students in AI-supported learning environments?\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eTable 5: Descriptive statistics showing the level of psychological safety experienced by students in AI-supported learning environments\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eS/N\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eItems\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMean\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStd. D.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRemarks\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eI feel safe expressing my opinions in classes where AI tools are used.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.70\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHigh\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe use of AI in learning does not make me feel intimidated or monitored excessively.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.90\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.80\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHigh\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eI am comfortable making mistakes when using AI-based learning tools.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.70\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHigh\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAI-supported learning environments make me feel respected and valued as a student.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.80\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.80\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHigh\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eI do not fear being unfairly judged or penalised by AI systems.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.90\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.80\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHigh\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe presence of AI tools enhances my confidence in participating in learning activities.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.70\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHigh\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eWeighted Average Mean\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e3.95\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHigh\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eDecision Rule:\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;0 – 2.99 = low, 3.00 – 5.00 = high\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 5 reveals that there is a high level of psychological safety experienced by students in AI-supported learning environments (with the weighted average mean score of 3.95), indicating comfort in interacting with AI-supported learning environments.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResearch Question 3:\u003c/strong\u003e What is the level of trust students have in AI systems used for academic purposes?\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 6: Descriptive statistics showing the level of trust students have in AI systems used for academic purposes\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eS/N\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eItems\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMean\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStd. D.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRemarks\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eI trust AI tools used in my institution to produce accurate academic outcomes.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.80\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHigh\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eI believe AI systems used in my institution are reliable for learning and assessment purposes.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.90\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.70\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHigh\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eI trust that AI tools are used in my institution in students’ best interests.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.80\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.80\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHigh\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eI am confident that AI systems treat all students equally and fairly.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.70\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHigh\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eI feel comfortable relying on AI technologies for academic support.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.90\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.80\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHigh\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eI have confidence in the use of AI within my institution.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.70\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHigh\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eWeighted Average Mean\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e3.95\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHigh\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eDecision Rule:\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;0 – 2.99 = low, 3.00 – 5.00 = high\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 6 shows that there is a high level of trust students have in AI systems used for academic purposes (weighted average mean = 3.95). This implies that, students generally trust AI systems in academic contexts, reflecting confidence in fairness, accuracy, and reliability.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNull Hypotheses Testing\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eH\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e₀₁\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e:\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp; Perceived ethical use of artificial intelligence has no significant influence on students’ psychological safety in Nigerian tertiary institutions.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eTable 7: Pearson correlation of influence of artificial intelligence on students’ psychological safety in Nigerian tertiary institutions\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eVariable\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eN\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMean\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStd. D.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003edf\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003er\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSig\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ep\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEthical use of AI\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e300\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.80\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.62*\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;0.05\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePsychological Safety \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e300\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.95\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.75\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e298\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e*Correlation is significant at the 0.05 (2-tailed)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 7 shows that there is a strong and positive correlation between ethical AI use and psychological safety of students (r = 0.62, p \u0026lt; 0.05). Null hypothesis 1 was rejected. This implies that, ethical AI use significant enhances psychological safety of students.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eH\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e₀₂\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e:\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp; Perceived ethical use of artificial intelligence has no significant influence on students’ trust in AI-driven educational systems in Nigerian tertiary institutions.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eTable 8:\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003ePearson correlation of influence of artificial intelligence on students’ trust in AI-driven educational systems in Nigerian tertiary institutions\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e=\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eVariable\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eN\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMean\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStd. D.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003edf\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003er\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSig\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ep\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEthical use of AI\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e300\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.80\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.60*\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;0.05\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStudents’ Trust in AI\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e300\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.95\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.75\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e298\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e*Correlation is significant at the 0.05 (2-tailed)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 8 shows that there is a strong and positive correlation between ethical AI use and students’ trust in AI-driven educational systems (r = 0.60, p \u0026lt; 0.05). Null hypothesis 2 was rejected. This infers that, ethical AI use is significantly associated with higher trust among students.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eH\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e₀₃\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e:\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp; There is no significant relationship between students’ psychological safety and their trust in AI-mediated learning environments in Nigerian tertiary institutions.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eTable 9: Pearson correlation between students’ psychological safety and their trust in AI-mediated learning environments in Nigerian tertiary institutions\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eVariable\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eN\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMean\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStd. D.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003edf\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003er\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSig\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ep\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePsychological Safety\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e300\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.95\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.75\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.58*\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;0.05\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStudents’ Trust in AI \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e300\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.95\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.75\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e298\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e*Correlation is significant at the 0.05 (2-tailed)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 9 indicates that there is a moderate and positive correlation between psychological safety of students and their trust in AI-driven educational systems (r = 0.58, p \u0026lt; 0.05). Null hypothesis 3 was rejected. This shows that, students with higher psychological safety tend to trust AI systems more.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eH\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e₀₄\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e:\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp; Perceived ethical use of artificial intelligence has no significant combined predictive effect on students’ psychological safety and trust in Nigerian tertiary institutions.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eTable 10: Regression analysis showing artificial intelligence and its combined predictive effect on students’ psychological safety and trust in Nigerian tertiary institutions\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"642\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"7\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eR = 0.67\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eR Square = 0.45\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAdjusted R Square = 0.449\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStd. Error = 0.583\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eModel\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSum of Squares\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003edf\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean Square\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eF\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSig.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRegression\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e85.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e85.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e122.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eResidual\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e104.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e298\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.351\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e190.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e299\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"7\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ea. Predictors: (Constant), Ethical use of AI\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eb. Dependent Variable: Students’ psychological safety and trust\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCoefficients\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePredictor\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eUnstandardized B\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStd. Error\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eBeta\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003et\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSig.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEthical use of AI\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.65\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.059\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.67\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11.07\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 10 reveals that ethical AI use significantly predicts both psychological safety and trust of students [R\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e = 0.45, F\u003csub\u003e(1, 298)\u003c/sub\u003e = 122.5, sig. = 0.000, p \u0026lt; 0.05]. Ethical AI use predicts 45% of variance in psychological safety and trust collectively. Null hypothesis 4 was rejected.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe results indicate that the perception of ethical application of artificial intelligence among the undergraduate students in Ondo State is positive with an average of over the neutral mark on the ethical AI questions. This is an indication that the majority of students are confident in the equal, transparent, and responsible use of AI in academic processes, which is consistent with the findings of the research that indicated a growing student consciousness of ethical aspects of AI use, and the urgent necessity of effective ethical standards applied in the educational field [6]. Research points to the fact that ethical issues like privacy, fairness, and accountability are the issues that continue to occupy the centre of student perception of AI despite the benefits of using AI in education [3, 6]. These findings suggest that students do not simply follow AI passively but critically assess the ethical consequences of AI, which is why there is a need to introduce ethical principles into AI practise into institutions [3]. In general, the positive ethical perceptions highlight a willingness of students to work with AI tools, although their application should not be out-of-step with the main ethical principles.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eStudents reported that the levels of psychological safety in learning environments improved by AI are high, which is an indicator of comfort and confidence in handling AI tools. This result is consistent with studies highlighting the importance of psychological considerations in technology adoption; such as psychological safety and trust, proven to contribute to further use and positive interaction with AI tools in education [5]. Psychological safety helps in cutting down anxiety and increasing the desire to contribute, which is essential since the research shows that emotional and psychological support affects attitudes towards educational technologies and their adoption [5]. These results confirm the applicability of psychological constructs in theories of technology acceptance as well as indicate that in a secure and respected environment, AI tools may facilitate learning engagement instead of suppressing it.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe trust rates of AI devices among the questioned respondents are similar to those demonstrated by the overall educational literature that trust is a critical factor in the process of adopting and successfully implementing AI technologies [2]. The concept of trust also affects the attitudes of students regarding AI and their intentions to use these systems to support learning and academic activities. Research based on the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) also finds that trust is highly enhanced by digital literacy and perceived usefulness and leads to positive behavioural intentions towards AI [2, 3]. These findings imply that the trust of AI among students is not a mere passive attitude but rather determined by the impressions of reliability, equity, and capabilities of the tools, which means that AI technologies should be created with the consideration of transparency and pedagogical compatibility.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe hypothesis test indicated a statistically significant positive correlation between the ethical AI use and psychological safety, which rejected null hypothesis 1. This claims that ethically designed and clearly implemented AI systems help users more and more to achieve psychological comfort and safe learning. This is in tandem with previous study that revealed that, when students presume that AI tools have ethical integrity, they will be more inclined to use these tools without any fear of a prejudice and misuse [5]. These results support the idea that ethical principles are not any ideal but some practical determinants of the psychological well-being in the AI-mediated education.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe fact that there is a positive correlation of perceived ethical use of AI and trust supports the rejection of null hypothesis 2 as revealed by the findings of the study. This is buttressed by previous study that, trust is a fundamental mediating element in the relationship between people and smart technologies; transparency and ethical design are essential to achieving this trust [4]. AI tools are more trusted by students because they believe that they are not prejudiced or discriminating, which reduces scepticism and boosts the engagement. This is in line with systematic reviews which have found out that trust is a key barrier or enabler to learning of educational AI [1].\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe relationship between psychological safety and trust in the AI among the students was found to be significant in a positive way, which rejected the null hypothesis 3 as revealed by the study. This is in agreement with research that trust and psychological safety are mutually enhancing attributes in educational technology situations [5]. Anxiety may be reduced and perceived reliability of AI tools may be enhanced with the help of a psychologically safe space, which will help build more trust. These results highlight that trust is not only cognitive, but also it has to be affected by the affective and the psychological experiences present in the conditions of AI implementation.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRegression analysis revealed that the use of ethical AI accounted a significant percentage of variation in the psychological safety and trust, which rejected null hypothesis 4, as shown in the study findings. This compound influence justifies hypothetical arguments about the fact that considerations of ethics are the basis of favourable educational technology experiences [3]. Trust and comfort are encouraged in ethical AI practises that, in turn, encourage positive interaction and active adoption. The existence of such mixed impacts makes the concept of comprehensive AI governance frameworks gripping the aspects of ethics, trust, and psychological well-being more significant [6].\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eImplications of the Study\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis research highlights that ethical AI practises have positive effects in promoting the psychological safety and trust of the students in the tertiary institutions of Nigeria. The findings highlight the need of universities to adopt AI strategies in transparency and fairness. Reliable AI systems and psychologically secure learning environments can enhance student engagement and academic learning as well as academic integrity. In addition, these findings can be used by policymakers and administrators to develop institutional-level guidelines and training systems to encourage ethical AI literacy. The study can be relevant to understand the role of ethical AI, trust, and psychological safety in a more comprehensive view of technology adoption in higher education, focusing on student well-being and pedagogical effectiveness. This knowledge can also inform the AI developers to establish user-centred, reliable and ethically focused educational tools.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRecommendations\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e1.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;The institutions should come up with clear ethical frameworks on the use of AI, which should include fairness, transparency, and privacy.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;Students and staff should receive regular training and awareness programmes on how to become AI literate and use it responsibly.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e3.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;Universities should put into place monitoring systems to ascertain that ethical practises have been adhered to such as the responsible management of student information and artificial intelligence-based tests.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e4.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;The creators of AI educational tools should consider the aspect of trust-building, including explainable algorithms and feedback.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e5.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;There should be policies that encourage student participation in decision-making concerning the adoption of AI, making sure that the perceptions they hold are used to design implementation policies.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e6. \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; There should be collaboration between policymakers, AI developers, and educational institutions in ensuring the upholding of ethical standards, the creation of the environment of psychological safety, and the establishment of trust, which will eventually enhance the experiences of students and their learning outcomes in a more positive way.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis paper confirms the fact that the way undergraduate students view the use of ethically AI can be one of the determinants of their psychological security and confidence in educational environments. The results show that ethically deployed AI does not only instil trust in technology, but it also increases engagement and wellness. The studies connect ethical AI practises to the outcomes in psychology and trust, which makes the research evidence that responsible AI implementation, is essential to achieve academic effectiveness of tertiary institutions in Nigeria. The research proves that institutions should correspond to technological progress and ethical values, and the integration of AI is the most efficient in case students are safe and believe in its use. Altogether, the study brings to the picture the interaction between ethics, trust and psychological safety to create the meaningful and responsible use of AI in higher education.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eLimitations of the Study\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe study is restricted to undergraduate students in chosen higher institutions in Ondo State which could limit the externalisation of findings to other regions or people. The data was collected based on self-reported questionnaires, meaning that it is prone to social desirability or response bias. The cross-sectional design will not allow making causal inferences, and only associations will be obtained between ethical AI use, psychological safety, and trust. Besides, the research concentrates on AI perceptions only, irrespective of behavioural application or engagement patterns. The sample size was also restricted by the resource and time limits and was limited to 300 respondents. In spite of these shortcomings, the study has interesting contributions to the perceptions of students and sets the groundwork of further studies in the area of AI ethics and educational technology.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eSuggestions for Further Studies\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eFurther studies should to consider longitudinal studies to determine the changes in perception towards ethical AI over a period of time and their efficacy on academic performance. Research might be extended to post-graduate students, faculty and administrative personnel as this would be able to capture to a wider institutional outlook. A comparative study of the various states in Nigeria or even other African nations would be able to bring about regional differences in the perception and trust in AI. Qualitative methods like interviews or focus groups can be part of future research to gain better insights on how students experience the life with AI and what ethical issues they have.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthical\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eStatements\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study involved human participants and was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the participating tertiary institutions in Ondo State, Nigeria. The research protocol was reviewed and approved in accordance with the committee’s ethical guidelines and the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. Participation was voluntary, informed consent was obtained, and confidentiality of respondents was strictly maintained.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding Statement\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eI hereby declare that this research did not receive any funding or grant.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsent to Publish Declaration\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNot applicable.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData Availability\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAny data produced and discussed in this paper can be found with the author on a reasonable request. The data were also anonymised to allow preserving the privacy of the participants, and the dataset comprises demographics, answers to the structured questionnaire, and coded Likert-scale questions. The data is only offered to academics, researchers, and verifiers as dictated by principles of ethics and institutional laws.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eAdedeji Ademola Sunday wrote the methodology, did the Data Analysis, data interpretation and discussion of findings. He also wrote the remaining aspects of the work. Olawoyin, Seye Amos wrote the introduction, objectives, research questions, and hypothese Both Adedeji, A.S. and Olawoyin, S.A did the proofreading of the entire manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAfolabi A. Ethical issues in artificial intelligence adoption in African higher education institutions in Nigeria. Afr J Inform Knowl Manage. 2024;3(2):22\u0026ndash;33.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAgbarakwe HA, Ogbonna O. Leveraging Artificial Intelligence for Enhanced Assessment and Feedback Mechanisms in Nigeria Higher Education System. Int J Res Innov Social Sci. 2024;142\u0026ndash;51. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2024.809012\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.47772/IJRISS.2024.809012\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAlnsour MM, Qouzah L, Aljamani S, AL\u0026ndash;Omiri MK. AI in education: enhancing learning potential and addressing ethical considerations among academic staff\u0026mdash;a cross\u0026ndash;sectional study at the University of Jordan. Int J Educational Integr. 2025;21:16. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-025-00189-4\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s40979-025-00189-4\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNazaretsky T, Mejia\u0026ndash;Domenzain P, Swamy V, Frej J, K\u0026auml;ser T. The critical role of trust in adopting AI\u0026ndash;powered educational technology for learning: An instrument for measuring student perceptions. Computers Education: Artif Intell. 2025;8:100368.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eShen L, Qiu N, Wang Z. Psychological safety and trust as drivers of teachers\u0026rsquo; continued use of AI tools in classrooms. Sci Rep. 2025;15:31426. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-13789-4\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1038/s41598-025-13789-4\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eYang T, Cheon J, Cho MH, et al. Undergraduate students\u0026rsquo; perspectives of generative AI ethics. Int J Educational Technol High Educ. 2025;22:35. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-025-00533-1\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1186/s41239-025-00533-1\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"discover-education","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"diedu","sideBox":"Learn more about [Discover Education](https://www.springer.com/journal/44217)","snPcode":"44217","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/44217/3","title":"Discover Education","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Discover Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Ethical AI, Psychological Safety, Trust, Higher Education, Nigeria","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8901509/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8901509/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eThe growing trend of artificial intelligence (AI) use in post-secondary education offers both potential opportunities to support learning and the issues of ethics, trust, and psychological security. This study investigated the perceptions of undergraduate students towards the utilisation of ethical AI and its impact on their psychological safety and trust.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe quantitative descriptive survey research design was used and a structured questionnaire was used involving 300 undergraduate students in Ondo state. Data gathered was analysed using SPSS software version 28.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe outcome showed that the students tend to view AI as an ethically utilised tool, whose average of the ethical use items is 4.0. The psychological safety and trust in AI were also found to be high with mean scores being 3.95 in both constructs. The correlation analysis found that there were significant positive relationships between ethical AI use and psychological safety (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.62, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05) and trust (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.60, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05), and psychological safety was significantly related to trust (r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.58, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). The application of AI ethics was found to be a significant predictor of psychological safety and trust, which were explained by the multiple regression (R\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.45, F\u003csub\u003e(1, 298)\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;122.5, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe results suggest that AI that is used ethically can make students more engaged, better, and more confident about learning technologies. To ensure confidence and psychological safety, institutions are recommended to develop clear ethical guidelines, training modules, in addition to clear AI policies.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Students’ Perceptions of Ethical Use of Artificial Intelligence and Its Influence on Psychological Safety and Trust in Nigerian Tertiary Institutions in Ondo State","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2026-03-17 19:01:42","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8901509/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2026-04-21T17:11:40+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-04-16T19:22:01+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-04-13T06:45:46+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"124380665412815124294016869238918985715","date":"2026-04-13T05:19:16+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-04-10T14:09:39+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"98299389340510973670168564119154759694","date":"2026-04-07T07:40:36+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"40843629066637952544284197281283495962","date":"2026-04-06T19:47:55+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"179115776715309680763257223387686157162","date":"2026-03-19T08:16:52+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2026-03-12T09:44:16+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvited","content":"","date":"2026-02-25T10:17:29+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2026-02-24T18:17:57+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2026-02-24T13:07:06+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Discover Education","date":"2026-02-24T13:01:56+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"discover-education","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"diedu","sideBox":"Learn more about [Discover Education](https://www.springer.com/journal/44217)","snPcode":"44217","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/44217/3","title":"Discover Education","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Discover Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"c5710354-1501-4852-9f83-566e0cdbbab8","owner":[],"postedDate":"March 17th, 2026","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"under-review","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-05-11T12:59:31+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2026-03-17 19:01:42","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-8901509","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-8901509","identity":"rs-8901509","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}