ChatGPT Goes to Academia. An exploratory research on uses and imaginaries of artificial intelligence by students and academics

Author/s Giovanni Ciofalo, Marco Pedroni, Francesca Setiffi
Publishing Year 2024 Issue 2023/66
Language Italian Pages 18 P. 42-59 File size 259 KB
DOI 10.3280/SC2023-066003
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

This article examines the integration and implications of ChatGPT within the academic environment, focusing on its uses and social representations. Drawing insights from both students and academics, the study introduces two conceptual frames to interpret the practices and perceptions surrounding this artificial intelligence (AI) tool. ChatGPT is seen as a valuable resource for academic tasks and research activities, yet it also highlights significant ethical challenges. These concerns include issues of intellectual integrity, authorship, and the potential for plagiarism. The reliability of sources and potential privacy breaches further complicate these ethical dilemmas. The essay concludes by proposing the concept of “AI Adaptive Balance”. This emphasizes the academic community’s ongoing need to strike a balance between harnessing the advantages of AI and addressing its inherent challenges, ensuring that AI augments rather than undermines the academic mission.

Keywords: ChatGPT; Artificial Intelligence; university; techno-cultural imaginaries; social practices; ethical implications.

  1. Barbrook R. (2007), Imaginary Futures: From Thinking Machines to the Global Village, Pluto Press, London.
  2. Bartoletti R. (2020), Le culture del neoliberismo. Discorsi, pratiche e soggettività, in «Sociologia della comunicazione», n. 59, pp. 5-18.
  3. Beer D. (2023), The Tensions of Algorithmic Thinking: Automation, Intelligence and the Politics of Knowing, Policy Press, Bristol.
  4. Boccia Artieri G., Marinelli A. (2018), Introduzione: piattaforme, algoritmi, formati. Come sta evolvendo l’informazione online, in «Problemi dell’informazione», 3, pp. 349-368.
  5. Briggs A., Burke P. (2009), A Social History of the Media: From Gutenberg to the Internet, Polity, London.
  6. Bucher T. (2018), If... Then: Algorithmic Power and Politics, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  7. Castells M. (1996), The Rise of the Network Society. The Information Age: Economy, Society and Culture Vol. I, Blackwell, Cambridge (MA) and Oxford.
  8. Ciofalo G., Pedroni M. (2022), Rileggere la media ecology: ambiente, campo, figurazione, mediatizzazione, in «Sociologia della comunicazione», 64, pp. 5-27.
  9. Cohen S. (1972), Folk Devil and Moral Panics: The Creation of Mods and Rockers, Contestable, London.
  10. Cole S. (2023), NYC Bans Students and Teachers from Using ChatGPT, in «Vice», 4 gennaio, -- (consultato il 10/12/2023).
  11. Collins H. (2018), Artifictional intelligence: against humanity’s surrender to computers, Polity Press, Cambridge.
  12. Couldry N. (2012), Media, Society, World: Social Theory and Digital Media Practice, Polity Press, Cambridge.
  13. Cristianini N. (2023), La scorciatoia. Come le macchine sono diventate intelligenti senza pensare in modo umano, il Mulino, Bologna.
  14. De Biase L. (2023), CheatGPT, in «Media Ecology», 30, 7 aprile, (consultato il 7/9/2023).
  15. Elliott A. (2019), The Culture of AI: Everyday Life and the Digital Revolution, Routledge, London/New York.
  16. Epifani S. (2020), Sostenibilità digitale, Digital Transformation Institute, Roma.
  17. Esposito E. (2022), Comunicazione artificiale: come gli algoritmi producono intelligenza sociale, Bocconi University Press, Milano.
  18. Farina M., Lavazza A. (2023), ChatGPT in society: emerging issues, in «Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence», 6, 1130913.
  19. Flichy P. (1999), The construction of new digital media, in «New Media & Society», 1(1), pp. 33-41.
  20. Harvey D. (2023), A Companion to Marx’s Grundrisse (Ch. 9: The Power of Fixed Capital), Verso Books, London.
  21. Hepp A. (2020), Deep Mediatization, Routledge, London.
  22. Jenkins H. (2006), Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide, New York University Press, New York/London.
  23. Lévy P. (1997), Collective Intelligence: Mankind’s Emerging World in Cyberspace, Perseus Books, Cambridge MA.
  24. Lievrouw L.A. (2002), New Media Design and Development: Diffusion of Innovations v Social Shaping of Technology, in Lievrouw L.A., Livingstone S. (eds), The Handbook of New Media: Social Shaping and Social Consequences of ICTs, Sage, London; trad. it. (2002), Progettazione e sviluppo dei new media: diffusione delle innovazioni e modellamento sociale della tecnologia, in Lievrouw L.A., Livingstone S. (a cura di), Capire i new media, Hoepli, Milano, pp. 261-292.
  25. Marvin C. (1990), When Old Technologies Were New: Thinking About Electric Communication in the Late Nineteenth Century, Oxford University Press, Oxford; trad. it. (1994), Quando le vecchie tecnologie erano nuove. Elettricità e comunicazione a fine Ottocento, UTET, Torino.
  26. Mascheroni G., Siibak A. (2021), Datafied Childhoods: Data Practices and Imaginaries in Children’s Lives, Peter Lang, Bern/New York.
  27. Maturo A. (2022), Data Circulation in Health Landscapes: Risk Scores and Behavior-Based Health Insurance: Promises and Perils, in «TECNOSCIENZA», 13, pp. 106-111.
  28. Morin E. (1977), La méthode. Tome I: La nature de la nature, Seuil, Paris.
  29. Natale S. (2021), Deceitful Media. Artificial Intelligence and Social Life after the Turing Test, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  30. Pasquale F. (2015), The Black Box Society, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
  31. Postman N. (1970), The reformed English curriculum, in Eurich A.C. (ed.), High school 1980: The shape of the future in American secondary education, Pitman, New York, pp. 160-168.
  32. Romele A. (2023), Digital Habitus: A Critique of the Imaginaries of Artificial Intelligence, Taylor&Francis, London.
  33. Sacasas L.M. (2023a), Apocalyptic AI, in «The Convivial Society», 4(5), 7 aprile,
  34. Sacasas L.M. (2023b), Render Unto the Machine, in «The Convivial Society», 4(12), 8 luglio,
  35. Sartori L., Bocca G. (2022), Minding the gap(s): public perceptions of AI and socio-technical imaginaries, in «AI & Society», 37, pp. 1-16.
  36. Silverstone R., Morley D., Dahlberg A., Livingstone S. (1989), Families, Technologies and Consumption: The Household and Information and Communication Technologies, Discussion Paper, Centre for Research into Innovation, Culture and Technology, Brunel University.
  37. Stahl B.C., Eke D. (2024), The Ethics of ChatGPT:Exploring the Ethical Issues of an Emerging Technology, in «International Journal of Information Management», 74, 102700.
  38. Stark D. (2009), The Sense of Dissonance: Accounts of Worth in Economic Life, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
  39. Strauss A., Corbin J.M. (1990), Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques, Sage, London.
  40. Weatherby C. (2023), ChatGPT Is an Ideology Machine, in «Jacobin», 17 aprile,

Giovanni Ciofalo, Marco Pedroni, Francesca Setiffi, ChatGPT Goes to Academia. Una ricerca esplorativa su usi e immaginari dell’intelligenza artificiale da parte di studenti e accademici in "SOCIOLOGIA DELLA COMUNICAZIONE " 66/2023, pp 42-59, DOI: 10.3280/SC2023-066003