Volume 4, Issue 4 (December 2025)
IJER 2025, 4(4): 1-22 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Mohseni F, Nouri Alamuti M. (2025). Students’ Lived Experiences of Artificial Intelligence: From Intelligent Use to Dependence on ChatGPT for Completing Assignments. IJER. 4(4), 1-22. doi:10.22034/ijer.4.4.19
URL: http://ijer.hormozgan.ac.ir/article-1-542-en.html
URL: http://ijer.hormozgan.ac.ir/article-1-542-en.html
1- MA in School Counseling, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran , faezehmohseni@gmail.com
2- PhD Student in Educational Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
2- PhD Student in Educational Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
Abstract: (888 Views)
Objective: This study aimed to explore the lived experiences of high school students in Qazvin regarding their interaction with ChatGPT, with particular emphasis on the continuum from intelligent use to dependency.
Method: Adopting a qualitative approach, this research was conducted using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) based on the framework proposed by Smith, Flowers, and Larkin (2022). Participants were purposively selected from upper secondary school students in Qazvin who had at least six months of experience using ChatGPT. Data were collected through in-depth semi-structured interviews with 18 students (9 girls and 9 boys) from different areas of the city. The interviews were analyzed following the six-step IPA procedure.
Findings: Data analysis resulted in the identification of six superordinate themes and 24 subordinate themes: (1) initial encounter and discovery of capabilities, (2) intelligent use and learning enhancement, (3) transition to dependency and cognitive weakening, (4) lived contradictions and meaning crisis, (5) contextual and moderating factors, and (6) coping and adaptation strategies. The highest frequency of references was related to “lived contradictions and meaning crisis,” followed by “intelligent use” and “transition to dependency.” The findings revealed that students’ experiences with ChatGPT were complex and paradoxical. While students benefited from its capabilities to support learning, they also faced cognitive challenges such as reduced independent thinking, metacognitive laziness, and an illusion of competence.
Conclusion: Prohibitive approaches to AI in education are ineffective; instead, a balanced strategy is needed to maximize learning benefits, minimize negative effects, and guide students toward intelligent, responsible use.
Method: Adopting a qualitative approach, this research was conducted using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) based on the framework proposed by Smith, Flowers, and Larkin (2022). Participants were purposively selected from upper secondary school students in Qazvin who had at least six months of experience using ChatGPT. Data were collected through in-depth semi-structured interviews with 18 students (9 girls and 9 boys) from different areas of the city. The interviews were analyzed following the six-step IPA procedure.
Findings: Data analysis resulted in the identification of six superordinate themes and 24 subordinate themes: (1) initial encounter and discovery of capabilities, (2) intelligent use and learning enhancement, (3) transition to dependency and cognitive weakening, (4) lived contradictions and meaning crisis, (5) contextual and moderating factors, and (6) coping and adaptation strategies. The highest frequency of references was related to “lived contradictions and meaning crisis,” followed by “intelligent use” and “transition to dependency.” The findings revealed that students’ experiences with ChatGPT were complex and paradoxical. While students benefited from its capabilities to support learning, they also faced cognitive challenges such as reduced independent thinking, metacognitive laziness, and an illusion of competence.
Conclusion: Prohibitive approaches to AI in education are ineffective; instead, a balanced strategy is needed to maximize learning benefits, minimize negative effects, and guide students toward intelligent, responsible use.
Keywords: Lived Experience, ChatGPT, Intelligent Use, Cognitive Dependency, Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis, High School Students
Type of Study: Original |
Subject:
Educational Studies
Received: 2025/06/12 | Accepted: 2025/09/14 | Published: 2025/12/1
Received: 2025/06/12 | Accepted: 2025/09/14 | Published: 2025/12/1
References
1. Abedi Jafari, H., & Taslimi, M. S. (2023). Qualitative content analysis and its application in humanities research. Journal of Methodology of Human Sciences, 28(111), 89-120.
2. Abubakar, S., Jeilani, A., & Yusuf, M. (2025). The role of over-reliance on AI in the negative consequences of student learning: The moderating effects of ethical concerns and institutional policies. Cogent Education, *12*(1), 2591503. [DOI:10.1080/2331186X.2025.2591503]
3. Alidousti Shahraki, F., Heydari Kharaji, S., Alidousti, S., & Niazi, G. (2025). Elementary teachers' lived experiences of using artificial intelligence in teaching and learner assessment. In Proceedings of the Fourth National Conference on New Studies and Research in Educational Sciences and Psychology in Iran (pp. 45-67). University of Isfahan.
4. Amani, H., Motallebnejad, A., Chopani, F., & Zare' Gachi, M. (2024). A systematic analytical review of the effects of ChatGPT application in education. Journal of Technology and Education. Advance online publication.
5. Chan, C. K. Y. (2025). From Chat to Cheat: The Disruptive Effects of ChatGPT and Academic Integrity in Hong Kong Higher Education. SN Computer Science, *6*(993). [DOI:10.1007/s42979-025-04532-x]
6. College Board. (2025). AI in High School: Usage and Perceptions Among Students. College Board.
7. Davis-Bibb, C. (2025). The Impact of AI on Learning: A Qualitative Study of Student Perceptions at the Community College Level. Practitioner to Practitioner, *14*(2), 17-32.
8. Delavar, A. (2023). Applied probability and statistics in psychology and educational sciences. Roshd Publications.
9. Esmaili, R., & Karimi, N. (2024). Artificial intelligence in education: Opportunities and threats facing Iran's educational system. Journal of Educational Innovations, 22(3), 89-112.
10. Fröhlich, T. (2025, October 17). Are we teaching students AI competence or dependence? LSE Impact Blog.
11. George-Reyes, C. E., Avello-Martínez, R., & Buenestado-Fernández, M. (2025). Perceptions of ChatGPT and the Complexity of Its Impact among Higher Education Students: Evidence across Ten Countries of Latin America and Europe. Educational Process: International Journal, *15*, e2025171. [DOI:10.22521/edupij.2025.15.171]
12. Gil-Vera, V. D., & Quintero López, C. Q. (2025). Exploring students'lived experiences with artificial intelligence in higher education: A case study of ChatGPT. Perspectives in Education, *43*(4), 186-206. [DOI:10.38140/pie.v43i4.8083]
13. Greene, A. (2025, July 7). The only solution I can see is a return to in-person exams. Times Higher Education.
14. Heydarpour, M., & Khadivi, A. (2025). Challenges of using artificial intelligence in Iranian higher education: A qualitative study. Journal of Research and Planning in Higher Education, 31(2), 45-68.
15. Karimi, Y., & Tahvildari, H. (2025). The impact of artificial intelligence technology on teaching and learning Persian among students. In Proceedings of the First National Conference on New Approaches in Education (pp. 1-12). Ferdowsi University of Mashhad.
16. Kavanagh, F. (2025). Using ChatGPT to assist in student feedback for proficiency level writing tasks [Master's thesis, Universitat Oberta de Catalunya]. O2 Repository.
17. Khosravi, M., & Ahmadi, F. (2024). Dependence on artificial intelligence chatbots and its cognitive consequences among students. Journal of Educational Sciences and Psychology, 30(2), 123-145.
18. Koloda, D., & Selevičienė, E. (2025). University students' acceptance of ChatGPT as a writing assistance tool in ESL and ESP studies. Analele Universității "Ovidius" Constanța. Seria Filologie, *36*(1), 550-565.
19. Learning in hybrid times: Comparing student experiences in traditional and GenAI-supported instruction. (2025). Computers and Education Open, *9*, 100313. [DOI:10.1016/j.caeo.2025.100313]
20. Lee, H., Kim, J., & Park, S. (2025). An Insight on ChatGPT and its Effects on Academic Integrity. Journal of Generative AI, *3*, 23-35.
21. Li, J., Zhang, Y., & Wang, L. (2025). Effect of GenAI Dependency on University Students'Academic Achievement: The Mediating Role of Self-Efficacy and Moderating Role of Perceived Teacher Caring. Behavioral Sciences, *15*(10), 1348. [DOI:10.3390/bs15101348]
22. Mohammadi, M. (2023). The impact of ChatGPT and artificial intelligence on students' teaching and learning. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Applied Research in Electrical Engineering, Computer, and Mechanical Engineering (pp. 1-10). Sharif University of Technology.
23. Mongibello, A., & De Brasi, V. (2025). Empathy and Politeness in AI Chatbot-Mediated Language Learning: A Case Study with Italian University Students. In EDULEARN25 Proceedings. IATED.
24. Mousavi, Z. S., Seifi, M., Barzegar Maher, F., Bazelian, N., & Gholizadeh, Z. (2025). The role of artificial intelligence in transforming students' teaching and learning methods. In Proceedings of the First National Conference on New Approaches in Education (pp. 1-14). Ferdowsi University of Mashhad.
25. O'Brien, C. (2025, September 9). 'It's a monster': How generative AI is forcing university professors to rethink learning. The Irish Times.
26. Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods: Integrating Theory and Practice (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
27. Rezaei, A. (2024). Applications of machine learning in personalizing educational content. Quarterly Journal of Information and Communication Technology in Educational Sciences, 14(4), 78-96.
28. Richter, A., & Sudeeptha, I. (2025, August 26). From fear to fluency: what our students learned when they used AI across an entire course. Te Herenga Waka-Victoria University of Wellington. [DOI:10.64628/AA.4qjthha7r]
29. Safaee Moghaddam, M., & Kian Erthi, F. (2024). Ethical challenges of using artificial intelligence in education: A systematic review. Journal of Ethics in Science and Technology, 19(2), 23-41.
30. Salehnezhad Behrastaghi, S., Mohammadi, M., & Karimi, F. (2024). The role of artificial intelligence in managing and improving students' learning processes. In Proceedings of the First National Conference on Emerging Technologies in Education (pp. 234-256). University of Tehran.
31. Sarmad, Z., Bazargan, A., & Hejazi, E. (2022). Research methods in behavioral sciences (12th ed.). Agah Publications.
32. Shanahan, M. (2025, July 7). Higher education is clearly at an inflection point. Times Higher Education.
33. Smith, J. A., Flowers, P., & Larkin, M. (2022). Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis: Theory, Method and Research (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.
34. Tjahyanto, M. C. N. (2025). Deep vs surface learning: A qualitative inquiry into first-year student engagement with AI in higher education. In Proceedings of the Language and Language Teaching Conference 2025. Universitas Sanata Dharma.
35. Van Manen, M. (2023). Phenomenology of Practice: Meaning-Giving Methods in Phenomenological Research and Writing (2nd ed.). Routledge. [DOI:10.4324/9781003228073]
36. Wolkovich, E. M. (2025, August 26). PhD students are let down by sector's silence on ChatGPT misuse. Times Higher Education.
37. Zarei, H., & Ghahramani Pirsalami, F. (2025). Educational risks arising from students' dependence on artificial intelligence chatbots: A phenomenological study. Journal of Studies in Teaching and Learning, 17(1), 156-182.
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons - Attribution 4.0 International. |
