Google 还是 ChatGPT:谁是大学生的好帮手

IF 4.8 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Education and Information Technologies Pub Date : 2024-09-10 DOI:10.1007/s10639-024-13002-5
Mengmeng Zhang, Xiantong Yang
{"title":"Google 还是 ChatGPT:谁是大学生的好帮手","authors":"Mengmeng Zhang, Xiantong Yang","doi":"10.1007/s10639-024-13002-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Using information technology tools for academic help-seeking among college students has become a popular trend. In the evolutionary process between Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) and traditional search engines, when students face academic challenges, do they tend to prefer ChatGPT, or are they more inclined to utilize Google? And what are the key factors influencing learners’ preference to use ChatGPT for academic help-seeking? These relevant questions merit attention. The study employed a mixed-method research design to investigate university students’ online academic help-seeking preferences. The results indicated that students tend to prefer using ChatGPT to seek academic assistance, reflecting the potential popularity of GenAI in the educational field. Additionally, in comparing seven machine learning algorithms, the Random Forest and LightGBM algorithms exhibited superior performance. These two algorithms were employed to evaluate the predictive capability of 18 potential factors. It was found that ChatGPT fluency, ChatGPT distortions, and age were the core factors influencing how university students seek academic help. Overall, this study underscores that educators should prioritize the cultivation of students’ critical thinking skills, while technical personnel should enhance the fluency and reliability of ChatGPT and Google searches, and explore the integration of chat and search functions to achieve optimal balance.</p>","PeriodicalId":51494,"journal":{"name":"Education and Information Technologies","volume":"58 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Google or ChatGPT: Who is the better helper for university students\",\"authors\":\"Mengmeng Zhang, Xiantong Yang\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10639-024-13002-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Using information technology tools for academic help-seeking among college students has become a popular trend. In the evolutionary process between Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) and traditional search engines, when students face academic challenges, do they tend to prefer ChatGPT, or are they more inclined to utilize Google? And what are the key factors influencing learners’ preference to use ChatGPT for academic help-seeking? These relevant questions merit attention. The study employed a mixed-method research design to investigate university students’ online academic help-seeking preferences. The results indicated that students tend to prefer using ChatGPT to seek academic assistance, reflecting the potential popularity of GenAI in the educational field. Additionally, in comparing seven machine learning algorithms, the Random Forest and LightGBM algorithms exhibited superior performance. These two algorithms were employed to evaluate the predictive capability of 18 potential factors. It was found that ChatGPT fluency, ChatGPT distortions, and age were the core factors influencing how university students seek academic help. Overall, this study underscores that educators should prioritize the cultivation of students’ critical thinking skills, while technical personnel should enhance the fluency and reliability of ChatGPT and Google searches, and explore the integration of chat and search functions to achieve optimal balance.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51494,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Education and Information Technologies\",\"volume\":\"58 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Education and Information Technologies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-13002-5\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Education and Information Technologies","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-13002-5","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

大学生利用信息技术工具寻求学术帮助已成为一种流行趋势。在生成式人工智能(GenAI)与传统搜索引擎的进化过程中,当学生面临学业挑战时,他们是倾向于使用ChatGPT,还是更倾向于使用谷歌?影响学习者使用 ChatGPT 寻求学术帮助的关键因素是什么?这些相关问题值得关注。本研究采用混合方法研究设计,调查了大学生的在线学术求助偏好。结果表明,学生倾向于使用 ChatGPT 寻求学术帮助,这反映了 GenAI 在教育领域的潜在受欢迎程度。此外,在对七种机器学习算法的比较中,随机森林算法和LightGBM算法表现优异。这两种算法被用来评估 18 个潜在因素的预测能力。结果发现,ChatGPT 流畅度、ChatGPT 失真和年龄是影响大学生如何寻求学术帮助的核心因素。总之,本研究强调教育工作者应优先培养学生的批判性思维能力,而技术人员则应提高 ChatGPT 和谷歌搜索的流畅性和可靠性,并探索聊天和搜索功能的整合,以实现最佳平衡。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Google or ChatGPT: Who is the better helper for university students

Using information technology tools for academic help-seeking among college students has become a popular trend. In the evolutionary process between Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) and traditional search engines, when students face academic challenges, do they tend to prefer ChatGPT, or are they more inclined to utilize Google? And what are the key factors influencing learners’ preference to use ChatGPT for academic help-seeking? These relevant questions merit attention. The study employed a mixed-method research design to investigate university students’ online academic help-seeking preferences. The results indicated that students tend to prefer using ChatGPT to seek academic assistance, reflecting the potential popularity of GenAI in the educational field. Additionally, in comparing seven machine learning algorithms, the Random Forest and LightGBM algorithms exhibited superior performance. These two algorithms were employed to evaluate the predictive capability of 18 potential factors. It was found that ChatGPT fluency, ChatGPT distortions, and age were the core factors influencing how university students seek academic help. Overall, this study underscores that educators should prioritize the cultivation of students’ critical thinking skills, while technical personnel should enhance the fluency and reliability of ChatGPT and Google searches, and explore the integration of chat and search functions to achieve optimal balance.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Education and Information Technologies
Education and Information Technologies EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
10.00
自引率
12.70%
发文量
610
期刊介绍: The Journal of Education and Information Technologies (EAIT) is a platform for the range of debates and issues in the field of Computing Education as well as the many uses of information and communication technology (ICT) across many educational subjects and sectors. It probes the use of computing to improve education and learning in a variety of settings, platforms and environments. The journal aims to provide perspectives at all levels, from the micro level of specific pedagogical approaches in Computing Education and applications or instances of use in classrooms, to macro concerns of national policies and major projects; from pre-school classes to adults in tertiary institutions; from teachers and administrators to researchers and designers; from institutions to online and lifelong learning. The journal is embedded in the research and practice of professionals within the contemporary global context and its breadth and scope encourage debate on fundamental issues at all levels and from different research paradigms and learning theories. The journal does not proselytize on behalf of the technologies (whether they be mobile, desktop, interactive, virtual, games-based or learning management systems) but rather provokes debate on all the complex relationships within and between computing and education, whether they are in informal or formal settings. It probes state of the art technologies in Computing Education and it also considers the design and evaluation of digital educational artefacts.  The journal aims to maintain and expand its international standing by careful selection on merit of the papers submitted, thus providing a credible ongoing forum for debate and scholarly discourse. Special Issues are occasionally published to cover particular issues in depth. EAIT invites readers to submit papers that draw inferences, probe theory and create new knowledge that informs practice, policy and scholarship. Readers are also invited to comment and reflect upon the argument and opinions published. EAIT is the official journal of the Technical Committee on Education of the International Federation for Information Processing (IFIP) in partnership with UNESCO.
期刊最新文献
Development of a virtual reality creative enhancement system utilizing haptic vibration feedback via electroencephalography Is ChatGPT like a nine-year-old child in theory of mind? Evidence from Chinese writing Analysing factors influencing undergraduates’ adoption of intelligent physical education systems using an expanded TAM The importance of aligning instructor age with learning content in designing instructional videos for older adults Evaluating classroom response systems in engineering education: Which metrics better reflect student performance?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1