Abstract
This study investigates the factors influencing University of Johannesburg students’ perceptions of using artificial intelligence (AI) when engaging in academic work within the context of South African higher education. Drawing on Pierre Bourdieu’s sociological framework of habitus, capital, and field, the research conceptualises students as active agents navigating the competitive educational ‘field’, strategically leveraging AI tools as a form of digital and cultural capital. The rapid integration of AI tools has transformed academic processes, offering opportunities for personalised learning while posing challenges to academic integrity, including emerging forms of ‘AI-giarism’. This research addresses the gap in context-specific studies by exploring how socio-economic, institutional, and individual factors shape students’ views on AI use in academic work, and its potential for academic misconduct.
Utilising a quantitative approach, data were collected through a structured questionnaire administered via a census, yielding 178 responses from University of Johannesburg students. The study developed and validated ten reliable scales to measure perceptions across key constructs, including AI skills, ethical awareness, academic pressure, equity improvement, and integrity concerns. Findings from multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) and regression analyses revealed a critical ethical disconnect – while students reported high ethical awareness, ethical awareness and integrity concerns had minimal predictive impact on actual AI use. Conversely, AI skills, academic pressure, and perceptions of equity improvement emerged as strong positive predictors of both perceived AI benefits and usage levels. These results indicate that students’ AI engagement is driven more by pragmatic necessity, seeking survival and reducing academic disparities, than by ethical deliberation.
Limited but significant demographic influences were observed: male students reported a higher susceptibility to peer influence and academic pressure; undergraduate students showed a greater use of AI for academic preparation and higher academic pressure; non-Humanities students perceived higher benefits from AI and a greater need for institutional support; and financially secure students demonstrated stronger ethical awareness compared to their economically challenged peers.