ChatGPT in Academic Writing: Factors Shaping  Vietnamese English Majors’ Ethical Perceptions -   A Sequential Explanatory Mixed-Methods Study

Vo Thi Huynh Dieu

Vo Thi Huynh Dieu	dieum1624012@gstudent.ctu.edu.vn	School of Foreign Languages, Can Tho University, Can Tho (Vietnam)

Summary:

The rapid integration of ChatGPT into education has raised questions about students’ perceptions of its ethical use, particularly in higher education. This study-grounded in the Theory of Planned Behaviour, Technology Acceptance Model and Cultural-Historical Activity Theory (CHAT) investigated how English majors at a university in the Mekong Delta, Vietnam perceive the ethical use of ChatGPT in academic writing and the factors shaping these perceptions. A sequential explanatory mixed-methods design was employed, including a survey of 95 final-year English majors, followed by in-depth semi structured interviews with three purposively selected participants. Three interviews were conducted to provide explanatory insights into the quantitative patterns. The results indicated that students held favourable perceptions of ethical ChatGPT use in academic writing. Quantitative results indicated that attitudes, perceived behavioural control and perceived risks significantly shaped students’ ethical perceptions, while qualitative interviews were used to explain how these factors operated in students’ actual learning practices. The findings were interpreted using constructs drawn from TPB, TAM and CHAT particularly attitudes, perceived behavioural control and perceived usefulness. They emphasized the importance of verifying outputs but also highlighted the absence of institutional training. The study contributes to ongoing discussions and helpful implications of ChatGPT in academic writing by highlighting the need for structured guidance to promote ethical and effective use of ChatGPT into university learning.

View file

Keywords:

ChatGPT

ethical use

perceptions

factors

academic writing.

Refers:

[1] Abbas, M., Jam, F. A., & Khan, T. I. (2024). Is it harmful or helpful? Examining the causes and consequences of generative AI usage among university students. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/ s41239-024-00444-7

[2] Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behaviour. Organizational behaviour and human decision processes, 50(2), 179-211.

[3] Ateriya, N., Sonwani, N. S., Thakur, K. S., Kumar, A., & Verma, S. K. (2025). Exploring the ethical landscape of AI in academic writing. Egyptian Journal of Forensic Sciences, 15(1), 1-9. https:// doi.org/10.1186/s41935-025-00453-1

[4] Bailey, S. (2015). The essentials of academic writing for international students (4th ed.) Routledge.

[5] Barrot, J. S. (2023). Using ChatGPT for second language writing: Pitfalls and potentials. Assessing Writing, 57, 100745. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. asw.2023.100745

[6] Chan, C. K. Y., & Hu, W. (2023). Students’ voices on generative AI: perceptions, benefits, and challenges in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-004118

[7] Chauhan, P. (2022). Fundamentals of academic writing: A literature review. Journal of NELTA, 27(1-2), 161-180. https://doi.org/10.3126/nelta.v27i1 2.53201

[8] Cheng, A., Calhoun, A., & Reedy, G. (2025). Artificial intelligence-assisted academic writing: recommendations for ethical use. Advances in Simulation, 10(1), 22. https://doi.org/10.1186/ s41077-025-00350-6

[9] Chetwynd, E. (2024). Ethical use of artificial intelligence for scientific writing: current trends. Journal of Human Lactation, 40(2), 211-215. https://doi. org/10.1177/08903 344241235160

[10] Cotton, D. R., Cotton, P. A., & Shipway, J. R. (2024). Chatting and cheating: Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT. Innovations in education and teaching international, 61(2), 228-239. https:// doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2190148

[11] Dergaa, I., Chamari, K., Zmijewski, P., & Saad, H. B. (2023). From human writing to artificial intelligence generated text: examining the prospects and potential threats of ChatGPT in academic writing. Biology of sport, 40(2), 615-622. https://doi. org/10.5114/biolsport.2023.125623

[12] Duong, L. T. T., Ha, N. T., Sang, H. M., & Hien, T. T. (2025). Các yếu tố tác động đến ý định sử dụng ChatGPT trong giáo dục: Tiếp cận theo lý thuyết tích hợp TAM- TPB. VNU JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS, 5(3), 70-70. https://doi.org/10.57110/vnu-jeb.v5i3.447

[13] Dwivedi, Y. K., Kshetri, N., Hughes, L., Slade, E. L., Jeyaraj, A., Kar, A. K., Baabdullah, A. M., Koohang, A., Raghavan, V., Ahuja, M., Albanna, H., Albashrawi, M. A., Al-Busaidi, A. S., Balakrishnan, J., Barlette, Y., Basu, S., Bose, I., Brooks, L., Buhalis, D., … Wright, R. (2023). So, what if ChatGPT wrote it? Multidisciplinary perspectives on opportunities, challenges and implications of generative conversational AI for research, practice and policy. International Journal of Information Management, 71, 102642. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102642

[14] Engestrom, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Cambridge University Press.

[15] Fajt, B., & Schiller, E. (2025). ChatGPT in academia: University students’ attitudes towards the use of ChatGPT and plagiarism. Journal of Academic Ethics, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-025 09603-5

[16] Ho, P. X. P. (2024). Using ChatGPT in English language learning: A study on IT students’ attitudes, habits, and perceptions. International Journal of TESOL & Education, 4(1), 55-68. https://doi.org/10.54855/ ijte.24414

[17] Huallpa, J. J. (2023). Exploring the ethical considerations of using Chat GPT in university education. Periodicals of Engineering and Natural Sciences, 11(4), 105-115. https://doi.org/10.21533/pen.v11. i4.200

[18] Ivankova, N. V., Creswell, J. W., & Stick, S. L. (2006). Using mixed-methods sequential explanatory design: From theory to practice. Field Methods, 18(1), 3-20, https://doi. org/10.1177/1525822X05282260

[19] Kasneci, E., Sessler, K., Betsch, T., & Kasneci, G. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103, 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274

[20] Kuutti, K. (1996). Activity Theory as a Potential Framework for. Context and consciousness: Activity theory and human-computer interaction (1996), 17.

[21] Lindsay, P. H., & Norman, D. A. (2013). Human information processing: An introduction to psychology. Academic press.

[22] Lo, C. K. (2023). What is the impact of ChatGPT on education? A rapid review of the literature. Education sciences, 13(4), 410. https://doi. org/10.3390/educsci13040410

[23] Mohammadkarimi, E. (2023). Teachers’ reflections on academic dishonesty in EFL students’ writings in the era of artificial intelligence. Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching, 6(2). https://doi. org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.2.10

[24] Mondal, H., & Mondal, S. (2023). ChatGPT in academic writing: Maximizing its benefits and minimizing the risks. Indian Journal of Ophthalmology, 71(12), 3600-3606. https://doi.org/10.4103/IJO. IJO_718_23

[25] Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.

[26] Odhiambo, M. W. (2015). Perceived psychological contract and job satisfaction of secondary school teachers in Gem District, Kenya. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 5(5), 127-143. http://dx.doi. org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v5-i5/1598

[27] Ong, J. C. L., Chang, S. Y. H., William, W., Butte, A. J., Shah, N. H., Chew, L. S. T., ... & Ting, D. S. W. (2024). Ethical and regulatory challenges of large language models in medicine. The Lancet Digital Health, 6(6), e428-e432. https://doi.org/10.1016/ S2589-7500(24)00061-X

[28] Pasaribu, A. N., Manik, S., Pasaribu, T. K., & Saragih, Y. I. (2025). EFL students’ perception of ethical concerns on using ChatGPT in academic writing. English Review: Journal of English Education, 13(1), 39-46.

[29] Pham, H. T. U., & Mai, T. T. (2024). Exploring the Acceptance of ChatGPT Usage Among Vietnamese English Major Students in English Language Learning: A Case Study. In Nurturing open minds, shaping inclusive futures in language education (pp. 171-182).

[30] Ravšelj, D., Keržič, D., Tomaževič, N., Umek, L., Brezovar, N., Iahad, N. A., Abdulla, A. A., Akopyan, A., Segura, M. W. A., AlHumaid, J., Allam, M. F., Alló, M., Andoh, R. P. K., Andronic, O., Arthur, Y. D., Aydın, F., Badran, A., Balbontín- Alvarado, R., Saad, H. B., . . . Nisheva, M. M. (2025). Higher education students’ perceptions of ChatGPT: A global study of early reactions. PLoS ONE, 20(2), e0315011. https://doi.org/10.1371/ journal.pone.0315011

[31] Shenton, A. K. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects. Education for information, 22(2), 63-75. https:// doi.org/10.3233/EFI-2004-22201

[32] Singh, S. P., Khan, I. A., & Mitra, S. K. (2024). Scope and limitations of ChatGPT in research and academic writing. Digital Journal of Clinical Medicine, 6(1), 5. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0460-0754

[33] Swidan, A., Lee, S. Y., & Romdhane, S. B. (2025). College students’ use and perceptions of AI tools in the UAE: motivations, ethical concerns and institutional guidelines. Education Sciences, 15(4), 461. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15040461

[34] Tlili, A., Shehata, B., Adarkwah, M. A., Bozkurt, A., Hickey, D. T., Huang, R., & Agyemang, B. (2023). What if the devil is my guardian angel: ChatGPT as a case study of using chatbots in education. Smart learning environments, 10(1), 15. https://doi. org/10.1186/s40561-023-00237-x

[35] Vo, P. T. N. (2025). Tesol graduates’ views on the impacts and ethical aspects of ChatGPT in academic writing. Dong Thap University Journal of Science, 14(3), 13-22. https://doi.org/10.52714/dthu.14.3.2025.1506

[36] Yen, P. H., Thu, H. T. A., Thi, N. A., Tra, N. H., Thao, L. T., & Thuy, P. T. (2024). University Teachers’ Perceptions on the Integration of ChatGPT in Language Education Assessment: Challenges, Benefits, and Ethical Considerations. In 20th International Conference of the Asia Association of Computer-Assisted Language Learning (AsiaCALL 2023) (pp. 7-21). Atlantis Press.

[37] Yu, H. (2023). Reflection on whether Chat GPT should be banned by academia from the perspective of education and teaching. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1181712. https://doi.org/10.3389/ fpsyg.2023.1181712

[38] Zawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M., & Gouverneur, F. (2019). Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education – where are the educators? International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/ s41239-019-0171-0

Journal:

Volume. 22 - issue 2 / 2026

VIETNAM JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL SCIENCES

ChatGPT in Academic Writing: Factors Shaping Vietnamese English Majors’ Ethical Perceptions - A Sequential Explanatory Mixed-Methods Study