
The integration of generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools has become a game-changer in educational practices, particularly in collaborative academic writing. This study explores gender-based disparities in perceptions, emotions, and self-efficacy regarding students’ utilization of AI tools during a collaborative Wikibook writing project. Grounded in the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), the research investigates how male and female undergraduates in Hong Kong perceive the usefulness and ease of use of ChatGPT 3.5 and Padlet AI image generation function, as well as their emotions and self-efficacy when engaging with these tools. Using a 5-point Likert scale questionnaire and an independent sample t-test, the study compares gender perspectives with a sample size of 140 undergraduates. The results reveal that (1) both genders found the AI tools beneficial for language polishing and essay reconstruction in academic writing; (2) both genders experienced a range of emotions, including enjoyment, satisfaction, frustration, anxiety and tension during the writing task; (3) both male and female students demonstrated AI literacy to critically evaluate AI-generated information. These findings underscore the importance of fostering an equitable and engaging approach to AI-supported learning environments for both genders. The study highlights the benefits of AI tools in enhancing learning outcomes and emphasizes the role of students’ AI literacy in ensuring the responsible and effective use of these tools as learning partners.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
