Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ Education Sciencesarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
Education Sciences
Article . 2025 . Peer-reviewed
License: CC BY
Data sources: Crossref
addClaim

Gender Equity in Wikibook Collaborative Writing Assisted by Multimodal Generative AI Tools: The Case of Hong Kong Undergraduates

Authors: Lixun Wang; Boyuan Ren;

Gender Equity in Wikibook Collaborative Writing Assisted by Multimodal Generative AI Tools: The Case of Hong Kong Undergraduates

Abstract

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.

Related Organizations
  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    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
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
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).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
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.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average
gold