Measuring AI-giarism: A Validation Study and Dimensional Exploration of the Scale in Turkish

Şahin Gökçearslan; Filiz Mumcu; Thomas Chiu; Zsolt Lavicza

doi:10.53850/joltida.1762390

Measuring AI-giarism: A Validation Study and Dimensional Exploration of the Scale in Turkish

Abstract

The study's scope includes adapting and validating the AI-giarism scale, developed by Chan (2024), into Turkish and conducting analyses to assess its validity and reliability. The study examined the perceptions of 426 university students towards AI-assisted academic misconduct. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) revealed a three-factor structure for the scale: 'Plagiaristic AI use', 'AI-augmented writing', and ‘No AI reliance', accounting for 59.7% of the total variance. Confirmatory analyses revealed that the three-factor structure provided a good fit to the data, with the scale items loading significantly onto their respective factors. The model fit indices were adequate. Reliability analyses showed that Cronbach's alpha values ranged between .63 and .91, with discrimination between factors achieved. Additionally, no significant difference in AI-giarism level was obtained according to gender. This instrument provides a valid and reliable means of measuring university students' perceptions towards the ethical use of AI in academia. The scale is a valid and reliable assessment tool, particularly for distinguishing students' attitudes towards the unethical, ethical and limited use of AI.

Keywords

Ethical Statement

Ethics and Consent: Ethical approval for this study was obtained from A2025CAL (Hacettepe University, approval date: 6/08/2025 and permission of ethics document's number).

Thanks

The authors would like to thank all participants and collaborators who contributed to this study.

References

Akkaş, Ö. M., Tosun, C., & Gökçearslan, Ş. (2024). Artificial intelligence (AI) and cheating: the concept of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI). In Transforming Education With Generative AI: Prompt Engineering and Synthetic Content Creation (pp. 182-199). IGI Global Scientific Publishing.
Chan, C. (2024b). Holistic competencies and AI in education: A synergistic pathway. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 40(5), 1-12.
Chan, C. K. Y. (2023). Is AI changing the rules of academic misconduct? An in-depth look at students' perceptions of'AI-giarism'. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.03358.
Chan, C. K. Y. (2024a). Students’ perceptions of ‘AI-giarism’: investigating changes in understandings of academic misconduct. Education and Information Technologies, 1-22.
Campo, L., Delgado, N., Etxabe-Urbieta, J. M., Kanso, H., & Gueye, M. L. (2025). Relationship Between the Use of ChatGPT and Plagiarism in Higher Education: The Influence of Gender, Age and Previous Academic Results. Innovative Higher Education, 1-20.
Fatani, B. (2023). ChatGPT for future medical and dental research. Cureus, 15(4), 37285. 10.7759/cureus.37285. Gökçearslan, S., Tosun, C., & Erdemir, Z. G. (2024). Benefits, challenges, and methods of artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots in education: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Technology in Education, 7(1), 19-39.
Graham A. (2023). ChatGPT and other AI tools put students at risk of plagiarism allegations, MDU warns. BMJ, 381, 1133.10.1136/bmj.p1133
Gupta, T., & Pruthi, D. (2025). All that glitters is not novel: Plagiarism in ai generated research. arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.16487

Haring, K., Nye, K., Darby, R., Phillips, E., de Visser, E., & Tossell, C. (2019, November). I’m not playing anymore! a study comparing perceptions of robot and human cheating behavior. In International conference on social robotics (pp. 410-419). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Hassanipour, S., Nayak, S., Bozorgi, A., Keivanlou, M. H., Dave, T., Alotaibi, A., ... & Amini-Salehi, E. (2024). The ability of ChatGPT in paraphrasing texts and reducing plagiarism: A descriptive analysis. JMIR Medical Education, 10(1), e53308
Ibrahim, K. (2023). Using AI-based detectors to control AI-assisted plagiarism in ESL writing:“The Terminator Versus the Machines”.Language Testing in Asia, 13(1), 46. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-023-00260-2
Khalaf, M. A (2025). Does attitude towards plagiarism predict aigiarism using ChatGPT?. AI Ethics 5, 677-688. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-024-00426-5
Lin, L. (2024). A quarter of US teachers say AI tools do more harm than good in K-12 education.
Moorhouse, B. L., Yeo, M. A., & Wan, Y. (2023). Generative AI tools and assessment: Guidelines of the world's top-ranking universities. Computers and Education Open, 5, 100151.
Muntada, M. C., Martín, M. B., i Pros, R. C., & Busquets, C. G. (2013). Academic cheating and gender differences in Barcelona (Spain). Summa psicológica UST, 10(1), 65-72.
Nguyen, H. M., & Goto, D. (2024). Unmasking academic cheating behavior in the artificial intelligence era: Evidence from Vietnamese undergraduates. Education and Information Technologies, 29(12), 15999-16025.
Oravec, J. A. (2023). Artificial intelligence implications for academic cheating: Expanding the dimensions of responsible human-AI collaboration with ChatGPT. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 34(2), 213-237. Salvagno, M., Taccone, F. S., & Gerli, A. G. (2023). Can artificial intelligence help for scientific writing?. Critical care, 27(1), 75.
Bubaš, G., & Čižmešija, A. (2023, May). A critical analysis of students’ cheating in online assessment in higher education: Post-COVID-19 issues and challenges related to conversational artificial intelligence. In 2023 46th MIPRO ICT and Electronics Convention (MIPRO) (pp. 905-910). IEEE.
Bratton, L. (2024, April 16). Study: AI used in 11% of student papers since April 2023. GovTech. https://www.govtech.com
Kovari, A. (2025, January). Ethical use of ChatGPT in education—Best practices to combat AI-induced plagiarism. In Frontiers in Education (Vol. 9, p. 1465703). Frontiers Media SA.
D2L & Tyton Partners. (2025, June 11). New research data reveals that faculty workload can drop with daily AI use. D2L Newsroom. https://www.d2l.com/newsroom/tyton_partners_report_examines_ai_in_higher_education/

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Artificial Intelligence (Other)

Journal Section

Research Article

Authors

Şahin Gökçearslan ^*
0000-0003-3532-4251
Türkiye

Filiz Mumcu
0000-0001-9371-6734
Türkiye

Thomas Chiu
0000-0003-2887-5477
China

Zsolt Lavicza
0000-0002-3701-5068
Austria

Publication Date

January 14, 2026

Submission Date

August 11, 2025

Acceptance Date

October 17, 2025

Published in Issue

Year 2026 Number: 1

DOI

https://doi.org/10.53850/joltida.1762390

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA42PJ85HR

Cite

RIS / Bibtex

APA

Gökçearslan, Ş., Mumcu, F., Chiu, T., & Lavicza, Z. (2026). Measuring AI-giarism: A Validation Study and Dimensional Exploration of the Scale in Turkish. Journal of Learning and Teaching in Digital Age, 1, 111-118. https://doi.org/10.53850/joltida.1762390