An Investigation into AI Dependence, Critical Thinking and Writing Competence among Nigerian University Undergraduates
Keywords:
Artificial Intelligence Dependence, Critical Thinking, Writing Competence, English Language, University Students, ChatGPT.Abstract
The rapid integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools into academic activities has raised concerns about its impact on students' core cognitive and linguistic skills. This study investigated the relationship between AI dependence and critical thinking and writing competence among English Language students.
The study adopted a correlational research design. The population comprised English Language students, from which 492 students were selected using stratified random sampling technique. Data were collected using three validated instruments: AI Dependence Scale, Critical Thinking Disposition Scale and Writing Competence Scale. Mean and standard deviation were used to answer the research questions while Pearson Product-Moment Correlation (PPMC) was used to test the hypotheses at 0.05 level of significance.
Findings revealed a significant inverse association between AI dependence and critical thinking, r(490) = -.38, p <.001, and between AI dependence and writing competence, r(490) = -.42, p <.001. This suggests that higher levels of AI dependence are associated with lower levels of critical thinking and writing competence.
The study concluded that excessive dependence on AI tools such as ChatGPT, Grammarly and QuillBot is inversely associated with students' ability to analyze, evaluate and produce original written texts. While AI offers academic support, over-reliance weakens independent reasoning and writing skills.
References
1. Abdulrahaman, M. D., Alabi, O. T., & Musa, S. (2024). Generative AI and academic performance of Nigerian undergraduates. African Journal of Educational Technology, 12 (1), 45–62.
2. Adeleke, J. O. (2023). Digital literacy and ethical use of AI in Nigerian tertiary institutions. Nigerian Journal of Educational Research, 9 (2), 112–129.
3. Baidoo-Anu, D., & Ansah, L. O. (2023). Education in the era of generative AI: Understanding the potential benefits of ChatGPT in promoting teaching and learning. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 39 (4), 176–185.
4. 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), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00411-8
5. Cotton, D. R. E., 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
6. Dai, Y., Liu, A., & Lim, C. (2023). Reconceptualizing ChatGPT and generative AI as a student-driven innovation in higher education. Procedia CIRP, 119, 84–90.
7. Darvishi, A., Khosravi, H., Sadiq, S., Gašević, D., & Siemens, G. (2024). Impact of AI assistance on student agency. _Computers & Education, 210_, 104912.
8. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance. _MIS Quarterly, 13_(3), 319-340.
9. Facione, P. A. (2020). Critical thinking: What it is and why it counts (2020 update). Measured Reasons and The California Academic Press.
10. Hyland, K. (2023). Second language writing (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
11. Kumar, R., & Silva, T. (2024). Impact of generative AI on undergraduate writing quality and originality. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 6, 100203.
12. Marzuki, W., Widiati, U., Rusdin, D., Darwin, & Indrawati, I. (2023). The impact of AI writing tools on the content and organization of students' writing. _International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 22(4), 152-170.
13. Liao, H., Xiao, Y., & Wang, Y. (2024). Effects of AI writing assistants on L2 students' writing competence. _Journal of Second Language Writing, 63_, 101089.
14. Okon, E., & Bassey, U. (2024). Students’ use of ChatGPT for academic writing inNigerian universities. Journal of ICT in Education, 11(1), 33–49.
15. Perkins, M. (2023). Academic integrity considerations of AI Large Language Models in the post-pandemic era. _Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 20(2).
16. Rahman, M. M., et al. (2024). Prevalence of ChatGPT dependence among university students. _Smart Learning Environments, 11(2).
17. Risko, E. F., & Gilbert, S. J. (2016). Cognitive offloading. _Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20(9), 676-688.
18. Sweller, J. (2020). Cognitive load theory and educational technology. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(1), 1–16. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2023). Guidance for generative AI in e ducation and research. UNESCO.
https://doi.org/10.54675/PCSP7350
19. Zhai, C., Wibowo, S., & Li, L. D. (2024). The effects of over-reliance on AI dialogue systems on students' cognitive abilities: A systematic review. _Smart Learning Environments, 11(1), 11.
20. Zhai, X. (2024). ChatGPT for next generation science learning: Prospects, challenges, and opportunities. Research in Science Education, 54 (2), 279–295.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Auhor(s)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Articles published in the Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary Studies (JAMS) are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), unless otherwise stated. Authors retain copyright of their work and grant JAMS the right of first publication.
