Use of artificial intelligence tools and competencies for verifying scientific information
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.63688/4xge3r67Keywords:
artificial intelligence, scientific information, information verification, university students, digital competenciesAbstract
Introduction: The incorporation of artificial intelligence tools into academic and scientific activities has expanded the possibilities for searching, organizing, and analyzing information, although it also poses risks related to nonexistent references, inaccurate data, and unsupported content. Objective: To analyze the relationship between the use of artificial intelligence tools and competencies for verifying scientific information among university students. Methodology: A quantitative, nonexperimental, correlational, and cross-sectional study was conducted with a sample of 159 students selected through nonprobability convenience sampling. Two 20-item Likert-type scales were administered; in the pilot test with 32 students, Cronbach’s alpha coefficients of 0.961 and 0.966 were obtained. The analysis included frequencies, percentages, and Pearson’s correlation. Results: A total of 52.2% of participants showed a medium level of artificial intelligence tool use, while 48.4% showed a medium level of competencies for verifying scientific information. A high positive correlation was identified between the two variables (r = 0.755; p < 0.001), while correlations between dimensions ranged from 0.661 to 0.716. Conclusion: The use of artificial intelligence tools is significantly associated with competencies for verifying scientific information, although the study design does not allow causal relationships to be established.
References
Aiumtrakul, N., Thongprayoon, C., Suppadungsuk, S., Krisanapan, P., Miao, J., Qureshi, F., & Cheungpasitporn, W. (2023). Navigating the landscape of personalized medicine: The relevance of ChatGPT, BingChat, and Bard AI in nephrology literature searches. Journal of Personalized Medicine, 13(10), 1457. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm13101457
Ajith, A., Xia, M., Chevalier, A., Goyal, T., Chen, D., & Gao, T. (2024). LitSearch: A retrieval benchmark for scientific literature search. Proceedings of the 2024 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, 15068–15083. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2024.emnlp-main.840
Athaluri, S., Manthena, S., Kesapragada, V., Yarlagadda, V., Dave, T., & Duddumpudi, R. (2023). Exploring the boundaries of reality: Investigating the phenomenon of artificial intelligence hallucination in scientific writing through ChatGPT references. Cureus, 15(4), e37432. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.37432
Barradas, J. (2023). Inteligencia artificial como elemento transformador de la investigación científica. Entrelíneas, 2(1), 113–122. https://doi.org/10.56368/Entrelineas213
Castillo, W. (2023). The importance of human supervision in the use of ChatGPT as a support tool in scientific writing. Metaverse Basic and Applied Research, 2. https://doi.org/10.56294/mr202329
Cedeño, J., Maitta, I., Vélez, M., & Palomeque, J. (2024). Investigación universitaria con inteligencia artificial. Revista Venezolana de Gerencia, 29(106), 817–830. https://doi.org/10.52080/rvgluz.29.106.23
Chelli, M., Descamps, J., Lavoué, V., Trojani, C., Azar, M., Deckert, M., Raynier, J.-L., Clowez, G., Boileau, P., & Ruetsch-Chelli, C. (2024). Hallucination rates and reference accuracy of ChatGPT and Bard for systematic reviews: Comparative analysis. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 26, e53164. https://doi.org/10.2196/53164
Contreras, L., Puma, I., Morales, J., Gil, C., & Chalco, N. (2024). Ética en el uso de la inteligencia artificial en la investigación científica: Desafíos y consideraciones. Aula Virtual, 5(12), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14653199
Dennstädt, F., Zink, J., Putora, P., Hastings, J., & Cihoric, N. (2024). Title and abstract screening for literature reviews using large language models: An exploratory study in the biomedical domain. Systematic Reviews, 13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-024-02575-4
Díaz, L. (2024). El uso de la inteligencia artificial en la investigación científica. Revista Historia de la Educación Latinoamericana, 26(43), 253–272. https://doi.org/10.19053/uptc.01227238.18014
Doneva, S., Qin, S., Sick, B., Ellendorff, T., Goldman, J., Schneider, G., & Ineichen, B. (2024). Large language models to process, analyze, and synthesize biomedical texts: A scoping review. Discover Artificial Intelligence, 4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44163-024-00197-2
Gallent, C., Zapata, A., & Ortego, J. (2023). El impacto de la inteligencia artificial generativa en educación superior: Una mirada desde la ética y la integridad académica. RELIEVE. Revista Electrónica de Investigación y Evaluación Educativa, 29(2), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.30827/relieve.v29i2.29134
Gao, C., Howard, F., Markov, N., Dyer, E., Ramesh, S., Luo, Y., & Pearson, A. (2023). Comparing scientific abstracts generated by ChatGPT to real abstracts with detectors and blinded human reviewers. npj Digital Medicine, 6. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-023-00819-6
Gilbert, S., Kather, J., & Hogan, A. (2024). Augmented non-hallucinating large language models as medical information curators. npj Digital Medicine, 7(100). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-024-01081-0
Mata, K., Sancán, V., Káiser, I., & Kaiser, R. (2024). Una revisión sistemática del uso de la inteligencia artificial en el desarrollo de investigaciones científicas. Reincisol, 3(6), 1642–1660. https://doi.org/10.59282/reincisol.V3(6)1642-1660
Mugaanyi, J., Cai, L., Cheng, S., Lu, C., & Huang, J. (2024). Evaluation of large language model performance and reliability for citations and references in scholarly writing: Cross-disciplinary study. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 26. https://doi.org/10.2196/52935
Mujica, R. (2021). Alfabetización científica: Herramienta indispensable en la era digital. Revista Docentes 2.0, 11(1), 19–26. https://doi.org/10.37843/rted.v11i1.181
Ofori, R., Aceves, M., Wiratunga, N., & Moreno, C. (2024). Towards the automation of systematic reviews using natural language processing, machine learning, and deep learning: A comprehensive review. Artificial Intelligence Review, 57. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-024-10844-w
Penabad, L., Morera, M., & Penabad, M. (2024). Guía para uso y reporte de inteligencia artificial en revistas científico-académicas. Revista Electrónica Educare, 28(S), 1–41. https://doi.org/10.15359/ree.28-s.19830
Torre, J. d., Ramírez, A., & Romero, J. (2023). Artificial intelligence to automate the systematic review of scientific literature. Computing, 105, 2171–2194. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00607-023-01181-x
Wadden, D., & Lo, K. (2021). Overview and insights from the SCIVER shared task on scientific claim verification. Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Scholarly Document Processing, 124–129. https://aclanthology.org/2021.sdp-1.16.pdf
Wadden, D., Lo, K., Kuehl, B., Cohan, A., Beltagy, I., Wang, L., & Hajishirzi, H. (2022). SciFact-Open: Towards open-domain scientific claim verification. Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2022, 4719–4734. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2022.findings-emnlp.347
Walters, W., & Wilder, E. (2023). Fabrication and errors in the bibliographic citations generated by ChatGPT. Scientific Reports, 13. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-41032-5
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Wilmer Patricio Collaguazo Vega, Cindy Estefania Alvia Toala, Evelin Mariela Miranda Hermosa, Jose Fernando Toala Mosquera, Juan Gabriel Zaruma Piña (Autor/a)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
El artículo se distribuye bajo la Licencia Creative Commons Atribución 4.0 . Salvo que se indique lo contrario, el material publicado asociado se distribuye bajo la misma licencia.
