Tinjauan Sistematis Etika Penggunaan ChatGPT di Perguruan Tinggi
(1) Universitas Negeri Semarang, Indonesia
Abstract
ChatGPT menunjukkan kemampuan yang andal dalam berinteraksi seperti manusia dan menciptakan konten yang menyerupai karya manusia. Namun, kekurangan ChatGPT juga terlihat, termasuk keterbatasan akses terhadap data luar, kemungkinan menghasilkan respons yang merugikan serta penuh bias, mencampuradukkan fakta dan fiksi, serta ketidak-konsistenan dalam memberikan saran. Dalam konteks perkuliahan, ChatGPT seringkali dijadikan alat bantu untuk pembelajaran mandiri dan mendukung proses penelitian atau penulisan artikel. Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah memberikan gambaran tentang bagaimana etika penggunaan ChatGPT dalam konteks perkuliahan. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode peninjauan sistematis dengan model PRISMA yang melibatkan tiga langkah, yakni identifikasi, penyaringan, dan inklusi. Hasilnya menegaskan bahwa ChatGPT hanyalah merupakan sebuah alat, maka pengguna manusia harus bertanggung jawab atas penggunaannya dan apa yang dihasilkan olehnya. Oleh karena itu, penting bagi pengguna untuk menerapkan penalaran kritis saat memberikan instruksi dan untuk selalu meninjau respons yang dihasilkan secara cermat.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Ansari, A. N., Ahmad, S., & Bhutta, S. M. (2023). Mapping the global evidence around the use of ChatGPT in higher education: A systematic scoping review. Education and Information Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12223-4
Borji, A. (2023). A Categorical Archive of ChatGPT Failures. http://arxiv.org/abs/2302.03494
Deng, J., & Lin, Y. (2022). Frontiers in Computing and Intelligent Systems The Benefits and Challenges of ChatGPT: An Overview. Frontiers in Computing and Intelligent Systems, 2(2).
Eysenbach, G. (2023). The Role of ChatGPT, Generative Language Models, and Artificial Intelligence in Medical Education: A Conversation With ChatGPT and a Call for Papers. In JMIR Medical Education (Vol. 9). JMIR Publications Inc. https://doi.org/10.2196/46885
Gomes, W. J., Evora, P. R. B., & Solange, S. G. (2023). Artificial Intelligence is Irreversibly Bound to Academic Publishing — ChatGPT is Cleared for Scientific Writing and Peer Review. In Brazilian Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery (Vol. 38, Issue 4). Sociedade Brasileira de Cirurgia Cardiovascular. https://doi.org/10.21470/1678-9741-2023-0963
Gupta, B., Mufti, T., Sohail, S. S., & Madsen, D. Ø. (2023). ChatGPT: A brief narrative review. Cogent Business & Management, 10(3). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2275851
Haman, M., & Školník, M. (2023). Using ChatGPT to conduct a literature review. In Accountability in Research. Taylor and Francis Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2023.2185514
Imran, M., & Almusharraf, N. (2023). Analyzing the role of ChatGPT as a writing assistant at higher education level: A systematic review of the literature. In Contemporary Educational Technology (Vol. 15, Issue 4). Bastas. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/13605
İpek, Z. H., Gözüm, A. İ. C., Papadakis, S., & Kallogiannakis, M. (2023). Educational Applications of the ChatGPT AI System: A Systematic Review Research. Educational Process: International Journal, 12(3), 26–55. https://doi.org/10.22521/edupij.2023.123.2
Ivanov, S., & Soliman, M. (2023). Game of algorithms: ChatGPT implications for the future of tourism education and research. Journal of Tourism Futures, 9(2), 214–221. https://doi.org/10.1108/JTF-02-2023-0038
Kooli, C. (2023). Chatbots in Education and Research: A Critical Examination of Ethical Implications and Solutions. Sustainability (Switzerland), 15(7). https://doi.org/10.3390/su15075614
Krügel, S., Ostermaier, A., & Uhl, M. (2023). ChatGPT’s inconsistent moral advice influences users’ judgment. Scientific Reports, 13(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-31341-0
Lee, S. W., & Choi, W. J. (2023). Utilizing ChatGPT in clinical research related to anesthesiology: a comprehensive review of opportunities and limitations. In Anesthesia and Pain Medicine (Vol. 18, Issue 3, pp. 244–251). Korean Society of Anesthesiologists. https://doi.org/10.17085/apm.23056
Lo, C. K. (2023). What Is the Impact of ChatGPT on Education? A Rapid Review of the Literature. In Education Sciences (Vol. 13, Issue 4). MDPI. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13040410
Mohammad, B., Supti, T., Alzubaidi, M., Shah, H., Alam, T., Shah, Z., & Househ, M. (2023). The Pros and Cons of Using ChatGPT in Medical Education: A Scoping Review. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics, 305, 644–647. https://doi.org/10.3233/SHTI230580
Montenegro-Rueda, M., Fernández-Cerero, J., Fernández-Batanero, J. M., & López-Meneses, E. (2023). Impact of the Implementation of ChatGPT in Education: A Systematic Review. In Computers (Vol. 12, Issue 8). Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI). https://doi.org/10.3390/computers12080153
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., … Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Systematic Reviews, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021-01626-4
Pournaras, E. (2023). Science in the Era of ChatGPT, Large Language Models and Generative AI: Challenges for Research Ethics and How to Respond. http://arxiv.org/abs/2305.15299
Ramalingam, S., Yunus, M. M., & Hashim, H. (2022). Blended Learning Strategies for Sustainable English as a Second Language Education: A Systematic Review. In Sustainability (Switzerland) (Vol. 14, Issue 13). MDPI. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14138051
Ray, P. P. (2023). ChatGPT: A comprehensive review on background, applications, key challenges, bias, ethics, limitations and future scope. In Internet of Things and Cyber-Physical Systems (Vol. 3, pp. 121–154). KeAi Communications Co. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iotcps.2023.04.003
Roumeliotis, K. I., & Tselikas, N. D. (2023). ChatGPT and Open-AI Models: A Preliminary Review. In Future Internet (Vol. 15, Issue 6). MDPI. https://doi.org/10.3390/fi15060192
Sallam, M. (2023). ChatGPT Utility in Healthcare Education, Research, and Practice: Systematic Review on the Promising Perspectives and Valid Concerns. In Healthcare (Switzerland) (Vol. 11, Issue 6). MDPI. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11060887
Schlagwein, D., & Willcocks, L. (2023). ‘ChatGPT et al.’: The ethics of using (generative) artificial intelligence in research and science. In Journal of Information Technology (Vol. 38, Issue 3, pp. 232–238). SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1177/02683962231200411
Shaw, D., Morfeld, P., & Erren, T. (2023). The (mis)use of ChatGPT in science and education. EMBO Reports, 24(7). https://doi.org/10.15252/embr.202357501
Singh, H., & Singh, A. (2023). ChatGPT: Systematic Review, Applications, and Agenda for Multidisciplinary Research. Journal of Chinese Economic and Business Studies, 21(2), 193–212. https://doi.org/10.1080/14765284.2023.2210482
Vargas-Murillo, A. R., de la Asuncion Pari-Bedoya, I. N. M., & de Jesús Guevara-Soto, F. (2023). Challenges and Opportunities of AI-Assisted Learning: A Systematic Literature Review on the Impact of ChatGPT Usage in Higher Education. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 22(7), 122–135. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.22.7.7
Vargas-Murillo, A. R., Pari-Bedoya, I. N. M. D. L. A., & Guevara-Soto, F. D. J. (2023). The Ethics of AI Assisted Learning: A Systematic Literature Review on the Impacts of ChatGPT Usage in Education. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, 8–13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3606094.3606101
Wittmann, J. (2023). Science fact vs science fiction: A ChatGPT immunological review experiment gone awry. Immunology Letters, 256–257, 42–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.imlet.2023.04.002
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
View Integralistik Stats
