ChatGPT produced submissions judged of passing quality for 36 of 40 undergraduate psychology assessments (90%)¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · designr2·q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · recheck by 2029: tool and model accuracy changes quickly
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i? In a case study of one BPS-accredited psychology programme, 36 of 40 coursework assessments received AI-generated submissions judged passable by experienced markers. → Ivory 2026
Evidence¶
Ivory 2026¶
Ivory, M., Finnerty, S., Dunn, K., Philpot, R., & Warmelink, L. (2026). The Integrity of Psychology Assessments in the AI Age: A Critical Examination. Journal of Academic Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-026-09729-0
q2 · i? · design · r2
Instrumental case study of one UK BPS-accredited psychology degree (2023/24); two experienced markers made binary pass/fail judgements of unedited ChatGPT output. The study reports "90% of assessments being passable in the present study", comparable to the 94% rate it attributes to Scarfe et al.
"With 90% of assessments being passable in the present study, and Scarfe et al. ( 2024) reporting a rate of 94%, this suggests that psychology might be more vulnerable than other disciplines."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Advanced prompting improved the pass rate of AI-generated psychology submissions within a one-hour limit — related
- Visual media assessments (posters, presentations) were not passable because ChatGPT could not produce complete slides or poster content — related
- A student-staff partnership evaluated ChatGPT-generated output in response to diverse coursework assessments on an undergraduate medical sciences programme — related
- In a single-institution study, the joint system of Turnitin detection plus faculty judgement formally reported only 54.5 per cent of AI-generated submissions — related
- Assessments requiring novelty and originality were more resilient to AI-generated output — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
chatgpt-passable-36-of-40-psychology-assessments |
title |
ChatGPT produced submissions judged of passing quality for 36 of 40 undergraduate psychology assessments (90%) |
description |
ChatGPT produced submissions judged of passing quality for 36 of 40 undergraduate psychology assessments (90%) |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2026 |
recheck_by |
2029 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-11 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — ivory-2026 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.