Students raised ethical concerns about GenAI-assisted data comic creation, most frequently misinformation, bias, ownership, and reduced trustworthiness¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? A majority (N=45) raised misinformation concerns, N=40 bias and inequity concerns, and N=37 ownership and intellectual property concerns. → Zirui Shan 2026 q2 i? Over one-third (N=23) perceived GenAI co-created content as less reliable, calling for human oversight, credibility checks and transparency about AI's role. → Zirui Shan 2026

Evidence¶

Zirui Shan 2026¶

Zirui Shan, Vanessa Echeverria, Yuheng Li, Yi-Shan Tsai, and Roberto Martinez-Maldonado. (2026). Data Comics for Education: Evaluating Effectiveness, Benefits, and the Ethics of AI-Assisted Creation. https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.02361 doi:10.48550/arxiv.2607.02361

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Thematic analysis of Study Part 5 ethical-implication responses from 60 participants (Cohen's kappa 0.83). Four themes emerged: reinforcing misinformation, perpetuating biases, threatening ownership and intellectual property, and reducing trustworthiness; N=37 raised ownership and N=23 trustworthiness concerns.

"A majority of participants (N=45) raised concerns about misinformation in using GenAI to support data comics creation, with two-thirds (N=40) highlighting bias and inequity issues."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Two-thirds of students reported limitations of data comics: information overload, limited generalisability, design-dependence, and oversimplification — related
• Ethical acceptability of GenAI use varied with disciplinary norms: assistance was more acceptable for supporting or procedural tasks than for core intellectual tasks — related
• The most frequently cited ethical concerns about GenAI in research were hallucinated facts, fabricated references, and misleading content — related
• Faculty members and students identify both user-related and algorithm-related ethical risks in AI use in education — related
• Academic integrity, professional development, and equity concerns about AI span all surveyed units, though interpreted differently — related
• Nursing students and faculty report concerns that AI use may weaken critical thinking, enable plagiarism and misinformation, and create unequal access — related
• Critical AI literacy emerged as both a learning-design goal and a condition of teachers' professional mediation — related
• Poorly grounded GenAI self-study risks fabricated content and inferior learning relative to curated resources — related
• Students perceive LLM chatbots as useful for learning but requiring critical use, reporting hallucinations, overconfidence, and dependency risks — related
• GenAI in education presents a dual profile of potential benefits and significant concerns — related
• Students recognised both the benefits and limitations of GenAI, demonstrating ethical awareness and critical evaluation of its role in academic work — related
• Student experiences with GenAI in design thinking fall into four themes: perceived benefits, ethical concerns, hesitance and acceptance, and critical validation — a broader claim this one bears on
• Among 245 Indonesian undergraduates, majorities reported concern about reduced critical thinking when depending on AI (75%), excessive reliance (73%), misinformation (70%) and unintentional plagiarism (69%), and 40% about algorithmic bias — related