A BIBLIOMETRIC REVIEW OF UNIVERSITY STUDENTS’ ATTITUDES TOWARD  GENERATIVE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN LEARNING FROM 2022 TO EARLY 2026

Tran Thanh Thai; Mai Anh Tho; Le Thi Thu Lieu

Tran Thanh Thai	thaitt.gdho035@pg.hcmue.edu.vn	Ho Chi Minh University of Education 280 An Duong Vuong street, Cho Quan ward, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
Le Thi Thu Lieu*	lieultt@hcmue.edu.vn	Ho Chi Minh University of Education 280 An Duong Vuong street, Cho Quan ward, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
Mai Anh Tho	thoma@hcmute.edu.vn	Ho Chi Minh University of Technology and Engineering No. 01 Vo Van Ngan street, Thu Duc ward, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

Summary:

This study employs a bibliometric approach to examine the development, intellectual landscape, and major research themes concerning university students’ attitudes toward Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) in learning. Data was collected from the Dimensions database, resulting in a final dataset of 43 peer-reviewed publications published from 2022 to January 2026. Bibliometric analyses, including co-authorship, keyword co-occurrence, and citation analysis, were conducted using VOSviewer and SCImago Graphica. The findings show a rapid increase in the number of publications since 2023. However, the current research network is still fragmented, lacking cohesion and failing to form a core research community. The Technology Acceptance Model continues to serve as the dominant theoretical framework, although recent studies increasingly incorporate learner-centered constructs such as AI literacy, self-efficacy, and perceived risk. The analysis also indicates a gradual shift from technology-oriented perspectives toward approaches that emphasize students’ competencies, experiences, and the responsible use of GenAI. This study provides a structured overview of the emerging research landscape and identifies potential directions for future research on integrating GenAI into higher education.

View file

Keywords:

Generative Artificial Intelligence

student attitudes

bibliometric analysis

higher education.

Refers:

[1] Almassaad, A., Alajlan, H. & Alebaikan, R. (2024). Student perceptions of generative artificial intelligence: Investigating utilization, benefits, and challenges in higher education. Systems, 12(10), 385. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems12100385.

[2] Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), pp.179-211. org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T.

[3] Bewersdorff, A., Hornberger, M., Nerdel, C. & Schiff, D. S. (2025). AI advocates and cautious critics: How AI attitudes, AI interest, use of AI, and AI literacy build university students’ AI self efficacy. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 8, 100340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. caeai.2024.100340.

[4] Bhatt, A. (2021). Advice to authors for avoiding flaws in preparation of original research manuscripts. Perspectives in clinical research, 12(4), pp.229–233. https://doi.org/10.4103/picr.PICR_139_21.

[5] 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), 43.

[6] Chan, C. K. Y. & Lee, K. K. W. (2023). The AI generation gap: Are Gen Z students more interested in adopting generative AI such as ChatGPT in teaching and learning than their Gen X and millennial generation teachers? Smart Learning Environments, 10(1), 60. https://doi.org/10.1186/ s40561-023-00269-3.

[7] Chen, J., Xie, W., Xie, Q., Hu, A., Qiao, Y., Wan, R. & Liu, Y. (2025). A systematic review of user attitudes toward GenAI: Influencing factors and industry perspectives. Journal of Intelligence, 13(7), 78. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence13070078.

[8] Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), pp.319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008.

[9] Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N.& Lim, W. M. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133, pp.285–296. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070.

[10] Gao, Z., Cheah, J. H., Lim, X. J. & Luo, X. (2024). Enhancing academic performance of business students using generative AI. The International Journal of Management Education, 22(2), 100958. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2024.100958.

[11] Guo, F., Zhang, L., Shi, T. & Coates, H. (2025). Whether and when could generative AI improve college student learning engagement? Behavioral Sciences, 15(8), 1011. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15081011.

[12] Hook, D. W., Porter, S. J. & Herzog, C. (2018). Dimensions: building context for search and evaluation. Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics, 3, 23. https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2018.00023

[13] Lachheb, A., Leung, J., Abramenka-Lachheb, V.& Sankaranarayanan, R. (2025). AI in higher education: A bibliometric analysis, synthesis, and a critique of research. The Internet and Higher Education, 67, 101021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. iheduc.2025.101021.

[14] Luong Hiep, Huynh Tin, Gauch Susan, Do Loc & Hoang Kiem. (2012). Publication venue recommendation using author network’s publication history. In Asian Conference on Intelligent Information and Database Systems (pp. 426-435). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https:// doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-28493-9_45.

[15] Ma, T. (2025). Systematically visualizing ChatGPT used in higher education: Publication trend, disciplinary domains, research themes, adoption and acceptance. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 8, 100336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. caeai.2024.100336.

[16] Marengo, A., Karaoglan-Yilmaz, F. G., Yılmaz, R. & Ceylan, M. (2025). Development and validation of generative artificial intelligence attitude scale for students. Frontiers in Computer Science, 7, 1528455. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomp.2025.1528455.

[17] Nikolic, S., Wentworth, I., Sheridan, L., Moss, S., Duursma, E., Jones, R. A., Ros, M. & Middleton, R. (2024). A systematic literature review of attitudes, intensions and behaviours of teaching academics pertaining to AI and Genarative AI (GenAI) in higher education: An analysis of GenAI adoption using the UTAUT framework. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 40(6), pp.56–75. https:// doi.org/10.14742/ajet.9643

[18] Nimerenco, I. & Badea, A. M. (2024). Bibliometric Analysis of Artificial Intelligence’s Impact on Education: A Comprehensive Overview. Annals of the University Dunarea de Jos of Galati: Fascicle: I, Economics & Applied Informatics, 30(3). https://doi. org/10.35219/eai15840409470.

[19] Van Eck, N. J. & Waltman, L. (2019). VOSviewer Manual. University of Leiden.

[20] Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B. & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), pp.425–478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540.

[21] Wu, F., Dang, Y. & Li, M. (2025). A systematic review of responses and attitudes toward GenAI in higher education. Behavioral Sciences, 15(4), 467. https:// doi.org/10.3390/bs15040467.

[22] Yurdal, M. O. (2025). A Bibliometric analysis of publications on higher education students’ awareness of artificial intelligence. Journal of Awareness, 10(1), e3045-e3045. https://doi. org/10.26809/joa.3045.

Journal:

No. 9, September 2026

VIETNAM JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL SCIENCES

THE VIETNAM NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF EDUCATIONAL SCIENCES

A BIBLIOMETRIC REVIEW OF UNIVERSITY STUDENTS’ ATTITUDES TOWARD GENERATIVE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN LEARNING FROM 2022 TO EARLY 2026