Relationship between the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Educational Environments and the Perception of Data Privacy Risk among University Students
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.53591/revug.v140i2.3357Keywords:
generative artificial intelligence, data privacy, higher education, risk perception, educational technologyAbstract
The use of generative artificial intelligence in educational settings has grown steadily in recent years, reshaping learning processes in higher education. At the same time, this trend raises questions about data privacy and the handling of personal information. This study aimed to examine whether there is a relationship between the use of generative AI and how university students perceive data privacy risks. A mixed-methods approach was used, with a non-experimental, cross-sectional design. The sample consisted of 200 university students selected through convenience sampling. Data were collected using a structured questionnaire based on the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and the Internet Users’ Information Privacy Concerns (IUIPC) model. The instrument showed adequate validity (KMO = 0.86; p < 0.001) and high reliability (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.87). The results revealed a moderate negative correlation between the use of generative AI and perceived data privacy risk (r = −0.41; p < 0.001). The regression model indicated that AI use explains about 16% of the variance in privacy risk perception (R² = 0.16). These findings point to an association between the two variables, without implying causality. The study concludes that strengthening digital literacy and ethical technology education is essential in higher education institutions.
References
Bozkurt, A., Xiao, J., Lambert, S., et al. (2023). Speculative futures on ChatGPT and generative artificial intelligence in education. Asian Journal of Distance Education.
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.
Dwivedi, Y. K., Kshetri, N., Hughes, L., et al. (2023). So what if ChatGPT wrote it? Multidisciplinary perspectives on opportunities, challenges and implications of generative conversational AI. International Journal of Information Management, 71.
European Parliament. (2016). Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (General Data Protection Regulation).
Facuy Delgado, J. P., & Díaz Espinoza, M. (2025). El rol de la inteligencia ambiental en la promoción del desarrollo sostenible en la educación básica superior. Revista InveCom, 5(3). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14635894
Facuy, J., Aguirre-Munizaga, M., Pasini, A., Estévez, E., Moran-Castro, C. (2026). Validation of an Ambient Intelligence System Applied to the Prediction of Electronic Waste in Smart Cities. In: Valencia-Garcia, R., et al. Technologies and Innovation. CITI 2025. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 2776. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-032-11494-5_17
Floridi, L., Cowls, J., Beltrametti, M., et al. (2018). AI4People—An ethical framework for a good AI society. Minds and Machines, 28(4), 689–707.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Cengage Learning.
Holmes, W., Bialik, M., & Fadel, C. (2019). Artificial intelligence in education: Promises and implications for teaching and learning. Center for Curriculum Redesign.
Kasneci, E., Sessler, K., Küchemann, S., et al. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103, 102274.
Luckin, R., Holmes, W., Griffiths, M., & Forcier, L. (2016). Intelligence unleashed: An argument for AI in education. Pearson.
Malhotra, N. K., Kim, S. S., & Agarwal, J. (2004). Internet users’ information privacy concerns (IUIPC). Information Systems Research, 15(4), 336–355.
Nissenbaum, H. (2010). Privacy in context: Technology, policy, and the integrity of social life. Stanford University Press.
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
OpenAI. (2023). GPT-4 technical report. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2303.08774
Toledo, A., Facuy Delgado, J., Aldaz, J., & Yerovi, E. (2026). Evaluación cuasi-experimental del uso de herramientas digitales en el desarrollo de competencias investigativas en estudiantes universitarios. Atlas Research Journal, 4(1), 69–90. https://doi.org/10.65305/arj.v4n1.2026.51
Tsai, Y. S., Moreno-Marcos, P. M., Jivet, I., et al. (2021). The SHEILA framework. Journal of Learning Analytics, 8(1), 1–15.
UNESCO. (2021). Recommendation on the ethics of artificial intelligence.
United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development.
Zuboff, S. (2019). The age of surveillance capitalism. PublicAffairs.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0. International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes .
- NoDerivatives — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you may not distribute the modified material.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
