Search and Filter

Repository Feedback

Your feedback helps us improve the repository's content relevance and usability. Please share your thoughts to help us better serve researchers and practitioners.

Submit feedback

Submit a research study

Contribute to the repository:

Add a paper

How Students (Really) Use ChatGPT: Uncovering Experiences Among Undergraduate Students

Authors
Tawfiq Ammari,
Meilun Chen,
S M Mehedi Zaman,
Kiran Garimella
Date
Publisher
arXiv
We examine how undergraduate students integrate ChatGPT into everyday self-directed learning, analyzing 10,536 naturalistic messages donated by 36 students over a year. A sequential mixed-methods pipeline pairs iterative qualitative coding with zero-shot language-model annotation validated against human labels (kappa = 0.75-0.91). It yields a five-category taxonomy: Information Seeking, Content Generation, Language Use, Student-ChatGPT Interaction, and ChatGPT Response Behavior. Time-lagged linear regression and Cox proportional-hazards models link these categories to sustained engagement. Three findings stand out. First, structured tasks (theory application, code writing, job-application content, multiple-choice questions) predict continued use; ChatGPT becomes incorporated into academic rhythms when gratifications are reliably fulfilled. Second, system-issued "apologies" are the strongest positive predictor of increased engagement, outweighing every task-completion predictor. We name this mechanism "repair gratification": the reward of a breakdown acknowledged and repaired rather than a task simply completed. Third, interactional strain--prompt revision, frustration, follow-up clarification--predicts disengagement. When managing the system falls on the user without system accountability, students abandon the tool. We interpret these results through Self-Directed Learning, Uses and Gratifications Theory, and Expectancy Violations Theory, mapping predictors onto positive/negative violations and confirmations. We close with design recommendations for graduated repair patterns, mode-aware interaction, and verification affordances, and outline a participatory AI-literacy agenda for higher education.
Who is the user?
Who age?