Perceptions of Generative AI among Development Communication Students: Insights by Gender and Age from the Philippines
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56294/ai2025443Keywords:
Generative AI, student perceptions, gender differences, age differences, Development Communication, higher educationAbstract
Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools such as ChatGPT are increasingly used in higher education, yet students’ perceptions remain varied and may be shaped by demographic factors. This study examined the overall perceptions of Development Communication students toward generative AI and investigated whether these perceptions differ by gender and age. Using a descriptive-quantitative design, survey data were collected from 208 students and analyzed using descriptive statistics and independent samples t-tests. The results showed a neutral overall perception of generative AI (M = 3,31; SD = 0,65), indicating a balanced view of its advantages and limitations. Students positively rated AI’s 24/7 availability (M = 3,46; SD = 0,97), its ability to offer unique perspectives (M = 3,42; SD = 1,00), and teachers’ growing awareness of AI-assisted work (M = 3,63; SD = 0,82). Skepticism was evident regarding AI’s potential to replace teachers (M = 2,86; SD = 1,20). A significant gender difference emerged, with male students (M = 3,81; SD = 0,28) reporting higher perceptions than female students (M = 3,07; SD = 0,65), t(206) = 8,94; p < 0,001; d = 0,55. No significant differences were found across age groups, t(206) = –0,52; p = 0,61. Overall, the findings suggest that students recognize the usefulness of generative AI but remain cautious about its limitations and ethical implications. The observed gender disparity underscores the need for inclusive AI literacy initiatives to support equitable and responsible integration of GenAI in higher education.
References
1. Fabro RBB, Rivera JC, Sambrano LC, Dinoy LJM, Alcozer NG, Agustin MC. Perceptions and extent of utilization of generative artificial intelligence (AI) among filipino students. Int J Educ Res. 2024;12(7):107.
2. Vergara JPC. Navigating the Generative Artificial Intelligence Era: Charting the Course for Curricular Reform in Higher Education in the Philippines. Quezon City (PH): University of the Philippines Center for Integrative and Development Studies; 2024.
3. Domingo AR, Clorion FDD, Mangila B, Hasan N-N, Tarroza R, Flores B, Rillo R, Pantaleon C, Francisco CI, Delos Santos M, Alieto EO. Quill & Bytes: A qualitative analysis on the perceived impacts of AI-based paraphrasing tools in academic writing and performance toward higher education students. Procedia Comput Sci. 2025; 263:664–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2025.07.079 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2025.07.079
4. Chan CKY. Students’ perceptions of ‘AI-giarism’: Investigating changes in understandings of academic misconduct. Educ Inf Technol. 2025;30(6):8087–8108. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-13151-7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-13151-7
5. Lund BD, Lee TH, Mannuru NR, Arutla N. AI and academic integrity: Exploring student perceptions and implications for higher education. J Acad Ethics. 2025;23(3):1545–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-025-09613-3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-025-09613-3
6. Martha ASD, Widowati S, Rahayu DP. Assessing student readiness and perceptions of ChatGPT in learning: A case study in Indonesian higher education. J Inf Technol Educ Res. 2025; 24:023. https://doi.org/10.28945/5599 DOI: https://doi.org/10.28945/5599
7. Barus OP, Hidayanto AN, Handri EY, Sensuse DI, Yaiprasert C. Shaping generative AI governance in higher education: Insights from student perception. Int J Educ Res Open. 2025; 8:100452. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedro.2025.100452 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedro.2025.100452
8. Lyu W, Zhang S, Chung T, Sun Y, Zhang Y. Understanding the practices, perceptions, and (dis)trust of generative AI among instructors: A mixed-methods study in US higher education. Comput Educ Artif Intell. 2025; 8:100383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100383 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100383
9. Wardat S, Akour M. Teachers' use of generative AI in Jordanian universities: practices and perceptions. Forum Linguist Stud. 2025;7(6):90-102. https://doi.org/10.30564/fls.v7i6.9644 DOI: https://doi.org/10.30564/fls.v7i6.9644
10. Kim J, Klopfer M, Grohs JR, Eldardiry H, Weichert J, Cox LA, Pike D. Examining faculty and student perceptions of generative AI in university courses. Innov High Educ. 2025; 50:1281-1313. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-024-09774-w DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-024-09774-w
11. Prosen M, Ličen S. Perceptions, ethical challenges and sustainable integration of generative AI in health science education: a cross-sectional study. Sustainability. 2025;17(14):6546. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17146546 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su17146546
12. Tortella F, Palese A, Turolla A, Castellini G, Pillastrini P, Landuzzi MG, et al. Knowledge and use, perceptions of benefits and limitations of artificial intelligence chatbots among Italian physiotherapy students: a cross-sectional national study. BMC Med Educ. 2025;25(1):572. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-025-07176-w DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-025-07176-w
13. Devanadera AC. AI Integration in Education: A Correlational Study on Attitudes, Perceptions and Anxiety Among Pre-Service Teachers. LatIA. 2025; 3:249. https://doi.org/10.62486/latia2025249 DOI: https://doi.org/10.62486/latia2025249
14. Gapol PAM, Alieto EO, Capacio EA, Dumagay AH, Francisco CI, Vallejo RG. Preservice teachers’ extent of knowledge and willingness to adopt generative AI in higher education. In: González Vallejo R, Moukhliss G, Schaeffer E, Paliktzoglou V, editors. The Second International Symposium on Generative AI and Education (ISGAIE’2025). Lecture Notes on Data Engineering and Communications Technologies. Vol. 262. Springer; 2025. p. 66–79. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-98476-1_6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-98476-1_6
15. Maghanoy J, Tahil M, Sulasula J, Vallejo RG, Dumagay AH, Alieto EO. Gender and educational attainment dynamics on artificial intelligence anxiety among educators with emerging understanding. In: González Vallejo R, Moukhliss G, Schaeffer E, Paliktzoglou V, editors. The Second International Symposium on Generative AI and Education (ISGAIE’2025). Lecture Notes on Data Engineering and Communications Technologies. Vol. 262. Springer; 2025. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-98476-1_40 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-98476-1_40
16. Dumagay AH, Kunting AF, Alieto EO, Kenoh KS, Tarroza RT, Rillo RM, Riparip EM, Jacinto LAC, Lauzon LDS, Estigoy EB, Francisco CI, San Juan DO. Artificial intelligence as the call of the times: attitudes of higher education teachers across gender, generational cohorts, and length of service in the context of Education 5.0. LatIA. 2025;3:246. https://doi.org/10.62486/latia2025246 DOI: https://doi.org/10.62486/latia2025246
17. Alieto EO, Dumagay AH, Eijansantos AM, Estigoy EB, Vallejo RG, Serdenia JRC. Perceptions toward generative AI among Filipino pre- and in-service teachers: implications for AI use in educational assessment. In: Lahby M, editor. Innovative educational assessment with generative AI: opportunities, challenges, and practical case studies. Vol. 70. Cham: Springer; 2026. p. 225–243. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-032-05306-0_11 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-032-05306-0_11
18. Francisco CI, Pantaleon S, Lantaya GM, Francisco WA, Alieto EO. Understanding the attitude of senior high school students toward utilizing ChatGPT as a learning tool: A quantitative analysis. In: Hamdan RK, editor. Sustainable Data Management. Vol. 171. Springer; 2025. p. 37–49. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-83911-5_4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-83911-5_4
19. Fuentes JO, Clorion FD, Abequibel B, Valerio S, Alieto EO. Understanding the attitude of teacher education students toward utilizing ChatGPT as a learning tool: A quantitative analysis. In: Motahhir S, Bossoufi B, editors. Digital Technologies and Applications. ICDTA 2024. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems. Vol. 1098. Springer; 2024. p. 82–93. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-68650-4_9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-68650-4_9
20. Serdenia JR, Dumagay AH, Balasa K, Capacio E, Lauzon LD. Attitude, acceptability, and perceived effectiveness of artificial intelligence in education: A quantitative cross-sectional study among future teachers. LatIA. 2025; 3:313. https://doi.org/10.62486/latia2025313 DOI: https://doi.org/10.62486/latia2025313
21. Dwivedi YK, Kshetri N, Hughes L, Slade EL, Jeyaraj A, Kar AK, Baabdullah AM, Koohang A, Raghavan V, Ahuja M, Albanna H, Albashrawi MA, Al-Busaidi AS, Balakrishnan J, Barlette Y, Basu S, Bose I, Brooks L, Buhalis D, Carter L, Wright R, ¿et al. “So what if ChatGPT wrote it?” Multidisciplinary perspectives on opportunities, challenges and implications of generative conversational AI for research, practice and policy. Int J Inf Manag. 2023; 71:102642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102642 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102642
22. Howell BE, Potgieter PH. What do telecommunications policy academics have to fear from GPT-3? Telecomm Policy. 2023;47(7):102576. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2023.102576 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2023.102576
23. Marchena Sekli G, Godo A, Véliz JC. Generative AI solutions for faculty and students: A review of literature and roadmap for future research. J Inf Technol Educ Res. 2024; 23:014. https://doi.org/10.28945/5304 DOI: https://doi.org/10.28945/5304
24. Ashkanani J. Public perceptions of health information generated by AI: A research study. Med Writ. 2025;34(2):70-73. https://doi.org/10.56012/itdm3913 DOI: https://doi.org/10.56012/itdm3913
25. Alsofyani AH, Barzanji AM. The effects of ChatGPT-generated feedback on Saudi EFL learners’ writing skills and perception at the tertiary level: A mixed-methods study. J Educ Comput Res. 2025;63(2):431-463. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331241307297 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331241307297
26. Golding JM, Lippert A, Neuschatz JS, Salomon I, Burke K. Generative AI and college students: Use and perceptions. Teach Psychol. 2025;52(3):369-380. https://doi.org/10.1177/00986283241280350 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00986283241280350
27. Zhang R, Wang J. Perceptions, adoption intentions, and impacts of generative AI among Chinese university students. Curr Psychol. 2025;44(11):11276-11295. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-025-07928-3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-025-07928-3
28. Balasa K, Dumagay AH, Alieto EO, González Vallejo R. Gender and age dynamics in future educators' attitudes toward AI integration in education: A sample from state-managed universities in Zamboanga Peninsula, Philippines. Semin Med Writ Educ. 2025;4:668. https://doi.org/10.56294/mw2025668 DOI: https://doi.org/10.56294/mw2025668
29. Bantoto FM, Rillo R, Abequibel B, Mangila B, Alieto EO. Is AI an effective “learning tool” in academic writing? Investigating the perceptions of third-year university students on the use of artificial intelligence in classroom instruction. In: Motahhir S, Bossoufi B, editors. Digital technologies and applications. ICDTA 2024. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems. Vol. 1098. Cham: Springer; 2024. p. 72-81. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-68650-4_ DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-68650-4_8
30. Dumagay AH, Balasa KA, Kunting AF, Cabangcala RB. AI acceptance among prospective social studies and culture and arts education students. In: Arai K, editor. Intelligent computing. CompCom 2025. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems. Vol. 1426. Springer; 2025. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-92611-2_11 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-92611-2_11
31. Klar M. Using ChatGPT is easy, using it effectively is tough? A mixed methods study on K-12 students’ perceptions, interaction patterns, and support for learning with generative AI chatbots. Smart Learn Environ. 2025;12(1):32. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-025-00385-2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-025-00385-2
32. Tejada L. Pre-Service and In-Service Teachers’ Perspectives on Artificial Intelligence in Education: Insights from Physical Education and Classroom Practice in the Southern Philippines. LatIA. 2025;3:248. https://doi.org/10.62486/latia2025248 DOI: https://doi.org/10.62486/latia2025248
33. Toukoumidis AT, Mendoza CV, Alieto EO, Chiguano MP. The influence of the media on the perception of endophobia. Dirasat: Human and Social Sciences. 2025;53(4):9008. https://doi.org/10.35516/Hum.2025.9008 DOI: https://doi.org/10.35516/Hum.2025.9008
34. Creswell JW, Creswell JD. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage Publications; 2017.
35. Cohen L, Manion L, Morrison K. Research methods in education. London: Routledge; 2002. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203224342
36. Chan CKY, Tsi LHY. Will generative AI replace teachers in higher education? A study of teacher and student perceptions. Stud Educ Eval. 2024 Dec;83:101395. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2024.101395 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2024.101395
37. Zhang W, Li AW, Wu C. University students’ perceptions of using generative AI in translation practices. Instr Sci. 2025;53:633–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-025-09705-y DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-025-09705-y
38. Song Y, Huang L, Zheng L, Fan M, Liu Z. Interactions with generative AI chatbots: unveiling dialogic dynamics, students’ perceptions, and practical competencies in creative problem-solving. Int J Educ Technol High Educ. 2025;22(1):12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-025-00508-2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-025-00508-2
39. Russo C, Romano L, Clemente D, Iacovone L, Gladwin TE, Panno A. Gender differences in artificial intelligence: the role of artificial intelligence anxiety. Front Psychol. 2025; 16:1559457. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1559457 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1559457
40. Venkatesh V, Morris MG, Davis GB, Davis FD. User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Q. 2003;27(3):425-478. https://doi.org/10.2307/3003 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
41. Venkatesh V, Morris MG. Why don’t men ever stop to ask for directions? Gender, social influence, and their role in technology acceptance and usage behavior. MIS Q. 2000; 24:115-139.
https://doi.org/10.2307/3250981 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3250981
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Jay Rodel C. Serdenia (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The article is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Unless otherwise stated, associated published material is distributed under the same licence.
