Login Register

Environment and Social Psychology

  • Home
  • About the Journal
    • Focus and Scope
    • Peer Review Process
    • Open Access Policy
    • Publishing Ethics
    • Erratum & Withdrawal Policies
    • Copyright & Licence
    • Indexing & Archiving
    • Article Processing Charges (APC) Payment
    • Publisher
    • Contact
  • Article
    • Current
    • Archives
  • Submissions
  • Editorial Team
  • Announcements
  • Special Issues
Apply for Editorial Board Submit an Article

editor-in-chief

Editor-in-Chief

Prof. Dr. Paola Magnano
Kore University of Enna
Italy

Prof. Dr. Gabriela Topa
Social and organizational Psychology, Universidad Nacional de Educacion a Distancia
Spain

indexing-and-archiving

Indexing & Archiving

issn

ISSN

ISSN: 2424-8975 (Online)

ISSN: 2424-7979 (Print)

apc

Article Processing Charges (APCs)

US$1700

frequency

Publication Frequency

Monthly since 2024

Most Viewed

  • The Role of Social Support and Environment: The Mediating Effect of College Students’ Psychology and Behavior
    9044
  • The sustainable practice of education fairness in China: The influence of college students’ perceptions of senior teachers' support on students’ well-being
    8188
  • The Balance Between Resource Development And Environmental Protection Is “Social Contracting”: The Case Of LAPSSET Project In Kenya
    7955
  • Analyzing impacts of campus journalism on student’s grammar consciousness and confidence in writing engagements
    7494
  • A trip down memory lane: Sustaining collective memory through old shophouses in Jalan Mendaling Kajang, Selangor
    6064

Keywords

Home > Archives > Vol. 11 No. 1 (2026): Publishing > Research Articles
ESP-4348

Published

2026-01-13

Issue

Vol. 11 No. 1 (2026): Publishing

Section

Research Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2026 Shen Qinjie1,*, Wynn Arunrugstichai

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

The journal adopts the Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0), which means that anyone can reuse and redistribute the materials for non-commercial purposes as long as you follow the license terms and the original source is properly cited.

Author(s) shall retain the copyright of their work and grant the Journal/Publisher rights for the first publication with the work concurrently licensed since 2023 Vol.8 No.2.

Under this license, author(s) will allow third parties to download, reuse, reprint, modify, distribute and/or copy the content under the condition that the authors are given credit. No permission is required from the authors or the publisher.

This broad license intends to facilitate free access, as well as the unrestricted use of original works of all types. This ensures that the published work is freely and openly available in perpetuity.

By providing open access, the following benefits are brought about:

  • Higher Visibility, Availability and Citations-free and unlimited accessibility of the publication over the internet without any restrictions increases citation of the article.
  • Ease of search-publications are easily searchable in search engines and indexing databases.
  • Rapid Publication – accepted papers are immediately published online.
  • Available for free download immediately after publication at https://esp.as-pub.com/index.php/ESP

 

Copyright Statement

1.The authors certify that the submitted manuscripts are original works, do not infringe the rights of others, are free from academic misconduct and confidentiality issues, and that there are no disputes over the authorship scheme of the collaborative articles. In case of infringement, academic misconduct and confidentiality issues, as well as disputes over the authorship scheme, all responsibilities will be borne by the authors.

2. The author agrees to grant the Editorial Office of Environment and Social Psychology a licence to use the reproduction right, distribution right, information network dissemination right, performance right, translation right, and compilation right of the submitted manuscript, including the work as a whole, as well as the diagrams, tables, abstracts, and any other parts that can be extracted from the work and used in accordance with the characteristics of the journal. The Editorial Board of Environment and Social Psychology has the right to use and sub-licence the above mentioned works for wide dissemination in print, electronic and online versions, and, in accordance with the characteristics of the periodical, for the period of legal protection of the property right of the copyright in the work, and for the territorial scope of the work throughout the world.

3. The authors are entitled to the copyright of their works under the relevant laws of Singapore, provided that they do not exercise their rights in a manner prejudicial to the interests of the Journal.

About Licence

Environment and Social Psychology is an open access journal and all published work is available under the Creative Commons Licence, Authors shall retain copyright of their work and grant the journal/publisher the right of first publication, and their work shall be licensed under the Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0).

Under this licence, the author grants permission to third parties to download, reuse, reprint, modify, distribute and/or copy the content with attribution to the author. No permission from the author or publisher is required.

This broad licence is intended to facilitate free access to and unrestricted use of original works of all kinds. This ensures that published works remain free and accessible in perpetuity. Submitted manuscripts, once accepted, are immediately available to the public and permanently accessible free of charge on the journal’s official website (https://esp.as-pub.com/index.php/ESP). Allowing users to read, download, copy, print, search for or link to the full text of the article, or use it for other legal purposes. However, the use of the work must retain the author's signature, be limited to non-commercial purposes, and not be interpretative.

Click to download <Agreement on the Licence for the Use of Copyright on Environmental and Social Psychology>.

How to Cite

Shen Qinjie, & Wynn Arunrugstichai. (2026). Coping with assessment disruption: Business educators’ psychological and ethical responses to generative AI. Environment and Social Psychology, 11(1), ESP-4348. https://doi.org/10.59429/esp.v11i1.4348
  • ACM
  • ACS
  • APA
  • ABNT
  • Chicago
  • Harvard
  • IEEE
  • MLA
  • Turabian
  • Vancouver

  • Download Citation
  • Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
  • BibTeX

Coping with assessment disruption: Business educators’ psychological and ethical responses to generative AI

Shen Qinjie

Graduate School, Bansomdejchaopraya Rajabhat University, Bangkok, 10600, Thailand

Wynn Arunrugstichai

Raffles International College Bangkok, Samut Prakan, 10540, Thailand


DOI: https://doi.org/10.59429/esp.v11i1.4348


Keywords: generative AI; assessment disruption; business educators; academic integrity; teacher identity; emotional labor; social psychology; higher education


Abstract

As generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) transforms higher education, faculty face new psychological and ethical tensions in assessment. This qualitative study examines how business educators in Thailand perceive and respond to the disruption that GenAI has introduced into academic evaluations. Drawing on semi-structured interviews with ten university instructors, the study identifies four major themes: reliance on traditional methods to protect academic integrity, concern over the erosion of students’ critical thinking, frustration with pedagogical inconsistency, and exploratory attempts at meaningful AI integration. These findings reveal that educators’ responses are shaped not only by technological change but also by emotional strain, identity conflict, and ethically charged decisions around academic integrity, fairness, and responsible AI use within their institutions. The study contributes to social-psychological understandings of how faculty cope with educational transformation, highlighting the need for holistic institutional frameworks that address emotional readiness, ethical guidance, and pedagogical innovation in the age of AI.


References

[1]. 1.Dimitriadou, E., & Lanitis, A. (2023). A critical evaluation, challenges, and future perspectives of using artificial intelligence and emerging technologies in smart classrooms. Smart Learning Environments, 10(1), 12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-023-00231-3

[2]. 2.Chiu, T. K. F., Xia, Q., Zhou, X., Chai, C. S., & Cheng, M. (2023). Systematic literature review on opportunities, challenges, and future research recommendations of artificial intelligence in education. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 4, 100118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100118

[3]. 3.Xia, Q., Weng, X., Ouyang, F., Lin, T. J., & Chiu, T. K. (2024). A scoping review on how generative artificial intelligence transforms assessment in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21(1), 40. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00468-z

[4]. 4.Kasneci, E., Sessler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., et al. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103, 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274

[5]. 5.Ellis, R., Han, F., & Cook, H. (2025). Qualitatively different teacher experiences of teaching with generative artificial intelligence. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 22(1), 33. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-025-00532-2

[6]. 6.Francis, N. J., Jones, S., & Smith, D. P. (2025). Generative AI in higher education: Balancing innovation and integrity. British Journal of Biomedical Science, 82, 14048. https://doi.org/10.3389/bjbs.2024.14048

[7]. 7.Cotton, D. R. E., Cotton, P. A., & Shipway, J. R. (2023). Chatting and cheating: Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 61(2), 228–239. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2190148

[8]. 8.Durning, S. J., Dong, T., Ratcliffe, T., Schuwirth, L., Artino, A. R., Boulet, J. R., & Eva, K. (2016). Comparing open-book and closed-book examinations: A systematic review. Academic Medicine, 91(4), 583-599. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000000977

[9]. 9.Bengtsson, L. (2019). Take-Home Exams in Higher Education: A Systematic Review. Education Sciences, 9(4), 267. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci9040267

[10]. 10.Gonsalves, A. (2024). Educating for a post-ChatGPT world: Rethinking Bloom’s taxonomy. Journal of Educational Technology, 12(1), 23–38. https://doi.org/10.17925/jet.2024.12.1.23

[11]. 11.Baidoo-Anu, D., & Ansah, L. O. (2023). Education in the era of generative artificial intelligence (AI): Understanding the potential benefits of ChatGPT in promoting teaching and learning. Journal of AI, 7(1), 52-62. https://doi.org/10.61969/jai.1337500

[12]. 12.World Economic Forum. (2023). The future of jobs report 2023. Retrieved from https://www.weforum.org/publications/the-future-of-jobs-report-2023/

[13]. 13.Khlaif, Z. N., Alasali, A., Netshandama, V., Shamali, M., & Ayyoub, A. M. (2025). Against, avoid, adopt, explore: A spectrum of educators’ responses to generative AI in higher education. Education Sciences, 15(1), 40. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15010040

[14]. 14.Folkman, S., & Moskowitz, J. T. (2004). Coping: Pitfalls and promise. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 745–774. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.141456

[15]. 15.Skinner, E. A., Edge, K., Altman, J., & Sherwood, H. (2003). Searching for the structure of coping: A review and critique of category systems for classifying ways of coping. Psychological Bulletin, 129(2), 216–269. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.129.2.216

[16]. 16.Kelchtermans, G. (2009). Who I am in how I teach is the message: Self-understanding, vulnerability and reflection. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 15(2), 257–272. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540600902875332

[17]. 17.Sutton, R. E., & Wheatley, K. F. (2003). Teachers’ emotions and teaching: A review of the literature and directions for future research. Educational Psychology Review, 15(4), 327–358. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026131715856

[18]. 18.Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2009). Interviews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing. sage.

[19]. 19.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

[20]. 20.Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X05279903

[21]. 21.Susnjak, T., & McIntosh, T. R. (2024). ChatGPT: The end of online exam integrity? Education Sciences, 14(6), 656. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14060656

[22]. 22.Zaimoğlu, S., & Dağtaş, A. (2025). Teacher cognition and practices in using generative AI tools to support student engagement in EFL higher education contexts. Behavioral Sciences, 15(9), 1202. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15091202

[23]. 23. Gimpel, H., Hall, K., Decker, S., Eymann, T., Gutheil, N., Lämmermann, L., Braig, N., Maedche, A., Röglinger, M., Ruiner, C., Schoch, M., Schoop, M., Urbach, N., & Vandirk, S. (2025). Using generative AI in higher education: A guide for instructors. Journal of Information Systems Education, 36(3), 237–256. https://doi.org/10.62273/QLLG7172

[24]. 24.Wilkinson, C., Oppert, M., & Owen, M. (2024). Investigating academics’ attitudes towards ChatGPT: A qualitative study. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 40(4), 104–119. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.9456

[25]. 25.Lubbe, A., Marais, E., & Kruger, D. (2025). Cultivating independent thinkers: The triad of artificial intelligence, Bloom’s taxonomy and critical thinking in assessment pedagogy. Education and Information Technologies, 30, 17589–17622. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-025-13476-x

[26]. 26.Wang, J., & Fan, W. (2025). The effect of ChatGPT on students’ learning performance, learning perception, and higher-order thinking: Insights from a meta-analysis. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 12, 621. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-04787-y

[27]. 27.Shata, A., & Hartley, K. (2025). Artificial intelligence and communication technologies in academia: faculty perceptions and the adoption of generative AI. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 22(1), 14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-025-00511-7

[28]. 28.Kohnke, L., & Ulla, M. B. (2024). Embracing generative artificial intelligence: The perspectives of English instructors in Thai higher education institutions. Knowledge Management & E-Learning, 16(4), 653–670. https://doi.org/10.34105/j.kmel.2024.16.030



ISSN: 2424-8975
21 Woodlands Close #02-10, Primz Bizhub,Postal 737854, Singapore

Email:editorial_office@as-pub.com