Teachers' Perspectives on the Use of AI Detection Tools: Insights from Ridge Regression Analysis

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2512.11823v1
• Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2025 16:08:00 GMT
• Title: Teachers' Perspectives on the Use of AI Detection Tools: Insights from Ridge Regression Analysis
• Authors: Vicky P. Vital, Francis F. Balahadia, Maria Anna D. Cruz, Dolores D. Mallari, Juvy C. Grume, Erika M. Pineda, Jordan L. Salenga, Lloyd D. Feliciano, John Paul P. Miranda,
• Abstract summary: This study explores the perceptions of 213 Filipino teachers toward AI detection tools in academic settings.<n>It focuses on the factors that influence teachers' trust, concerns, and decision-making regarding these tools.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: This study explores the perceptions of 213 Filipino teachers toward AI detection tools in academic settings. It focuses on the factors that influence teachers' trust, concerns, and decision-making regarding these tools. The research investigates how teachers' trust in AI detection tools affects their perceptions of fairness and decision-making in evaluating student outputs. It also explores how concerns about AI tools and social norms influence the relationship between trust and decision-making. Ridge Regression analysis was used to examine the relationships between the predictors and the dependent variable. The results revealed that trust in AI detection tools is the most significant predictor of perceived fairness and decision-making among teachers. Concerns about AI tools and social norms have weaker effects on teachers' perceptions. The study emphasized critical role of trust in shaping teachers' perceptions of AI detection tools. Teachers who trust these tools are more likely to view them as fair and effective. In contrast, concerns and social norms have a limited influence on perceptions and decision-making. For recommendations, training and institutional guidelines should emphasize how these tools work, their limitations, and best practices for their use. Striking a balance between policy enforcement and educator support is essential for fostering trust in AI detection technologies. Encouraging experienced users to share insights through communities of practice could enhance the adoption and effective use of AI detection tools in educational settings..

Related papers

• How to Assess AI Literacy: Misalignment Between Self-Reported and Objective-Based Measures [6.943056322842481]
  The widespread adoption of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in K-12 education highlights the need for psychometrically-tested measures of teachers' AI literacy.<n>This study developed and evaluated SR and OB measures of teacher AI literacy within the established framework of Concept, Use, Evaluate, and Ethics.<n>Latent profile analysis identified six distinct profiles, including overestimation (SR > OB), underestimation (SR OB), alignment (SR close to OB) and a unique low-SR/low-OB profile among teachers without AI literacy experience.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-03T00:10:41Z)
• Psychological Factors Influencing University Students Trust in AI-Based Learning Assistants [0.0]
  This paper adopts a psychology oriented perspective to examine how university students form trust in AI based learning assistants.<n>We propose a conceptual framework that organizes psychological predictors of trust into four groups: cognitive appraisals, affective reactions, social relational factors, and contextual moderators.<n>The paper highlights that trust in AI is a psychological process shaped by individual differences and learning environments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-19T09:44:43Z)
• Evaluating AI-Powered Learning Assistants in Engineering Higher Education: Student Engagement, Ethical Challenges, and Policy Implications [0.2099922236065961]
  This study evaluates the Educational AI Hub, an AI-powered learning framework, implemented in undergraduate civil and environmental engineering courses at a large R1 public university.<n>Students valued the AI assistant for its accessibility and comfort, with nearly half reporting greater ease using it than seeking help from instructors or teaching assistants.<n>Ethical uncertainty, particularly around institutional policy and academic integrity, emerged as a key barrier to full engagement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-06T03:02:49Z)
• Media and responsible AI governance: a game-theoretic and LLM analysis [61.132523071109354]
  This paper investigates the interplay between AI developers, regulators, users, and the media in fostering trustworthy AI systems.<n>Using evolutionary game theory and large language models (LLMs), we model the strategic interactions among these actors under different regulatory regimes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-12T21:39:38Z)
• Analyzing the Impact of AI Tools on Student Study Habits and Academic Performance [0.0]
  The research focuses on how AI tools can support personalized learning, adaptive test adjustments, and provide real-time classroom analysis.<n>Student feedback revealed strong support for these features, and the study found a significant reduction in study hours alongside an increase in GPA.<n>Despite these benefits, challenges such as over-reliance on AI and difficulties in integrating AI with traditional teaching methods were also identified.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-03T04:51:57Z)
• How Performance Pressure Influences AI-Assisted Decision Making [52.997197698288936]
  We show how pressure and explainable AI (XAI) techniques interact with AI advice-taking behavior.<n>Our results show complex interaction effects, with different combinations of pressure and XAI techniques either improving or worsening AI advice taking behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-21T22:39:52Z)
• Combining AI Control Systems and Human Decision Support via Robustness and Criticality [53.10194953873209]
  We extend a methodology for adversarial explanations (AE) to state-of-the-art reinforcement learning frameworks. We show that the learned AI control system demonstrates robustness against adversarial tampering. In a training / learning framework, this technology can improve both the AI's decisions and explanations through human interaction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-03T15:38:57Z)
• Generative AI in Education: A Study of Educators' Awareness, Sentiments, and Influencing Factors [2.217351976766501]
  This study delves into university instructors' experiences and attitudes toward AI language models. We find no correlation between teaching style and attitude toward generative AI. While CS educators show far more confidence in their technical understanding of generative AI tools, they show no more confidence in their ability to detect AI-generated work.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-22T19:21:29Z)
• Adoption of Artificial Intelligence in Schools: Unveiling Factors Influencing Teachers Engagement [5.546987319988426]
  AI tools adopted in schools may not always be considered and studied products of the research community. We developed a reliable instrument to measure more holistic factors influencing teachers adoption of adaptive learning platforms in schools. Not generating any additional workload, in-creasing teacher ownership and trust, generating support mechanisms for help, and assuring that ethical issues are minimised are also essential for the adoption of AI in schools.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-03T11:47:08Z)
• AI Explainability 360: Impact and Design [120.95633114160688]
  In 2019, we created AI Explainability 360 (Arya et al. 2020), an open source software toolkit featuring ten diverse and state-of-the-art explainability methods. This paper examines the impact of the toolkit with several case studies, statistics, and community feedback. The paper also describes the flexible design of the toolkit, examples of its use, and the significant educational material and documentation available to its users.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-24T19:17:09Z)
• Explainable Active Learning (XAL): An Empirical Study of How Local Explanations Impact Annotator Experience [76.9910678786031]
  We propose a novel paradigm of explainable active learning (XAL), by introducing techniques from the recently surging field of explainable AI (XAI) into an Active Learning setting. Our study shows benefits of AI explanation as interfaces for machine teaching--supporting trust calibration and enabling rich forms of teaching feedback, and potential drawbacks--anchoring effect with the model judgment and cognitive workload.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-01-24T22:52:18Z)
• Effect of Confidence and Explanation on Accuracy and Trust Calibration in AI-Assisted Decision Making [53.62514158534574]
  We study whether features that reveal case-specific model information can calibrate trust and improve the joint performance of the human and AI. We show that confidence score can help calibrate people's trust in an AI model, but trust calibration alone is not sufficient to improve AI-assisted decision making.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-01-07T15:33:48Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.