Jovita G. Rivera

John Paul P. Miranda, Emmanuel B. Parreño, Jovita G. Rivera

The integration of AI tools in academic settings has introduced a distinct form of strain that existing frameworks like technostress and digital fatigue have not yet fully addressed. This study develops a conceptual model and identifies the dimensions that define AI fatigue as a form of strain arising from sustained academic use of AI tools. Using grounded theory analysis of open-ended responses from 1,054 university students across three universities in the Philippines, the study examined the cognitive, motivational, emotional, physical, and attentional pressures students experienced during AI-supported academic work. Analysis produced five dimensions of AI fatigue, namely Cognitive Overload, Motivational Disengagement, Moral Unease, Physical Strain, and Attentional Drift, each consisting of two indicators grounded in participant accounts. The findings also yielded the AI Fatigue Model, a stage-based framework that explains how these pressures accumulate and reinforce one another across repeated AI interaction in academic tasks. These contributions establish a conceptual and exploratory foundation for AI fatigue as a distinct construct and provide a basis for future instrument validation, scale development, and cross-contextual inquiry in academic settings where AI now mediates student learning.

John Paul P. Miranda, Rhiziel P. Manalese, Mark Anthony A. Castro et al.

This study examined how moral disengagement influences Filipino college students' intention to use ChatGPT in academic writing. The model tested five mechanisms: moral justification, euphemistic labeling, displacement of responsibility, minimizing consequences, and attribution of blame. These mechanisms were analyzed as predictors of attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control, which then predicted behavioral intention. A total of 418 students with ChatGPT experience participated. The results showed that several moral disengagement mechanisms influenced students' attitudes and sense of control. Among the predictors, attribution of blame had the strongest influence, while attitudes had the highest impact on behavioral intention. The model explained more than half of the variation in intention. These results suggest that students often rely on institutional gaps and peer behavior to justify AI use. Many believe it is acceptable to use ChatGPT for learning or when rules are unclear. This shows a need for clear academic integrity policies, ethical guidance, and classroom support. The study also recognizes that intention-based models may not fully explain student behavior. Emotional factors, peer influence, and convenience can also affect decisions. The results provide useful insights for schools that aim to support responsible and informed AI use in higher education.