The objective of this work was to analyze the effect of the use of ChatGPT in the teaching-learning process of scientific research in engineering. Artificial intelligence (AI) is a topic of great interest in higher education, as it combines hardware, software and programming languages to implement deep learning procedures. We focused on a specific course on scientific research in engineering, in which we measured the competencies, expressed in terms of the indicators, mastery, comprehension and synthesis capacity, in students who decided to use or not ChatGPT for the development and fulfillment of their activities. The data were processed through the statistical T-Student test and box-and-whisker plots were constructed. The results show that students’ reliance on ChatGPT limits their engagement in acquiring knowledge related to scientific research. This research presents evidence indicating that engineering science research students rely on ChatGPT to replace their academic work and consequently, they do not act dynamically in the teaching-learning process, assuming a static role.

Abasaheb SA, Subashini R. (2023). Maneuvering of digital transformation: Role of artificial intelligence in empowering leadership – An empirical overview. International Journal of Professional Business Review, 8(5): e01838. https://doi.org/10.26668/businessreview/2023.v8i5.1838

Abdelhafiz, A. S., Ali, A., Maaly, A. M., Ziady, H. H., Sultan, E. A., & Mahgoub, M. A. (2024). Knowledge, Perceptions and Attitude of Researchers Towards Using ChatGPT in Research. Journal of Medical Systems, 48(1). Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-024-02044-4

Al Murshidi, G., Shulgina, G., Kapuza, A., & Costley, J. (2024). How understanding the limitations and risks of using ChatGPT can contribute to willingness to use. Smart Learning Environments, 11(1). Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-024-00322-9

Albassam WA. (2023). The power of artificial intelligence in recruitment: An analytical review of current AI-based recruitment strategies. International Journal of Professional Business Review, 8(6): e02089. https://doi.org/10.26668/businessreview/2023.v8i6.2089

Alblooshi MAJA, Mohamed AM, Yusr MM. (2023). Moderating role of artificial intelligence between leadership skills and business continuity. International Journal of Professional Business Review, 8(6): e03225. https://doi.org/10.26668/businessreview/2023.v8i6.3225

Dúo-Terrón, P. (2024). Generative Artificial Intelligence: Educational Reflections from an Analysis of Scientific Production. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 14(3), 756-769. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.2680

Fang, Y., Chen, J., & Wang, R. (2024). A commentary on: «Matters arising: Authors of research papers must cautiously use ChatGPT for scientific writing». International Journal of Surgery (London, England), 110(3), 1877-1878. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1097/JS9.0000000000001037

Fiorillo, L., & Mehta, V. (2024). Accelerating editorial processes in scientific journals: Leveraging AI for rapid manuscript review. Oral Oncology Reports, 10. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oor.2024.100511

Gwon, Y. N., Kim, J. H., Chung, H. S., Jung, E. J., Chun, J., Lee, S., & Shim, S. R. (2024). The Use of Generative AI for Scientific Literature Searches for Systematic Reviews: ChatGPT and Microsoft Bing AI Performance Evaluation. JMIR Medical Informatics, 12. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.2196/51187

Hind, B., Jallal, M., Serhier, Z., & Bennani Othmani, M. (2024). Exploring the Horizon: The Impact of AI Tools on Scientific Research. Data and Metadata, 3. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.56294/dm2024289

Hu X, Tian Y, Nagato K, Nakao M, Liu A. (2023). Opportunities and challenges of ChatGPT for design knowledge management. Procedia CIRP, 119: 245–250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2023.05.001

Javanbakht, A. (2024). In Context: AI Will Write Your Paper: The Very Different Future of Research and Scientific Writing in the Age of Artificial Intelligence. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 63(7), 681-683. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2024.03.013

Lehr, S. A., Caliskan, A., Liyanage, S., & Banaji, M. R. (2024). ChatGPT as Research Scientist: Probing GPT’s capabilities as a Research Librarian, Research Ethicist, Data Generator, and Data Predictor. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 121(35). Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2404328121

Lindebaum, D., & Fleming, P. (2024). ChatGPT Undermines Human Reflexivity, Scientific Responsibility and Responsible Management Research. British Journal of Management, 35(2), 566-575. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12781

Liu NF, Zhang T, Liang P. (2023). Evaluating verifiability in generative search engines. Computation and Language. Available online: https://arxiv.org/abs/2304.09848 (accessed on 20 October 2024).

Millard, J., Christie, A. P., Dicks, L. V., Isip, J. E., Johnson, T. F., Skinner, G., & Spake, R. (2024). ChatGPT is likely reducing opportunity for support, friendship and learned kindness in research. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 15(10), 1764-1766. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.14395

Mollaki, V. (2024). Death of a reviewer or death of peer review integrity? The challenges of using AI tools in peer reviewing and the need to go beyond publishing policies. Research Ethics, 20(2), 239-250. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1177/17470161231224552

Picazo-Sanchez, P., & Ortiz-Martin, L. (2024). Analysing the impact of ChatGPT in research. Applied Intelligence, 54(5), 4172-4188. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-024-05298-0

Raju Vaishya, Misra A, Vaish A. (2023). ChatGPT: Is this version good for healthcare and research? Diabetes & Metabolic Syndrome: Clinical Research & Reviews, 17: 102744. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dsx.2023.102744

Sabil S, Bangkara BMA, Mogea T, Niswan E, Timotius E. (2023). Identification of HRM improvement strategy using artificial intelligence in modern economic development. International Journal of Professional Business Review, 8(6): e01835. https://doi.org/10.26668/businessreview/2023.v8i6.1835

Sampaio, R. C., Nicolás, M. A., Junquilho, T. A., Silva, L. R. L., de Freitas, C. S., Telles, M., Teixeira, J. S., da Escóssia, F., & dos Santos, L. C. (2024). ChatGPT and other artificial intelligences will transform scientific research: Reflections on their uses. Revista de Sociologia e Politica, 32. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-98732432E008

Sänger, M., De Mecquenem, N., Lewińska, K. E., Bountris, V., Lehmann, F., Leser, U., & Kosch, T. (2024). A qualitative assessment of using ChatGPT as large language model for scientific workflow development. GigaScience, 13. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1093/gigascience/giae030

Schulze Balhorn, L., Weber, J. M., Buijsman, S., Hildebrandt, J. R., Ziefle, M., & Schweidtmann, A. M. (2024). Empirical assessment of ChatGPT’s answering capabilities in natural science and engineering. Scientific Reports, 14(1). Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-54936-7

Shrivastava R. (2023). Role of artificial intelligence in the future of education. International Journal of Professional Business Review, 8(1): e0840. https://doi.org/10.26668/businessreview/2023.v8i1.840

Shyr, C., Grout, R. W., Kennedy, N., Akdas, Y., Tischbein, M., Milford, J., Tan, J., Quarles, K., Edwards, T. L., Novak, L. L., White, J., Wilkins, C. H., & Harris, P. A. (2024). Leveraging artificial intelligence to summarize abstracts in lay language for increasing research accessibility and transparency. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 31(10), 2294-2303. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocae186

Siche R, Siche N. (2023). El modelo de lenguaje basado en inteligencia artificial sensible - ChatGPT: Análisis bibliométrico y posibles usos en la agricultura y pecuaria. Scientia Agropecuaria, 14(1): 111–116. https://doi.org/10.17268/sci.agropecu.2023.010

Suleiman, A., von Wedel, D., Munoz-Acuna, R., Redaelli, S., Santarisi, A., Seibold, E.-L., Ratajczak, N., Kato, S., Said, N., Sundar, E., Goodspeed, V., & Schaefer, M. S. (2024). Assessing ChatGPT’s ability to emulate human reviewers in scientific research: A descriptive and qualitative approach. Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine, 254. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmpb.2024.108313

Suntoro, S., Zulaeha, I., Mardikantoro, H. B., & Yuniawan, T. (2024). Using ChatGPT to Write Scientific Papers in Indonesia: A Systematic Review. Ianna Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 6(3 Special Issue), 1-16. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13337611

Widyaningrum, R., Wulandari, F., Zainudin, M., Athiyallah, A., & Rizqa, M. (2024). Exploring the factors affecting ChatGPT acceptance among university students. Multidisciplinary Science Journal, 6(12). Scopus. https://doi.org/10.31893/multiscience.2024273

Xingzhi Wang, Nabil Anwer, Yun Dai, Ang Liu (2023). ChatGPT for design, manufacturing, and educa-tion. Procedia CIRP, Volume 119, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2023.04.001