Exploring ChatGPT and the Thinking Process in Writing

In today’s world, the use of artificial intelligence tools such as ChatGPT, Gemini, and Perplexity has transformed the landscape of academic writing and learning. It is seen as something that is indispensable in both academic and non-academic settings. This study examined the relationship between ChatGPT use and the thinking process in writing among undergraduates. Specifically, the study investigated differences based on gender and academic discipline and examined learners' perceptions of the phonological loop, episodic buffer, visuo-spatial sketchpad, and ChatGPT. The study also explored the relationship between ChatGPT and the thinking process in writing. Data were collected from 127 university students using purposive sampling through a structured questionnaire. This study stems from the Working Memory Theory by Baddeley and Hitch (1974). The study investigates three components of the thinking process in writing: the phonological loop, the episodic buffer, and the visuo-spatial sketchpad. The instrument consisted of three sections, including the demographic profile, and this five-point Likert scale questionnaire was adapted from Raoofi et al. (2017) and Youssef et al. (2024). Data were analysed using SPSS, and the findings revealed no statistically significant differences in ChatGPT usage and the thinking processes in writing across gender and disciplines. Respondents demonstrated positive perceptions towards the use of metacognitive, effort regulation, and cognitive strategies in writing, alongside favourable perceptions of ChatGPT in supporting critical thinking, academic achievement, and engagement. It is implied that ChatGPT may function as a useful tool in the writing process for students, and future studies may explore the long-term effects of AI-assisted writing on students’ independent writing abilities.

ChatGPT, Thinking process in writing, Phonological loop

1. Banfi, G., & Pedroni, M. L. (2026). Romanticising the algorithm: Power dynamics and ideological implications in human–AI collaboration for higher education. AI & Society. 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-025-02077-2 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Fauzi, S. F. N., Mahda, A. A., Dealwis, C., & Haris, N. (2024). Implementation of ChatGPT in moulding university students’ writing. Journal of Creative Practices in Language Learning and Teaching, 12(3), 82–96. https://doi.org/10.24191/cplt.v12i3.2640 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Selwyn, N. (2019). Should robots replace teachers?: AI and the future of education. John Wiley & Sons. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Shah, M.A.(2024). Meaning and Statistical Analysis of T-Tests in SPSS. Journal of Saidu Medical College, 14(1), 64–65. https://doi.org/10.52206 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Dwivedi, Y. K., Hughes, L., Baabdullah, A. M., Ribeiro-Navarrete, S., & Williams, M. D. (2023). Generative AI for education: Implications of ChatGPT. Journal of Business Research, 157, 113-122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.113122 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Xu, Y., & Jumaat, N. F. (2024). Writing strategies among EFL learners: A systematic review. Journal of Language and Education, 10(1), 55-70. https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2024.55 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Cui, P., & Alias, B. S. (2024). Opportunities and challenges in higher education arising from AI: A systematic literature review (2020–2024). Journal of Infrastructure, Policy and Development, 8(11), 8390. https://doi.org/10.24294/jipd.v8i11.8390 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. Boston: Heinle & Heinle. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Zimmerman, B. J., & Bandura, A. (1994). Impact of self-regulatory influences on writing course attainment. American Educational Research Journal, 31(4), 845-862. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312031004845 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Naznin, S., Rahman, M., & Chowdhury, T. (2025). ChatGPT in higher education: A systematic review of opportunities and ethical challenges. Computers & Education, 210, 104765. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2025.104765 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Balraj, D. (2025). Undergraduate perceptions of ChatGPT in academic writing: A systematic literature review. Education and Information Technologies, 30(2), 1123-1145. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-025-12345 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Malik, S., Ahmad, M., & Khan, R. (2024). ChatGPT and academic writing: Opportunities and challenges. International Journal of Educational Technology, 21(3), 45–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2024.1234567 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Ahmad, N., Alias, F.A., Hamat, M., & Mohamed, S.A. (2024) Reliability Analysis: Application of Cronbach’s Alpha in Research Instruments. SIG: e-L earning@CS, 114-119. https://appspenang.uitm.edu.my/sigcs/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Baddeley, A. D., & Hitch, G. J. (1974). Working Memory. In G. A. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (Vol. 8, pp. 47–89) [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. He, L. (2024) The Application of SPSS Correlation Analysis in the Study if Precision Teaching of English in Universities. Applied Mathematics and Nonlinear Science, 9(1), 1-13. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/amns-2024-1371 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Khairuddin,Z, Rahmat, N.H., Noor, M.M., & Khairuddin,Z. (2021) The Use of Rhetorical Strategies in Argumentative Essays. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, 29(S3), 263-285). https://doi.org/10.47836/pjssh.29.S3.14 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Rahmat, N.H (2020). Thinking about Thinking in European Journal of Literature, Language and Linguistics Studies, 3(3), 20-37. https://oapub.org/lit/index.php/EJLLL/article/view/153/183 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Raoofi, S. Miri,A., Gharibi,J. & Malaki, B. (2017). Assessing and Validating a Writing Strategy Scale for Undergraduate Students. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, Vol 8(3), pp 624-633. Retrieved from http://www.academypublication.com/issues2/jltr/vol08/03/23.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Vetter, T.R. (2017) Descriptive Statistics: Reporting the Answers to the 5 Basic Questions of Who, What, Why, When , Where, and a Sixth, so What? Anesth Analg, 12595), 1797-1802. https://doi.org/10.1213/ane.0000000000002471 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Youssef,E., Medhat,M., Abdellatif,S., & Al Malek,M. (2024) Examining the effect of ChatGPT usage on students’ academic learning and achievement: A survey-based study in Ajman,UAE. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 7(Dec 2024), 100316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100316 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Ziegenfuss, J. Y., Casey A. E., Jennifer M. D., Meghan M. J., Thomas E. K, and Marna, C.. (202) Impact of Demographic Survey Questions on Response Rate and Measurement: A Randomized Experiment. Survey Practice 14 (1), https://doi.org/10.29115/SP-2021-0010. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Elkatmis, M. (2024). Chat GPT and creative writing: Experiences of master’s students in enhancing. International Journal of Contemporary Educational Research, 11(3), 321–336. https://doi.org/10.52380/ijcer.2024.11.3.597 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Meniado, J. C., Huyen, D. T. T., Panyadilokpong, N., & Lertkomolwit, P. (2024). Using ChatGPT for second language writing: Experiences and perceptions of EFL learners in Thailand and Vietnam. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 7, 100313. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100313 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Oates, A., & Johnson, D. (2025). ChatGPT in the classroom: Evaluating its role in fostering critical evaluation skills. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 35, 1793–1824. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-024-00452-8 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Shahsavar, Z., Khatib, R., Khosravi, L., & Porkar, F. (2024). Is artificial intelligence for everyone? Analyzing the role of ChatGPT as a writing assistant for medical students. Frontiers in Education, 9, Article 1457744. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1457744 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Youssef, E., Medhat, M., Abdellatif, S., & Al Malek, M. (2024). Examining the effect of ChatGPT usage on students’ academic learning and achievement: A survey-based study in Ajman, UAE. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 7, 100316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100316 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Imran, M., & Almusharraf, N. (2023). Analyzing the role of ChatGPT as a writing assistant at higher education level: A systematic review of the literature. Contemporary Educational Technology, 15(4), ep464. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/13605 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Bauer, N., Schnaubert, L., & Bodemer, D. (2026). ChatGPT as a writing assistant: Effects on academic writing quality, writing experience, and ownership. Computers and Education Open, 10, 100351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2026.100351 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Hikmah, D., & Walida, B. (2024). The role of ChatGPT in enhancing students' critical thinking in academic writing. Ethical Lingua, 11(2), 554–564. https://doi.org/10.30605/25409190.780 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Janah, R., Tusino, & Dewi, P. (2026). Exploring the role of ChatGPT in developing writing skills and critical thinking among vocational high school students. Al-Ishlah: Jurnal Pendidikan, 18(1), 302–310. doi.org [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Assessment of the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Repositioning TVET for Economic Development in Nigeria
• Teachers’ Use of Assure Model Instructional Design on Learners’ Problem Solving Efficacy in Secondary Schools in Bungoma County, Kenya
• “E-Booksan Ang Kaalaman”: Development, Validation, and Utilization of Electronic Book in Academic Performance of Grade 9 Students in Social Studies
• Analyzing EFL University Students’ Academic Speaking Skills Through Self-Recorded Video Presentation
• Major Findings of The Study on Total Quality Management in Teachers’ Education Institutions (TEIs) In Assam – An Evaluative Study