Information Systems Education Journal (ISEDJ) 22 (3)

ISSN: 1545-679X July 2024

Cheating Better with ChatGPT:

A Framework for Teaching Students When to Use
ChatGPT and other Generative AI Bots

David R. Firth
Management Information Systems
[email protected]

Mason Derendinger
[email protected]

Jason Triche
Management Information Systems
[email protected]

Management Information Systems

University of Montana
Missoula, MT 59812, USA

Abstract

In this paper we describe a framework for teaching students when they should, or should not use
generative AI such as ChatGPT. Generative AI has created a fundamental shift in how students can
complete their class assignments, and other tasks such as building resumes and creating cover letters,
and we believe it is imperative that we teach students when the use of generative AI is appropriate, and
when it is not appropriate (i.e., considered cheating). Framework development is based off the 2x2
Product-Market matrix introduced by Ansoff in 1965. Our initial pass at the framework was piloted with
colleagues, and then followed with a focus group of students to refine the framework. We then used the
framework in an MBA class to test its efficacy and gather qualitative feedback. Using the results, we
further refined the framework and then used it to teach two general undergraduate business classes as
a rudimentary test of generalizability across students. The qualitative results were positive. The
framework helps educators understand when to use, or not use ChatGPT, and provides a way to teach
students about the same. We have found that using the framework in class generates interesting
discussions about the use of generative AI.

Keywords: Generative AI, ChatGPT, Teaching, Framework, Flowchart

Recommended Citation: Firth, D.R., Derendinger, M., Triche, J., (2024). Cheating Better with
ChatGPT: A Framework for Teaching Students When to Use ChatGPT and other Generative AI Bots.
Information Systems Education Journal, 22(3), pp. 47-60, https://doi.org/10.62273/BZSU7160

©2024 ISCAP (Information Systems and Computing Academic Professionals) Page 47

https://isedj.org/; https://iscap.us
Information Systems Education Journal (ISEDJ) 22 (3)
ISSN: 1545-679X July 2024

Cheating Better with ChatGPT:

A Framework for Teaching Students When to
Use ChatGPT and other Generative AI Bots
David R. Firth, Mason Derendinger and Jason Triche

1. INTRODUCTION The use of generative AI in universities has

already generated controversy: “There’s an Arms
The introduction of the printing press radically Race on Campus and Professors are Losing” (The
transformed the availability and transfer of Atlantic, 2023), and “Here are the schools and
knowledge. Rather than being forced to rely on colleges that have banned the use of ChatGPT
expensive, handwritten manuscripts for the over plagiarism and misinformation fears”
physical dissemination of knowledge, individuals (Business Insider, 2023), as examples. Its ability
could purchase and consume reasonably-priced, to successfully evaluate and complete
typed knowledge. The introduction of generative complicated functions has resulted in a variety of
artificial intelligence, of which ChatGPT is just an reactions among the educational establishment
example, presents an opportunity to (Baidoo-Anu and Ansah, 2023); several
fundamentally change the process of human institutions have already banned its use (Lim et.
learning in a way not observed since Gutenberg al, 2023), yet it remains a crucial part of business
developed his printing press (Kissinger et. al, innovations (Chen, 2022). However, we disagree
2023). with the approach of restricting or banning its
use. Generative AI has a huge potential to
When the printing press emerged, the low literacy disseminate knowledge (Liebrenz et. al, 2023). It
rate of the European population hampered the has access to a library far beyond the capacity
true potential of the printing press for hundreds (Kissinger et. al, 2023) that a human possesses.
of years. Taking full advantage of a powerful, We believe that Generative AI as a technology is
novel tool at our disposal requires an educated much like the calculator when it was first
population. The same is true for generative AI like introduced. When introduced, many schools
ChatGPT: we must, ourselves, become AI- banned its use for mathematics and other science
literate. AI literacy can be defined as a set of skills subjects, but soon found that it reduced simple
that enable a solid understanding of AI through mathematical errors and allowed the instructors
three priority axes: learning about AI, learning and students to work on more important issues.
about how AI works, and learning for life with AI
(Casal-Otero et al., 2023). Then, as information Generative AI is being utilized in new ways at a
systems professionals, we must ensure that this rapid pace. Wired magazine uses ChatGPT
literacy is passed on to students. It is not throughout their journalistic process, such as
sufficient and perhaps, not even necessary, to generating headlines or ideas for stories
have a technical understanding of AI and its (Lichfield, 2023). It promises advancements in
capabilities. But it is necessary to learn when sustainability decision making (Schoormann et.
generative AI should be used. al, 2023) and even in translating sign language
into verbal communication (Strobel et. al, 2023).
Non-generative AI has already become ubiquitous Software developers have used it to greatly
in daily life. Indeed, artificial intelligence has increase their efficiency, and many students are
generated a 4th Industrial revolution (French et. already using it to complete assignments. The
al, 2021). We use artificial intelligence when our reality that generative AI is so widely used, even
robots clean our floors while we are away, when in its relative infancy, is an indicator of how
our home thermostat automatically sets the ubiquitous it is becoming. Therefore, we believe
temperature to our preference, and when we find that the most relevant questions are, should and
the ideal item for our kitchen via an if so, how we use generative AI for a given use
advertisement on a web page. In short, AI powers case. In this paper, we have developed
the tools we use daily (Baidoo-Anu and Ansah, frameworks to address the should, which then
2023). leads to better solutions to how.

©2024 ISCAP (Information Systems and Computing Academic Professionals) Page 48

https://isedj.org/; https://iscap.us
Information Systems Education Journal (ISEDJ) 22 (3)
ISSN: 1545-679X July 2024

Our frameworks help to address concerns

regarding improper use of generative AI and
encourage students to make use of the
opportunity to use a new tool to aid their learning.
Our overarching goal is to provide a framework
by which students can be introduced to the
effective use of generative AI chat bots in
classroom-related settings. While we absolutely
do not approve of cheating, we are well aware
that cheating is prevalent in business schools.
One comprehensive study of business school
cheating showed that 86% of students had
cheated at least once (Klein et al., 2007). We do
realize that providing a framework to students as
to when and when not to use generative AI could
increase the level of cheating, or perhaps more
importantly given the already high rate of
cheating, the efficacy of cheating. In industry,
leaders expect IS graduates to be able to align
business and technology with the goal of using
artificial intelligence to further the needs of the
business case (Lyytinen et. al, 2023). Students
must also be able to connect the use of IT and AI
to how the tools can help the business generate
value (Lyytinen et. al, 2023). For students with a this framework is iterative. We tested the
general IS undergraduate degree, there is an framework with colleagues and a small group of
expectation that they have a basic understanding students and modified the framework based on
of artificial intelligence (Lyytinen et. al, 2023). We feedback. When we were confident that we had
encourage educators to make use of our an acceptable and useful flowchart and matrices
frameworks to help their students understand and we engaged an entire class of MBAs. From that
utilize the powerful new generative AI tool at their qualitative feedback we made minor changes,
disposal. Our frameworks are useful tools but and then we used the framework in several
operate in different ways. The first framework is sections of undergraduate classes to check that
a simple flowchart that provides basic the framework was useful.
introduction on when to use generative AI like
ChatGPT for students. The second framework is a Figure 1: Flowchart for basic evaluation of
more complex tool, but a more useful tool if one generative AI potential use cases. A user
understands the nuances of how to wield the can begin at the top and proceed stepwise
technology properly. until a positive (yes) or negative (no) has
been determined.
2. FRAMEWORKS
As a starting point, we introduce a simple binary
The flowchart and matrix frameworks that we flowchart, see Figure 1. The purpose of this chart
developed and describe here are exploratory. We is for the preliminary evaluation of the
currently teach the Future of Work sections of our appropriateness of utilizing generative AI for a
undergrad MIS and MIS for the MBAs using a given use case. This flowchart allows students to
Latham and Humberd (2018) article wherein they apply a series of questions to a task to evaluate
developed a framework to help teachers and on a basic level whether generative AI should be
students better understand the four ways jobs used to complete the task. As such, it can be used
respond to automation. This article provides a to explore different types of information or
useful framework for students to better contexts easily for the purpose of showing
understand the Future of Work. Therefore, we students, and others, how large language model
wanted to provide a similar framework for when generative AI can be used in collegiate settings
to use generative AI. To that end, we developed and beyond. To be clear, the scope of the
a flowchart and matrix frameworks from scratch flowchart is to allow students the ability to
to help us, the teachers, understand when to use determine if generative AI should be used in a
generative AI, or not. The goal was to then be collegiate environment (e.g., assignments, group
able to use this framework to explain when to use deliverables, projects).
generative AI to students. The process of building

©2024 ISCAP (Information Systems and Computing Academic Professionals) Page 49

https://isedj.org/; https://iscap.us
Information Systems Education Journal (ISEDJ) 22 (3)
ISSN: 1545-679X July 2024

In our flowchart (Figure 1) work is apersonal if 2. Must the work demonstrate

the personality of the author does not need to be understanding beyond rote knowledge?
conveyed in the product. Rote knowledge is No, the script can contain rote knowledge
knowledge that does not require the synthesis without any real synthesis or addressing
and application of other knowledge into a new a particular context.
product. Rote knowledge is factual knowledge 3. Is the work an intermediate product?
No, the script is a final product.
(e.g., today’s date). An intermediate product is a
product that is created in a process at any point In this circumstance, the flowchart concludes that
prior to the absolute end or before the because the student will be reading from the
deliverable. Work is considered to be internal if it script, the use of generative AI is not appropriate.
is not being presented to a client, professor or This would amount to plagiarism and is a violation
instructor for an assignment, or submitted to an of student conduct and would inhibit their
entity outside the organization or group. learning. The result is not to use ChatGPT.

The basic flowchart is useful to the extent that it We will use a non-academic example to
can be presented in a straightforward way to a demonstrate the shortcomings of this flowchart.
large number of students or to students early in There is an individual who wants to use ChatGPT
their collegiate career. It is simple to use, and in to generate responses to a lab partner that is
most cases, will return a correct answer that emailing them excessively with trivial questions
encourages students to use the tool in a way that and for information that could be easily found
saves them time in a way that is not detrimental using a search engine. Should this individual use
to their learning. To demonstrate, we will walk ChatGPT to generate responses?
through the flowchart from the perspective of a
busy university student who must give a speech 1. Can the work be apersonal?
on the importance of communal residence halls. No, a 1-to-1 email is, by definition,
Should the student use ChatGPT to develop an personal. Use of ChatGPT is not
outline for the speech? Let us evaluate: appropriate.

1. Can the work be apersonal? Following the flowchart, the answer would be to
Yes, the outline does not need to reflect not use ChatGPT. However, this seems to be an
the personality of the author. indistinct area that would benefit from a greater
2. Must the work demonstrate evaluation of circumstances. The answer should
understanding beyond rote knowledge? not always be no, as what counts as personal has
No, the outline can contain rote nuance and variation to it that is not accounted
knowledge without any synthesis. for in the flowchart.
3. Is the work an intermediate product?
Yes, the outline is not the final product. Our flowchart is straightforward to use and will
Use of ChatGPT makes sense. prevent students from using generative AI in a
way that will inhibit their learning or harm their
In this circumstance, the flowchart framework professional or personal relationships. As a result
has determined that because the outline is merely of this simplicity, this framework has been
a foundation upon which personality and designed to be conservative in its results. In this
understanding of the writer can be developed particular lab partner circumstance, it is better to
before the final product is complete, using return a false negative than a false positive as the
ChatGPT is a wise use of the resources at the risk of not using generative AI is relatively small
student’s disposal. The result of the flowchart is compared to using it in an inappropriate way.
to use ChatGPT. That is, the status quo of manually writing an
email is less risky than trying something new and
We will evaluate another potential use case. using generative AI. To this end, the flowchart
There is a student who must present a nutrition will, in most instances, return false negatives, but
and training plan to an imaginary client for a class not false positives. Therefore, we have developed
assignment. The students want to know if they a second framework to derive a more nuanced
should use ChatGPT to gather information to write answer. This framework, which we are calling the
a script that they will read for their presentation. Matrix Framework, can be visualized in Figure 3,
1. Can the work be apersonal? below.
Yes, the script does not need to reflect the
personality of the student.

©2024 ISCAP (Information Systems and Computing Academic Professionals) Page 50

https://isedj.org/; https://iscap.us
Information Systems Education Journal (ISEDJ) 22 (3)
ISSN: 1545-679X July 2024

3. 2x2 MATRIX FRAMEWORK DEVELOPMENT We found that we needed two 2x2 matrices. One
focuses on the intrinsic nature of the topic being
Our 2x2 matrix framework inspiration came from asked of ChatGPT, the other focuses on how the
Beth Humberd, who co-developed the 2x2 matrix results of ChatGPT will be used. The intrinsic
in the “Four Ways Jobs Respond to Automation” nature 2X2 matrix has axes defined by
paper (Latham and Humberd, 2018). We use the apersonal/personal on the horizontal, and rote
Four Ways Jobs Respond to Automation 2x2 knowledge/understanding on the vertical. This
matrix in the Future of Work section of both the dichotomy of apersonal/personal reflects how
undergraduate level Introduction to Management well someone knows the person or topic that is
Information Systems class for all business being covered. Personal suggests that someone
students, as well as the Introduction to knows it well and with details that would not be
Management Information Systems class for MBA known to others. Apersonal suggests that the
students, and it is a very useful way to instruct personality of the author does not need to be
students. conveyed in the generated product. On the
The 2x2 matrix as it relates to business theory vertical axis, rote knowledge is something that
has been around since 1965. The 2x2 product- has already been canonicalized, for instance in a
market matrix has become a basic tool for textbook. Understanding is something that is well
explaining business to students since then. Figure beyond just textbook rote knowledge, and implies
3 shows the Product-Market matrix (Ansoff a deep understanding of context, history, and
1965). “The two most essential strategy levers for such.
any business are the product or service it delivers
and the markets it sells into.” (Ansoff, 1965). The The second 2X2 matrix, which focused on how the
words in each quadrant represent what you results from ChatGPT will be used, has
should do in that quadrant, with each quadrant Internal/External Use on the horizontal, and
being defined by whether it is a current or new Intermediate/End Product on the vertical. This
product (vertical axis), or a current or new dichotomy of Internal/External Use reflects
market (horizontal axis). whether or not the results from ChatGPT will be
used internally, by someone or their team who
In developing our 2x2 matrix for the evaluation of they know well, or will be disseminated to others,
generative AI use cases, we used the guidance who they might not know well, or at all. The
provided by Lowy and Hood (2004) to create a 2 Intermediate/End Product dichotomy reflects
× 2 matrix that expresses a real and important whether or not the results of ChatGPT are just a
tension in your life…we ask them to name the stepping stone to a final product, or are the end
ends of the two axes, and the four quadrants product themselves.
contained in the matrix. Further, 2 × 2 modeling
is characterized by discovery and unpredictability 4. PROSPECT THEORY
(Lowy and Hood, 2004).
Before we continue with an explanation of the
Matrix Framework in Figure 3, it is important to
introduce a tool to help understand how to deal
with the yellow result outcomes – see Figure 3 for
yellow results. A yellow result is one in which the
outcome is not clear to use generative AI or to
not use generative AI. Further analysis is
necessary, and for this further analysis we are
proposing the use of prospect theory (Kahneman
and Tversky, 1979). Simply, prospect theory
describes the decision-making process that
individuals utilize as they account for potential
losses and gains relative to their current
circumstances (Barberis, 2013). As there is
extensive literature on prospect theory, we will
only give a brief overview as it applies to our
Matrix Framework. In summary, by evaluating
the risks and rewards relative to current
circumstances, a user of the Matrix Framework
Figure 2. Product-Market Matrix, Ansoff can evaluate if it is appropriate to use ChatGPT
(1965) for a specific use case if it falls into a yellow
quadrant in one of the matrices.

©2024 ISCAP (Information Systems and Computing Academic Professionals) Page 51

https://isedj.org/; https://iscap.us
Information Systems Education Journal (ISEDJ) 22 (3)
ISSN: 1545-679X July 2024

According to prospect theory, a user weighs their the deliverable as they have already acquired
decision based on the potential changes to their their figurative academic $1 million and are more
circumstances. There are several assumptions on concerned with the risk (opportunity cost) of not
which prospect theory is founded, including that using ChatGPT. It can be helpful to think of this
individuals are: 1) more attuned to changes than assumption as a most valuable, first $1,000, and
absolute magnitudes, 2) people are more a least valuable, last $1,000.
sensitive to gains than losses of the same
magnitude, and 3) there is diminishing sensitivity In summary, by evaluating the risks and rewards
to the magnitude of a gain or loss (Barberis, 2013 relative to current circumstances, with the
see Table 1). underpinning of prospect theory to guide the
process, a user of the Matrix Framework can
Table 1: Assumption of Individual Behavior Assumption 1 Assumption 2 Assumption 3
in Prospect Theory. Individuals are Individuals There is
“more attuned are more diminishing
The first assumption is that individuals will value to changes sensitive to sensitivity to
changes more highly than a shift in the absolute than absolute gains than the
standing. For example, let us briefly explore how magnitudes.” losses of the magnitude of
many students use prospect theory without their same a gain or
conscious intention to do so. A student is more magnitude. loss.
likely to do work to improve a test score when evaluate if it is appropriate to use ChatGPT for a
offered the chance to earn points back (Rice, specific use case if it falls into a yellow quadrant
2020) than they are to complete an optional extra in one of the matrices in Figure 3. As prospect
credit assignment (Harrison, et. al, 2011). In this theory is descriptive, not prescriptive, it is helpful
circumstance, the risk is the opportunity cost of to first determine the answer, then critically
taking the time to do the extra credit. Here, the evaluate how a user arrived at the answer by
student has prioritized a change (i.e., improved analyzing which assumption was used.
test grade) more than an absolute magnitude
(i.e., extra points). Given the choice between a 5. MATRIX FRAMEWORK FOR TEACHING
guaranteed $50 or having a 50/50 chance at GENERATIVE AI USE CASES
$100, which has an expected outcome of $50,
most people will take the guaranteed $50. For a We will now walk through each of the quadrants
student, pushing for a regrade produces the of the two 2X2 matrices in Figure 3 (Stranger,
opportunity for an increase whilst locking in the Acquaintance, Coworker, Friend, Draft, Pitch,
current grade, whereas extra credit has a range Communication, and Solution) in turn to discuss
of uncertain outcomes. and explain them.
Next, individuals are motivated more by gains Stranger: Apersonal/Rote Knowledge
than losses. “What do I gain by using ChatGPT?” It is helpful to think of this quadrant as containing
is the silent question underpinning this article. It the kind of information that a stranger may know
is weighed against what could be lost by using about you. The stranger may find out basic facts
ChatGPT. As in the first assumption, the loss or about you, such as where you work, or what kind
risk associated with not using ChatGPT is of car you drive. However, they do not know
generally the opportunity cost of taking the time anything personal about you, like your
to do something manually rather than using relationships with your family, or possess any
ChatGPT. Using ChatGPT has the gain of both deep understanding of how the facts about you
saving time and generating an answer that is make you who you are. It is appropriate to use
better because it is built off more information ChatGPT for use cases that deal with such basic,
than that to which the student has access. personal facts and require no deep understanding
or application of those facts.
Finally, an individual will be happier about
becoming $1,000 more wealthy (or less badly off) An example of a use case in this quadrant is
than they are to hear they will receive an extra creating a syllabus. Creating a syllabus requires
$1,000 on top of their $1 million lottery winnings. knowledge of facts, and applies to the whole
This is relevant to our framework in that a class, and not a specific person, and as such is
mediocre student may decide to put more manual apersonal/rote knowledge. Additionally, it does
effort into an extra credit assignment to achieve not require an understanding of who the
a high-quality deliverable and secure their instructor is as a person. This would make it an
figurative first $1,000. However, an excellent
student may decide to use ChatGPT to develop

©2024 ISCAP (Information Systems and Computing Academic Professionals) Page 52

https://isedj.org/; https://iscap.us
Information Systems Education Journal (ISEDJ) 22 (3)
ISSN: 1545-679X July 2024

Figure 3. Proposed Matrix Framework for the evaluation of generative AI use

cases.

©2024 ISCAP (Information Systems and Computing Academic Professionals) Page 53

https://isedj.org/; https://iscap.us
Information Systems Education Journal (ISEDJ) 22 (3)
ISSN: 1545-679X July 2024

appropriate use case for ChatGPT when evaluated A resume lands in this category. For a well-crafted
in this part of the Matrix Framework. resume, it is necessary to understand how your
skills apply to a given prospective job. For
Acquaintance: Personal/Rote Knowledge example, take someone who currently works in a
In this quadrant, there are use cases that require call-center but is looking to move to more fulfilling
the kind of knowledge that an acquaintance would work as a consultant in the same field as that in
have which we are taking to mean someone who which the call center operates. There is no
knows some aspects of your personality. They obvious way working in a call center prepares an
likely have an idea of what your sense of humor individual for work as a consultant. However,
is like or may know the kinds of clothes you wear. there are communication skills and conflict-
However, they still do not have a deep navigation abilities that are developed in a call
understanding of who you are as a person. center that are very useful to a career in
consulting. It is not enough for a prospective
Depending on the situation, it may or may not be consulting employer to merely know that you
helpful to use ChatGPT for use cases that fall into worked in a call center, it is important for them to
this category. One can utilize prospect theory to understand what that work entailed and how it
evaluate whether a use case that falls into this prepared you for work as a consultant.
category can be accomplished using generative
AI or not. However, there is not much space on a resume to
directly address who you are as a person. You can
For example, take a student who is reaching out include skills and interests, but these do not
by sending an email to a leader at an organization directly reflect you personally, they are simply
that they desire to be employed by upon facts about you. Using prospect theory here helps
graduation and compare their decision-making determine if the use of ChatGPT is appropriate.
process to that of an individual in management at
the same organization where the leader works. In an example, let’s ask ourselves if landing a new
Here, the prospect theory assumption #3 that job is a choice or a necessity? If it is a necessity,
there is diminishing sensitivity to gains is helpful then an individual will likely choose to manually
in evaluating the decision-making process. The create a resume, as the opportunity cost of
student should not use ChatGPT to craft the creating the resume is outweighed by the
email, as they have much to gain in the form of potential gain of a job. Assumption #3 in prospect
employment by making a good impression on the theory is used in the decision-making process.
potential leader. This individual sees a huge potential gain (i.e.,
their first $1,000). It may initially seem like
In contrast, the individual in management at the assumption #2 is the correct prospect theory
same organization as the leader may choose to assumption for this situation, and that the
use ChatGPT to send the email. The individual in decision using that assumption would lead to a
management has much less to gain in the process contradictory choice. However, it is important to
of making a good first impression, since they have remember that assumption #2 is only useful for
already achieved much of what the student is gains and losses of similar magnitude. In this
seeking to achieve. Therefore, the same circumstance, the potential gain of a job is
assumption underlying the student’s decision to significantly larger than the loss, the time spent
not use ChatGPT underpins the second composing the resume manually. Therefore,
individual’s decision to use it. This exemplifies the assumption #2 does not accurately describe this
necessity of prospect theory to underpin the individual’s choice.
Matrix Framework. Two individuals can come to
different conclusions using the same framework If moving to a new job is a choice, then the gain
based on their personal circumstances. (i.e., a new, marginally better job) is closely
associated to the loss (i.e., opportunity cost of
Coworker: Apersonal/Understanding manually creating a resume) and the individual
Coworkers likely understand the facts should use ChatGPT to create the resume. Here,
surrounding your work. However, they may not assumption #2 is appropriate as the potential
understand who you are as a person. If you work gains and losses like saving time by using
for a large firm, they may not have even met you ChatGPT and not getting a marginally better job
in person. Here, it is again helpful to use prospect are similar. Therefore, the potential gain will take
theory to evaluate whether a specific use case is precedence in the decision-making process.
appropriate for ChatGPT or not.

©2024 ISCAP (Information Systems and Computing Academic Professionals) Page 54

https://isedj.org/; https://iscap.us
Information Systems Education Journal (ISEDJ) 22 (3)
ISSN: 1545-679X July 2024

Friend: Personal/Understanding A PowerPoint deck is a good example of a use

Close friends understand what you do and who case that falls into the “Pitch” category. In fact, a
you are. They know why you love or hate your PowerPoint deck (or deck developed using similar
job. They know your hobbies and your plans for software) is a crucial part of most pitches. The
your future. They can give you advice on large life deck is presented to clients, but it is far from a
decisions and romantic partners. ChatGPT is not finished product. If the client likes the deck and
appropriate for use cases that require an the accompanying presentation, they may hire
understanding of both your personality and the the presenter to build or implement the idea that
connections between the facts of the use case they presented. In summary, a PowerPoint deck
with which you are presented. is not a finished product, though it presents the
A letter of condolence falls into this category. concept of a finished product to an external
Given a hypothetical situation where you find out entity.
a student missed class due to losing a family
member, it is quite inappropriate to formulate a In this circumstance, the prospect theory
response using ChatGPT. This is because you assumption #3 that there is a diminishing value
need to show you understand and care about the to returns is useful. If an individual has already
situation. Additionally, you want your personality been contracted to fulfill a need, and the
to come through, as you do not want to appear to PowerPoint deck is only necessary to sell an
be unfeeling. For these reasons, this and other additional service, then ChatGPT may be useful.
use cases in this quadrant are not appropriate to Here, the user already has their proverbial $1
use ChatGPT to fulfill. million. They are only risking not being able to sell
the add-on (i.e., their last $1,000), as they have
Draft: Internal Use/Intermediate Product already sold the main service.
This category includes use cases that are not
finished products and are used internally. Drafts However, it may not be appropriate to use
are generally not presented to any individual ChatGPT to gain the client from the start. At the
outside of an organization, and the point of a draft beginning, before the deal has been sold and
is that it is not final. Use cases that fall into this contracted, the user is striving for their proverbial
quadrant are prime examples of when making use first $1,000, which is valued more highly in
of ChatGPT is appropriate. prospect theory than the last $1,000.

A document summary can also be in this Microsoft seems to agree with the assessment
quadrant. A document summary, despite the that ChatGPT can be helpful in solving the first
opinions of some educators, is not an external $1,000 issue here, as they have developed a new
product. Document summaries are meant to be tool called Copilot to use in building PowerPoint
referenced in the future to remind the user what decks. As in most cases, getting started is the
a given piece is about so that they can use it to most valuable gain from using ChatGPT.
build a product for external use, like a research
paper. This also touches on the other key Communications: End Product/Internal Use
attribute about a document summary. They are Communications for our purposes are use cases
an intermediate product in a process of that are an end product for internal use. Here, we
developing a final product. Therefore, it would be consider an organization to be a cohesive unit and
useful and appropriate to use ChatGPT to as such, communications can be an email or a
summarize a document. note to a family member or a member of your
educational institution, among other things. We
Pitch: Intermediate Product/External Use believe that in many of these cases, it could be
In this quadrant, good use case examples include appropriate and helpful to make use of ChatGPT.
a sales or business pitch. In a pitch, the product However, there may be some instances where it
is external, though not final. An individual is not, depending on your circumstances.
presents an idea to a client, but the idea is not a
final product yet. ChatGPT may be useful in Imagine a scenario where a professor must
developing a pitch, as it is not a final product, but respond to a student inquiring about receiving an
it can help develop the presentation. In this excused absence for missing class. If it is the
quadrant, it is again necessary to use prospect beginning of the semester and the professor does
theory to evaluate how to deal with “yellow not know the student, it could be helpful to use
result” outcomes in order to evaluate your ChatGPT to formulate a response based on the
specific circumstances and use case to decide if syllabus to save time. However, if this scenario
the use of ChatGPT is appropriate. occurred near the end of the semester, the
professor might have an established relationship

©2024 ISCAP (Information Systems and Computing Academic Professionals) Page 55

https://isedj.org/; https://iscap.us
Information Systems Education Journal (ISEDJ) 22 (3)
ISSN: 1545-679X July 2024

and knowledge of the student. In this case, the That is, it is apersonal because the personality of
professor should choose to write a response the author does not need to be conveyed in the
manually that helps elicit the reason for the final product. The personal budget use case has
absence. Students miss class for a variety of moved to a green quadrant.
reasons, from hobby-type events like concerts to
memorial services and professional conferences. Further, this particular budget is an intermediate
Whether a professor declines or accepts the product on the way to helping the person
request to excuse the absence, it could be useful understand where they are at in any moment of
to include a personal touch to maintain the time. As such, the quadrant has moved from the
positive relationship. Communication quadrant to the Draft quadrant,
and again from being yellow to green.
Here, assumption #1 is useful. At the beginning
of the semester, the professor is reacting to a Contrast this with when someone is creating a
potential absolute change in circumstances with a personal budget to make a major decision, such
student. Therefore, they use ChatGPT to refer the as to purchase a car or house. There is now a lot
student to the syllabus. In contrast, at the end of to lose. As such, the personal budget moves from
the semester, the professor has an established the Acquaintance quadrant to the Friend
rapport with the student, and they should take quadrant, as it needs to be highly personal. As
the time to respond based on the student’s such it has moved from a yellow quadrant to a
individual needs to preserve the relationship, a red quadrant, and they should not use ChatGPT.
relative change instead of an absolute change.
Since this particular budget could easily be used
Solution: External Use/ End Product by the bank or car dealership for financing, this
Use cases that fall into the Solution quadrant budget has also moved from Internal Use to
should not make use of ChatGPT. These are final External Use. That is, the quadrant has moved
products that are meant for external from Communication to Solution. Again, it has
consumption. It is not appropriate to use ChatGPT moved from a yellow quadrant to a red quadrant,
as the final step in an external process. If there is and they should not use ChatGPT.
a deliverable, it is essential that the product is at
least reviewed by the user and edited. 7. PRELIMINARY TESTING OF THE
FRAMEWORKS
Take a personal biography for example. This piece
will be representing yourself on behalf of your To refine and test our frameworks, we presented
institution to the public. Indeed, it is important the frameworks and instructions for their use to a
that in situations like these, individuals directly class of MBA students and a class of
represent themselves. The value in this process is undergraduate students at a public regional
added by the user, and should not be passed off university. In order to gain useful feedback on our
to a bot. frameworks, we surveyed the students before
and after the class to self-rate their own ability to
6. PROSPECT THEORY AT WORK IN THE determine if ChatGPT was appropriate for a given
2X2 MATRIX FRAMEWORK use case. We also asked them to provide written
feedback on what they thought was helpful or
One powerful way to explain to students how could be improved.
prospect theory works in the 2x2 Matrix
framework is to consider a personal budget use We collected anonymous survey data from the
case. This use case is in the Acquaintance Rote students (n=18) to test whether the students had
Knowledge / Personal quadrant, and the become more comfortable evaluating ChatGPT
Communication Internal Use / End Product use cases as a result of the frameworks covered
quadrant. Both are yellow quadrants. in this paper. Prior to starting the discussion of
the frameworks in class we administered a pre-
If someone is creating a personal budget just to test survey using a 7-point Likert scale using the
“take stock” or just to “see where they are”, then question “How comfortable do you feel evaluating
there is not much to lose, and they can save time ChatGPT use cases?”. After the class was
by using ChatGPT to create their personal budget. complete we administered the same survey to
determine if there were any increases in student
Since the budget exercise is personal, and just to capabilities. We used a paired t-test to test for
take stock or see where they are at, the axis has significance between the pre/post survey results.
moved from being “personal” on the horizontal The results of the survey are below (see Table 2).
axis, to being “apersonal” on the horizontal axis.

©2024 ISCAP (Information Systems and Computing Academic Professionals) Page 56

https://isedj.org/; https://iscap.us
Information Systems Education Journal (ISEDJ) 22 (3)
ISSN: 1545-679X July 2024

Survey Question Pre- Post- Paired Product. Therefore, we would have expected a
test test t-stat more even split owing to students being forced
mean mean p-value into a prospect theory-based analysis of their
How comfortable 4.50 6.72 0.0002 individual relationships with this family member.
do you feel A student with a strong relationship with their
evaluating niece and a student with no pre-existing
ChatGPT use relationship with their niece would likely answer
cases? differently.
Table 2: Student Survey Results
A priori we assumed that students would operate
The student survey results show that the mean under the prospect theory assumption that
score increased for the survey question “How relative change is a greater motivator than
comfortable do you feel evaluating ChatGPT use absolute change. A student may not use ChatGPT
cases?” The increase was statistically significant, if they already have a relationship with their niece
but we acknowledge that the sample size is small. because they would seek to improve their
relationship, where a student with no relationship
We also asked for qualitative feedback from the may use ChatGPT because they had no
students. First, students who rated themselves as relationship with their niece in which to invest.
less able to evaluate use cases prior to the lecture
had significantly improved their self-rating of A potential area for future research would be to
evaluating use cases by the end of the lecture. examine if the relationship between the child in
For these students, we received detailed feedback the question to the individual being surveyed
that the framework presentation had changed the affects the answer. For instance, would the child
way they viewed ChatGPT. One student remarked being a daughter as opposed to a niece influence
that they went from “thinking about it as a fun the answer. However, that is beyond the scope of
novelty thing to a tool that [they] needed to this paper.
started engaging with straight away.” Another
student stated that they “have a better Although not specifically related to the when to
understanding of where and when [they] should use ChatGPT of our Matrix Framework, at the end
use [ChatGPT].” Overall, the students seemed to of the presentation, students were tasked with
be appreciative of a deeper understanding of feeding their resumes into ChatGPT for the
what situations would be appropriate and not purposes of writing a draft cover letter. The steps
appropriate to use ChatGPT. For many, it involved were:
fundamentally changed the way that they viewed
ChatGPT and gave them confidence in knowing 1. Sign up for or sign in to a ChatGPT
how they should apply it to their professional and account.
academic tasks. 2. Cut and paste their resume into the
ChatGPT dialogue box after telling
We also had students evaluate examples of use ChatGPT “This is my resume.”
cases by using the frameworks. These examples 3. Tell ChatGPT a very specific position they
incorporated prospect theory for the yellow result are applying for, such as “I want to work
outcomes and required students to evaluate what at Nike in marketing for women’s
they should do based on circumstances. For the athleisure.”
most part, they were able to arrive at the answer 4. Ask ChatGPT for a one-page cover letter
that we were expecting after taking part in the that includes a paragraph on “Why me,”
presentation. However, there were some notable “Why you,” and “Why us.”
exceptions. In one situation, we asked them the
following question: Upon seeing the result, one generally quiet
Your 3-year-old niece wants you to tell her a student exclaimed, “Oh my god, I would totally
bedtime story. You are not a creative type, but hire me based on this!” We then referred to the
still want to tell her a bedtime story. Should you two Matrix Frameworks and emphasized that this
use ChatGPT to generate a bedtime story? cover letter would be in “Coworker:
Apersonal/Understanding” and “Pitch:
The answer to this question was nearly Intermediate Product/External Use,” and that it
unanimously yes. Using our frameworks, this use was a draft only, and that it was necessary for
case is in a yellow quadrant for both squares in them to review it make it their own. This exercise
the Matrix Framework. In the first matrix, the introduced them to the power of ChatGPT but also
result is Personal/Rote Knowledge, and in the informed them of how they should evaluate its
second matrix, the result is Internal Use/End use.

©2024 ISCAP (Information Systems and Computing Academic Professionals) Page 57

https://isedj.org/; https://iscap.us
Information Systems Education Journal (ISEDJ) 22 (3)
ISSN: 1545-679X July 2024

In our discussions with the undergraduate improve critical and creative thinking (Rudolph,
students, there was a definite thread of thinking et. al, 2023). Wired does not publish stories
that general education courses were more about created by AI (Lichfield, 2023), instead they use
figuratively just checking the box on the path to it in the creative process to develop a better end
getting the degree. The result was that more product.
students leaned towards using ChatGPT. In
contrast, the MBA students were much more How to teach students to use ChatGPT effectively
focused on skill-building. ChatGPT was a is an area of potential future research. Once
productivity tool, rather than a completion tool for students understand the power and risks of the
them. This difference is in line with what we could tool, and when they should use it, the next step
expect to see given the application of prospect is teaching them to use the tool effectively. To
theory. Undergraduate students are seeking an paraphrase a common statement regarding
absolute change to their circumstances, the automation and AI, professionals in a given field
granting of a first degree, (i.e., the first $1,000). will not be replaced by ChatGPT, but professionals
Students in the MBA program are seeking a who know how to use ChatGPT will replace
relative change to their circumstances (e.g., a professionals who do not. A global head of
raise, promotion, or career pivot) and are marketing at a global technology firm recently
therefore more motivated. stated that their next hire would be a prompt
engineer for tools like ChatGPT. We believe it is
8. CONCLUSION essential that students are taught how to wield
ChatGPT after they are taught when they should
As elucidated by numerous papers and use it.
individuals, the rise of generative AI represents
an issue for the institution of education in its Students should be empowered to use AI and
current state. One the one hand, there is knowing when to do so is a critical first step. It is
significant resistance to its use (Lim et. al, 2023). essential that they learn about these tools to be
On the other, students should master AI tools competitive in their fields of employment
while in school (Rudolph, et. al, 2023). In order (Lyytinen et. al, 2023). In the words of one of our
to accomplish this goal, it is necessary for students, our frameworks do “a great job of not
students to understand the strengths and only explaining how someone could use ChatGPT
shortcomings (Vayena and Morris, 2023) of this but if someone should use ChatGPT in certain
technology. academic and professional situations.” This kind
of instruction is essential to the success of
For educational institutions, we feel it is essential students in a world where generative AI
that action is taken proactively to introduce and integration is accelerating. The qualitative
adopt the use of generative AI in curriculums. No- feedback from students was very positive, and
code software implementation courses can be showed that students had a much better
helpful, particularly for business students (Wang understanding of when to use ChatGPT. We
and Wang, 2022). This can dovetail easily with realize that this also means that the framework
ChatGPT to help students think through how and can enable students to make better choices about
why systems are configured the way they are, when to cheat using ChatGPT. While there is
rather than becoming burdened with the technical significant research to be done in this area, we
aspects of the code. Whether or not it is banned, believe that our frameworks provide a solid
ChatGPT will still be used (Liebrenz et. al, 2023). foundation to begin educating students about
Senior-level students and relatively low academic how to evaluate use cases for ChatGPT.
performers are prone to cheating (Hogan and
Jaska, 2000) and institutions must embrace In the near term, there will continue to be
cultural change (Lim et. al, 2023). Rather than resistance to the widespread integration of
trying to avoid technology, universities can generative AI tools in the field of education and
leverage AI to enhance creative potential. beyond. Researchers, like artists, find value in
According to Lichfield (2023), Wired magazine is their work’s scarcity, novelty, and creativity
using ChatGPT as a research tool and to generate (Loebeckke et al., 2020). Here, we find an
story ideas. Microsoft has already built a unexpected relationship between modern
prototype search engine and is working on researchers, artists, and a 15th century German
incorporating ChatGPT into their whole suite of monk named Johannes Trithemius. Trithemius
products (Rudolph et. al, 2023). Rather than try vehemently argued against the products of the
to prevent the inevitable, institutions can printing press, claiming that a work’s value lies in
welcome the chance to have students invest in its scarcity (Norman, 2023). Like Trithemius, we
their own learning and use ChatGPT as a tool to lie at a crossroads of innovation and status quo.

©2024 ISCAP (Information Systems and Computing Academic Professionals) Page 58

https://isedj.org/; https://iscap.us
Information Systems Education Journal (ISEDJ) 22 (3)
ISSN: 1545-679X July 2024

We must be cautious to avoid his mistaken and 5G. Communications of the Association for
thinking. Information Systems, 49, pp-pp.
https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.04910
9. REFERENCES
Gregor, S. (2018). The Dangers of Dance for the
Information Systems Discipline.
Ågerfalk, P. J., Conboy, K., Crowston, K., Eriksson
Communications of the Association for
Lundström, J. S., Jarvenpaa, S., Ram, S., &
Information Systems, 43, pp-pp.
Mikalef, P. (2022). Artificial Intelligence in
https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.04313
Information Systems: State of the Art and
Research Roadmap. Communications of the Hacker, P., Engel, A., & Mauer, M. (2023,
Association for Information Systems, 50, pp- February 10). Regulating ChatGPT and other
pp. https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.05017 Large Generative AI Models. Working Paper.
Baidoo-Anu, D., & Owusu Ansah, L. (2023). Harrison, Marissa & Meister, Denise & Lefevre,
Education in the era of Generative Artificial Amy. (2011). Which students complete extra
Intelligence (AI): Understanding the potential credit work? College Student Journal, 45, 550-
benefits of CHATGPT in promoting teaching 555.. College student journal. 45. 550.
and learning. SSRN Electronic Journal.
https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4337484 Hogan, P. T. & Jaska, P. V. (2000). Academic
Dishonesty: A Study of CIS Student Cheating
Barberis, N. C. (2013). Thirty Years of Prospect Behavior. Journal of Information Systems
Theory in Economics: A review and Education, 11(3-4), 169-178.
assessment. Journal of Economic
Perspectives, 27(1), 173–196. Houde, S., Liao, V., Martino, J., Muller, M.,
https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.27.1.173 Piorkowski, D., Richards, J., Weisz, J., &
Zhang, Y. (2020). Business (mis)Use Cases of
Business Insider (2023) Here are the schools and Generative AI. Proceedings of IUI ’20
colleges that have banned the use of ChatGPT Workshops.
over plagiarism and misinformation fears.
https://www.businessinsider.com/chatgpt- Kahneman, Daniel; Tversky, Amos (1979).
schools-colleges-ban-plagiarism- "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision
misinformation-education-2023-1 under Risk". Econometrica. 47 (2): 263–291.

Casal-Otero, L., Catala, A., Fernández-Morante, Kissinger, H., Schmidt, E., & Huttenlocher, D.
C. et al. AI literacy in K-12: a systematic (2023, February 24). Opinion | chatgpt
literature review. IJ STEM Ed 10, 29 (2023). heralds an intellectual revolution. The Wall
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-023-00418- Street Journal. Retrieved March 3, 2023, from
7 https://www.wsj.com/articles/chatgpt-
heralds-an-intellectual-revolution-
Chatterjee, J., & Dethlefs, N. (2023). This new enlightenment-artificial-intelligence-homo-
conversational AI model can be your friend, technicus-technology-cognition-morality-
philosopher, and guide ... and even your worst philosophy-774331c6?page=1
enemy. Patterns, 4(1), 1–3.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patter.2022.10067 Klein, Helen & Levenburg, Nancy & McKendall,
6 Marie & Mothersell, William. (2007). Cheating
During the College Years: How Do Business
Chen, L. (2022). Current and Future Artificial Students Compare? Journal of Business Ethics.
Intelligence (AI) Curriculum in Business 72. 197-206. 10.1007/s10551-006-9165-7.
School: A Text Mining Analysis. Journal of
Information Systems Education, 33(4), 416- Latham, S. and Humberd, B. (2018). Four Ways
426. Jobs Will Respond to Automation. MIT Sloan
Management Review; Cambridge Vol. 60 (1):
Driver, Julia, "The History of Utilitarianism", The 11-14.
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter
2022 Edition), Edward N. Zalta & Uri Lichfield, G. (2023, March 2). How Wired will use
Nodelman (eds.), generative AI Tools. Wired. Retrieved March 3,
plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2022/entries/ 2023, from
utilitarianism-history https://www.wired.com/story/how-wired-will-
use-generative-ai-tools/
French, A., Shim, J., Risius, M., Larsen, K. R., &
Jain, H. (2021). The 4th Industrial Revolution Liebrenz, M., Schleifer, R., Buadze, A., Bhugra,
Powered by the Integration of AI, Blockchain, D., & Smith, A. (2023). Generating scholarly
content with ChatGPT: Ethical challenges for

©2024 ISCAP (Information Systems and Computing Academic Professionals) Page 59

https://isedj.org/; https://iscap.us
Information Systems Education Journal (ISEDJ) 22 (3)
ISSN: 1545-679X July 2024

medical publishing. The Lancet Digital Health, Rudolph, J., Tan, S., & Tan, S. (2023). Chatgpt:
5(3), e105–e106. Bullshit spewer or the end of traditional
https://doi.org/10.1016/s2589- assessments in higher education? Journal of
7500(23)00019-5 Applied Learning and Teaching, 6(1).
https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.9
Lim, W. M., Gunasekara, A., Pallant, J. L., Pallant,
J. I., & Pechenkina, E. (2023). Generative AI Schoormann, T., Strobel, G., Möller, F., Petrik, D.,
and the future of education: Ragnarök or & Zschech, P. (2023). Artificial Intelligence for
reformation? A paradoxical perspective from Sustainability—A Systematic Review of
management educators. The International Information Systems Literature.
Journal of Management Education, 21(2), Communications of the Association for
100790. Information Systems, 52, pp-pp.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2023.100790 https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.05209
Loebbecke, C., El Sawy, O. A., Kankanhalli, A., Siemon, D., Strohmann, T., & Michalke, S.
Markus, M., Te'eni, D., Wrobel, S., Rydén, P., (2022). Creative potential through Artificial
& Obeng-Antwi, A. (2020). Artificial Intelligence: Recommendations for improving
Intelligence Meets IS Researchers: Can It corporate and Entrepreneurial Innovation
Replace Us?. Communications of the Activities. Communications of the Association
Association for Information Systems, 47, pp- for Information Systems, 50, 241–260.
pp. https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.04713 https://doi.org/10.17705/1cais.05009
Lowy, A., & Hood, P. (2004). The power of the Strobel, G., Schoormann, T., Banh, L., & Möller,
2x2 Matrix, Jossey-Bass F. (in press). Artificial Intelligence for Sign
Language Translation – A Design Science
Lyytinen, K., Topi, H., & Tang, J. (2023). MaCuDE
Research Study. Communications of the
IS Task Force: Final Report and
Association for Information Systems, 52, pp-
Recommendations. Communications of the
pp. Retrieved from
Association for Information Systems, 52, 566-
https://aisel.aisnet.org/cais/vol52/iss1/33
586. https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.05224
Vayena, E., & Morris, A. (2023, February 28). A
Mirbabaie, M., Brendel, A. B., & Hofeditz, L.
bioethicist and a professor of medicine on
(2022). Ethics and AI in Information Systems
regulating AI in health care. The Economist.
Research. Communications of the Association
Retrieved March 3, 2023, from
for Information Systems, 50, pp-pp.
https://www.economist.com/by-
https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.05034
invitation/2023/02/28/a-bioethicist-and-a-
Norman, J. (2023, February 23). Trithemius professor-of-medicine-on-regulating-ai-in-
favors vellum over paper for long term health-care
information storage. Trithemius Favors Vellum
The Atlantic (2023). The First Year of AI College
over Paper for Long Term Information Storage
Ends in Ruin
: History of Information. Retrieved March 13,
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/arch
2023, from
ive/2023/05/chatbot-cheating-college-
https://www.historyofinformation.com/detail.
campuses/674073/
php?id=337
Wang, H., & Wang, S. (2022). Teaching Tip:
Rice, B. S. (2020, June), How Extra Credit
Improving Student Performance by
Quizzes and Test Corrections Improve Student
Introducing a No-Code Approach: A Course
Learning While Reducing Stress Paper
Unit of Decision Support Systems. Journal of
presented at 2020 ASEE Virtual Annual
Information Systems Education, 33(2), 127-
Conference Content Access, Virtual On line .
134.
10.18260/1-2--34732

©2024 ISCAP (Information Systems and Computing Academic Professionals) Page 60

https://isedj.org/; https://iscap.us