ArticleBehavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Ethical Decision-Making in Education: A Comparative Study of Teachers and Artificial Intelligence in Ethical Dilemmas.
Article in Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Moral Disengagement and Unethical Generative AI Use as the Chain Mediators Between Antagonistic Personality and Problematic Generative AI Use.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- AI and higher education: teachers' perceptions of students' ethical tensions in online pedagogical methods.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Utilization of Artificial Intelligence to support administrative decision-making in special education institutions in Saudi Arabia: perceptions of principals, supervisors, and teachers.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence guidance in ethically challenging clinical scenarios in child and adolescent psychiatry: a qualitative study in the context of Turkiye.BMC medical ethics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The use of artificial intelligence (AI) in education supports long-term educational goals. AI enables learners to engage with ethical issues through simulations and virtual environments, allowing them to experience responsible decision-making in practice. Additionally, it assists administrators and educators in making data-driven decisions, contributing to the more effective formulation of educational policies. This study examines how teachers and AI address ethical educational dilemmas, comparing their decisions based on gender, experience, and education level. A total of 141 public school teachers in Turkey participated in the study, and their responses were compared with AI-generated decisions using Yin's nested multiple-case design. The scenarios were analyzed within the framework of five ethical perspectives: virtue ethics, deontological ethics, utilitarianism, social justice ethics, and situation ethics. AI aligned with teachers in five out of eight ethical dilemmas but differed in three cases, adopting a more analytical and outcome-oriented approach. In contrast, teachers placed greater emphasis on empathy and adherence to ethical principles. These findings highlight the differences in ethical decision-making between AI and teachers, emphasizing the role of AI in fostering ethical responsibility and awareness in education.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.