View in EDS

ChatGPT vs. Students: A Comparative Analysis of Performance in Corporate Finance Exams

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: ChatGPT vs. Students: A Comparative Analysis of Performance in Corporate Finance Exams
Language: English
Authors: Syed Mujahid Hussain (ORCID 0000-0001-7714-9602), Aqdas Malik (ORCID 0000-0002-3517-8760), Nisar Ahmad, Sheraz Ahm
Source: Journal of Educational Technology Systems. 2025 54(2):326-341.
Availability: SAGE Publications. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: https://sagepub.com
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 16
Publication Date: 2025
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Tests/Questionnaires
Education Level: Higher Education
Postsecondary Education
Descriptors: Business Education, Finance Occupations, Undergraduate Students, Multiple Choice Tests, Artificial Intelligence, Difficulty Level, Numeracy, Problem Solving, Computer Uses in Education, Critical Thinking, Human Capital
DOI: 10.1177/00472395251378671
ISSN: 0047-2395
1541-3810
Abstract: This study assesses the performance of ChatGPT in comparison with that of undergraduate students in 60 multiple-choice questions (MCQs) of Corporate Finance exams that sought to measure students' abilities to solve different types of questions (descriptive and numerical) and of varying difficulty levels (basic and intermediate). Our results indicate that overall, the students performed significantly better in all question categories except ChatGPT, outperforming the students in descriptive questions. These results imply that while AI tools offer great potential in the teaching and learning domain, we must consider their limitations, especially in the application of numerical skills and the ability to develop practical solutions. Similar to other areas, AI is becoming inevitable in education, particularly in Finance, but it should be used cautiously as a supplementary tool, not completely replacing human intelligence.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2025
Accession Number: EJ1487959
Database: ERIC
FullText Text:
  Availability: 0
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1487959
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: ChatGPT vs. Students: A Comparative Analysis of Performance in Corporate Finance Exams
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Syed+Mujahid+Hussain%22">Syed Mujahid Hussain</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7714-9602">0000-0001-7714-9602</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Aqdas+Malik%22">Aqdas Malik</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3517-8760">0000-0002-3517-8760</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Nisar+Ahmad%22">Nisar Ahmad</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Sheraz+Ahm%22">Sheraz Ahm</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Journal+of+Educational+Technology+Systems%22"><i>Journal of Educational Technology Systems</i></searchLink>. 2025 54(2):326-341.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: SAGE Publications. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: https://sagepub.com
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 16
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2025
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research<br />Tests/Questionnaires
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Postsecondary+Education%22">Postsecondary Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Business+Education%22">Business Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Finance+Occupations%22">Finance Occupations</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Undergraduate+Students%22">Undergraduate Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Multiple+Choice+Tests%22">Multiple Choice Tests</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Artificial+Intelligence%22">Artificial Intelligence</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Difficulty+Level%22">Difficulty Level</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Numeracy%22">Numeracy</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Problem+Solving%22">Problem Solving</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Computer+Uses+in+Education%22">Computer Uses in Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Critical+Thinking%22">Critical Thinking</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Human+Capital%22">Human Capital</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1177/00472395251378671
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 0047-2395<br />1541-3810
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: This study assesses the performance of ChatGPT in comparison with that of undergraduate students in 60 multiple-choice questions (MCQs) of Corporate Finance exams that sought to measure students' abilities to solve different types of questions (descriptive and numerical) and of varying difficulty levels (basic and intermediate). Our results indicate that overall, the students performed significantly better in all question categories except ChatGPT, outperforming the students in descriptive questions. These results imply that while AI tools offer great potential in the teaching and learning domain, we must consider their limitations, especially in the application of numerical skills and the ability to develop practical solutions. Similar to other areas, AI is becoming inevitable in education, particularly in Finance, but it should be used cautiously as a supplementary tool, not completely replacing human intelligence.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2025
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1487959
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1487959
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1177/00472395251378671
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 16
        StartPage: 326
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Business Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Finance Occupations
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Undergraduate Students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Multiple Choice Tests
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Artificial Intelligence
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Difficulty Level
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Numeracy
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Problem Solving
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Computer Uses in Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Critical Thinking
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Human Capital
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: ChatGPT vs. Students: A Comparative Analysis of Performance in Corporate Finance Exams
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Syed Mujahid Hussain
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Aqdas Malik
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Nisar Ahmad
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Sheraz Ahm
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 12
              Type: published
              Y: 2025
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 0047-2395
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1541-3810
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 54
            – Type: issue
              Value: 2
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Journal of Educational Technology Systems
              Type: main
ResultId 1