Social representations of GenAI and paradoxical tensions in its adoption in higher education

Bibliographic Data

ID23310050
AuthorsAudris Umel (0000-0002-6572-1816, Constructor University, corresponding author), Christoph Lattemann (0000-0002-4451-8894, Constructor University, corresponding author)
Year2026
Publication date2026-07-26
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueAI & Society (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0951-5666 • E-ISSN: 1435-5655
PublisherSpringer Science and Business Media LLC (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1007/s00146-026-03178-4
OpenAlexW7171291676
LanguageEN
References cited51

In just a few years, generative artificial intelligence (GenAI or GAI) has distinctly impacted numerous facets of human activity, particularly in how information is processed and transformed into knowledge. As centers for knowledge (co)creation and appropriation, universities face the opportunity and challenge of navigating a de facto integration of this promising yet disruptive technology. This study examines how instructors and students form their common-sense understanding of GenAI and endorse actions that resolve the paradoxical tensions associated with GenAI. Utilising an integrated social representational and paradoxical lens, 12 semi-structured interviews were conducted with instructors and students, and the data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Instructors and students share social representations of GenAI as an innovative yet demanding tool, a revolutionary progress, and a normative challenge. Nevertheless, instructors and students locate themselves differently within diverse paradoxical dimensions (e.g., openness vs vigilance) of these shared representations. These paradoxes further shape not only their identities as agentic and reflective tech adopters but also their expectations and recommendations for balancing managed and organic GenAI adoption. With aid from these findings, higher education institutions can establish sound and balanced GenAI-induced organisational and digital transformation processes and practices by mindfully fostering ambidextrous behaviours and strategies. These can then enrich existing expertise and perspectives among diverse university stakeholders and support renegotiation of boundaries between contradictory demands.

Agency (philosophy) · Habitus · Higher education · Normative · Openness to experience · Reflexivity · Thematic analysis · Transformative learning · Digital Education and Society · Information Systems Theories and Implementation · Innovative Education and Learning Practices

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access