Metaphorical perceptions of secondary school students regarding the concept of generative artificial intelligence
Clinical Snapshot
PICO Framework
| P — Population | 332 secondary school students aged 14-18 years from four schools in Türkiye |
| I — Intervention | Open-ended metaphor prompt about generative artificial intelligence |
| C — Comparator | Not applicable (descriptive qualitative study) |
| O — Outcomes | Metaphorical perceptions and conceptualizations of generative AI categorized into themes |
Bottom Line
This qualitative study reveals that secondary school students hold sophisticated, multifaceted perceptions of generative AI, viewing it simultaneously as a knowledge source, teaching tool, and potential risk. The research provides valuable insights for educators and policymakers developing AI literacy programs. However, methodological limitations including unclear sampling strategies and absence of ethical considerations discussion somewhat limit the study's robustness. The findings suggest adolescents demonstrate both appreciation for AI's educational potential and awareness of ethical concerns, supporting the need for balanced, developmentally appropriate AI education that promotes critical thinking alongside practical skills. For Australian educators, these insights can inform curriculum development and guide responsible AI integration in secondary schools.
Key Findings
P Value: Not applicable for qualitative research
Effect Size: Not applicable for qualitative research
Primary Outcome: Five overarching themes of GenAI perception: knowledge source, teaching entity, supportive tool, human intelligence reflection, and dual-purpose technology
Nnt Or Sensitivity: Inter-rater reliability κ = 0.92 indicating high analytical consistency
Confidence Interval: Not applicable for qualitative research
Clinical Application
Findings can inform development of age-appropriate AI literacy curricula and educational policies Relevant for Australian secondary education as schools increasingly integrate AI tools; aligns with ACARA digital technologies curriculum and responsible AI use guidelines Secondary school students (14-18 years) and educators working with adolescents in AI-integrated learning environments
Abstract
UNLABELLED: The rapid integration of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools, such as ChatGPT, into educational contexts has raised important questions regarding how adolescents conceptualize and make sense of these technologies. Understanding students' perceptions is essential for developing age-appropriate, ethical, and pedagogically sound approaches to AI use in secondary education. This descriptive qualitative study employed a phenomenological approach and metaphor analysis to explore secondary school students' perceptions of generative artificial intelligence. The study sample consisted of 332 students aged 14-18 years from four secondary schools in Türkiye. Data were collected using an open-ended prompt ("Generative artificial intelligence is like … because …") and analyzed through content analysis. Metaphors were categorized based on shared semantic and conceptual features, and inter-rater reliability was established using Cohen's kappa (κ = 0.92). Analysis revealed ten metaphor categories clustered under five overarching themes: generative artificial intelligence as (1) a source of knowledge, (2) a teaching and guiding entity, (3) a supportive and assisting tool, (4) a reflection of human intelligence, and (5) a dual-purpose (beneficial-risky) technology. Students most frequently conceptualized GenAI as a comprehensive knowledge source (e.g., book, encyclopedia) and as a human-like cognitive entity (e.g., brain, wise person). At the same time, metaphors reflecting ethical awareness and potential risks, such as misuse and overreliance, were also identified. The findings indicate that secondary school students hold multifaceted and nuanced perceptions of generative artificial intelligence, encompassing both educational opportunities and ethical concerns. These results highlight the importance of integrating AI literacy into secondary education in ways that promote critical thinking, responsible use, and awareness of GenAI's limitations alongside its potential benefits. CONCLUSION: It was determined that secondary school students perceive generative artificial intelligence ambivalently as both a useful tool and a source of ethical and emotional concern, highlighting the need for developmentally appropriate artificial intelligence literacy approaches. WHAT IS KNOWN: • GenAI tools such as ChatGPT are increasingly integrated into educational contexts and have the potential to support personalized learning, information access, and student engagement. • Existing research has primarily focused on educators' perspectives or higher education settings, while studies examining adolescents' perceptions of GenAI remain limited. WHAT IS NEW: • This study provides empirical evidence on secondary school students' metaphorical perceptions of generative artificial intelligence within a K-12 context. • Findings reveal that adolescents conceptualize GenAI in multifaceted ways, including as a knowledge source, teaching and guiding entity, supportive tool, reflection of human intelligence, and a dual-purpose (beneficial-risky) technology.
References
- 1.Özbay, Ö. (2026). Metaphorical perceptions of secondary school students regarding the concept of generative artificial intelligence. European Journal of Pediatrics. https://doi.org/10.30658/hmc.1.3
Related Research
Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association
Artificial Intelligence Tools for Gastrointestinal Research: A Practical Guide
2 Aug 2026
Artificial intelligence in medicine
Artificial intelligence language models for medical text analysis: A systematic review
2 Aug 2026
Surgery
Artificial intelligence to revolutionize surgical decision-making is still just around the corner.
1 Aug 2026
This content is for educational purposes for healthcare professionals only and does not constitute clinical advice. Clinical decisions should be based on individual patient assessment, current guidelines, and appropriate specialist consultation. Editorial Standards · Privacy Policy · Terms of Service