MANILA — Some Filipino college students who admitted using generative artificial intelligence to cheat in writing tasks viewed the practice less as academic misconduct and more as a way to cope with academic demands, according to a study published in the Journal of Academic Ethics.

The study, titled Cheating Writing with Generative AI: Exploring Student Motivations Using the Theory of Planned Behavior, examined why Filipino undergraduate students intentionally used generative AI for academic cheating. Researchers found that participants reframed the practice as a legitimate “academic survival strategy” rather than misconduct.

The qualitative study involved six undergraduate students from different disciplines, year levels and institutions in Metro Manila who admitted using generative AI to cheat in writing tasks.

Because the sample was small and deliberately selected, the findings reflect only the experiences of the participants and should not be taken as representative of all Filipino college students.

Researchers found that students were more likely to use AI in general education subjects they considered less relevant to their future careers. Peer influence also contributed to the behavior, as students learned AI techniques from classmates and increasingly viewed the practice as normal when others were doing the same.

Unclear school policies were another factor. Some participants interpreted the absence of specific rules on generative AI as indirect permission to use it, while others were highly confident they could submit AI-assisted work without being detected.

The study recently gained attention online after the Facebook page Iskolar ng Bayan featured the research and raised discussion over how students are using AI in academic work.

The researchers stressed that the findings do not justify cheating. Instead, they said schools may need clearer policies on generative AI, stronger AI literacy programs and more explicit guidance on how the technology can be used ethically in academic work.

They also argued that traditional punishment alone may not be enough as AI becomes more accessible, particularly when academic pressure, peer behavior and unclear institutional rules influence how students use the technology.

‍