2023 4th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Data Sciences (AiDAS)

Breaking the Illusion: The Reality of Artificial

Intelligence's (AI) Negative Influence on University
Students
Azizah binti Abd Rahman Zahari Md Rodzi* Iffah Najihah binti Razali
Kolej Pengajian Pengkomputeran, Kolej Pengajian Pengkomputeran, Kolej Pengajian Pengkomputeran,
Informatik dan Matematik Informatik dan Matematik Informatik dan Matematik
Universiti Teknologi MARA Universiti Teknologi MARA Universiti Teknologi MARA
Cawangan Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia Cawangan Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia Cawangan Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia
zahari@uitm.edu.my zzah.abdrahman.125@gmail.com najihahrp@gmail.com
2023 4th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Data Sciences (AiDAS) | 979-8-3503-1843-2/23/$31.00 ©2023 IEEE | DOI: 10.1109/AIDAS60501.2023.10284674

Wan Normila Mohamad
Faculty of Business and Management,
Universiti Teknologi MARA
Cawangan Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia
wanno794@uitm.edu.my
Irfan Suri binti Mohd Nazri
Kolej Pengajian Pengkomputeran,
Informatik dan Matematik
Universiti Teknologi MARA
Cawangan Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia
surinazri0084@gmail.com
Faisal Al-Sharqi
Department of Mathematics, Faculty of
Education for Pure Sciences,
University of Anbar, Ramadi, Anbar,
Iraq.
faisal.ghazi@uoanbar.edu.iq

Abstract— This study extensively examines the
primary causes of artificial intelligence's (AI) negative effects on
education, with a specific focus on UiTM Seremban students.
Questionnaire-based quantitative data collection techniques are
utilized to gather information from 200 students in this study.
The final criteria were determined by specialists and analysed
using SPSS 27. The findings indicate that the negative effects of
AI in this educational context include personal disconnection, a
lack of customization, the dissemination of inaccurate
information, privacy and security concerns, increased screen
time, and excessive technological reliance. Notably, the identified
negative impact with the highest mean score was "privacy and
security" Notably, this research is in its early stages and seeks to
identify causal relationships using the DEMATEL method.
Keywords—Artificial Intelligence, student, UiTM
Seremban, Descriptive statistics, negative impacts
I. INTRODUCTION
Almost every aspect of life has benefited greatly from the
ongoing advancement of AI technology, and the educational
sector is no exception. While AI has many advantages for
education, it will also encounter some unexpected challenges.
People may better prepare for and advance the use of AI in
education by being aware of potential issues that may arise
when it is implemented in education. The objective of this
study is to the negative impact of AI in education among
students from UiTM Seremban, Malaysia, to gain a deeper
comprehension of these negative impacts. This study aims to
investigate the following research inquiries: This inquiry
seeks to identify the negative impacts of AI in education that
influence to students in UiTM Seremban, Malaysia, and to
propose potential solutions to surmount these impacts.
The adoption of AI and flexible learning technologies in
the field of educational technology has received considerable
attention. According to a study conducted by Adams Becker
et al. in 2018, these advancements typically undergo an
adoption period of two to three years before becoming widely
used. According to Alexander et al. [1], the application of AI
in educational settings is projected to experience continued
growth. This growth is expected to surpass the notable 43%
rate of expansion observed between 2018 and 2022. The
integration of AI in education can greatly enhance teaching
and learning experiences. However, it is important to
recognize that there may also be negative effects associated
with its implementation, which could potentially diminish its
overall utility. A thorough examination of AI’s advantages
and disadvantages in education is imperative to guarantee
responsible and efficient integration, ultimately leading to
improved educational achievements. Table 1 presents the
results of a research study that provides insight into the
negative impact of AI in education.
A) Personal Disconnection. A pervasive use of AI,
according to study participants, would result in an overly
mechanical way of processing information, a pragmatic
approach, a greater emphasis on knowledge than on aesthetic
feelings, less room for teachers, ethical and security-related
issues, and adverse social effects in interpersonal interactions
[2]. Higher standards for students’ capacity for independent
learning are imposed by changes in learning styles [3]. Since
a lot of the new technology is made to be used by one person
at a time, there are worries that students will lose the social
and teamwork skills they usually learn in the classroom [4].
B) Limited Customization. The limited customization of AI
in education may negatively impact students. Haleem et al.
[5] stated that limited customisation is one of the challenges
with using AI in education. AI can give each student a
personalized learning experience, but it may not always be
able to do so because of limits in data, algorithms, and
resources [6]. Thus, it could lead to less engagement and
learning among students. According to Duggan [7], AI
systems must be able to adapt to students' different needs and
backgrounds to be effective. The authors said that without
this customization, AI in education might not have the desired
results and might even worsen educational differences.
C) Wrong information. Wrong information is one of
artificial intelligence's drawbacks in learning. When AI is
employed in making choices, it is necessary to identify the

XXX-X-XXXX-XXXX-X/XX/$XX.00 ©20XX IEEE

979-8-3503-1843-2/23/$31.00 ©2023 IEEE — 194 —
Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MARA. Downloaded on November 10,2023 at 04:29:07 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 2023 4th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Data Sciences (AiDAS)

potential repercussions and risks at multiple levels. If the AI
algorithm recommends the wrong reading or improper clip to
students, it might lead to major social or economic difficulties
[8]. The learning process can occasionally be disrupted by
several issues, including server errors and network issues,
which take a long time to fix. This can frustrate both students
and teachers [4]. It's challenging because gathering all the
essential information is exceedingly challenging because of
people mislabelling items or providing incorrect responses to
queries [9].
increase their screen time because of AI-personalized
recommendations and adaptive learning pathways delivered
through digital interfaces [19].
II. METHODOLOGY
This study utilizes a structured approach to examine the
negative impacts of AI integration in education on students.
The subsequent stages describe the research's methodology
as shown in Fig. 1:

D) Privacy and Security. Technology based on artificial

intelligence that mimics human intellect may cause legal
issues. The collection or release of personal information can
easily lead to a privacy breach because each person can create
a data region with clear lines separating personal information
from public information [10]. Some of these challenges may
be stated as to whom AI will report, what duty these tools will
have, the property rights of the products created by artificial
intelligence, privacy and security issues [2]. Massive data
collecting often raises questions regarding data security and
privacy [11]. The potential of AI to deduce a person's status
from data trails, including their disability status, poses a
threat to their privacy and autonomy [12].

E) Technology Dependence. AI can improve learning, but

students may become dependent on it that can lead to
technology dependence. According to study Duggan [7]
states there is also a risk that student’s ability to give
machines tasks and cognitive processes can make them more
dependent on technology while making them less able to do
these things themselves. In study [13] state that students may
be less use their problem-solving skills if they have access to
AI that give them answers and solutions right away. This can
make people rely on AI systems to solve problems instead of
thinking critically and analyzing things on their own.
Educators should think carefully about the role of AI in
education and try to find a balance between technology and
human contact [14].
F) Lack of Emotional Intelligence. There robots are
significantly when it comes to functioning effectively, but
they cannot replace the interpersonal relationships that build
a team. Human bonding is a crucial element in team
management and cannot be achieved by machines [15].
Artificial intelligence has the significant benefit of making
judgments based on data rather than feelings. It is a well-
known reality that human decisions are always adversely
impacted by our emotions, despite our best attempts [16].
One drawback is that because they don't interact with real
people during class, students are unable to practice and gain
social skills [9].
N7- Technology dependence on AI may have negative
impacts for students which is increased screen time usage
[16]. Obsessive, excessive, compulsive, impulsive, and
hurried usage of digital devices are characteristics of
problematic screen time [17]. Spending too much time in
front of a screen is linked to a number of bad things for mental
health, such as psychological problems, low emotional
stability, and a higher risk of sadness or anxiety [18]. Students
who engage with AI-generated content and activities may
Fig. 1. Research Framework
Step 1: Identification of Possible Negative Impacts.
The study conducted a comprehensive literature review to
identify a wide range of potential negative effects associated
with the incorporation of AIin education for students. The
objective of this phase was to compile a comprehensive
inventory of these effects using existing research, reports, and
expert opinions.
Step 2: Expert Panel Selection and Criteria Ranking.
To assure a comprehensive evaluation, an expert council was
meticulously assembled. This panel consisted of three student
representatives, three academic professionals, and three
members of upper management. This diverse panel assessed
and ranked the identified negative impacts collectively. The
panel identified the top seven negative effects based on their
severity, relevance, and potential repercussions through
structured discussions and expert deliberations.
Step 3: Questionnaire Development.
Informed by the insights of the expert council, the study's
questionnaire was complex. Each of the top seven negative
effects was dissected into specific dimensions, culminating in
the formulation of a series of queries. The purpose of these
inquiries was to elicit nuanced responses from students,
casting light on their perceptions and experiences regarding
the identified negative effects.

— 195 —
Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MARA. Downloaded on November 10,2023 at 04:29:07 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 2023 4th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Data Sciences (AiDAS)
Step 4: Pilot Questionnaire Testing.
The meticulously crafted questionnaire underwent pilot
testing with a select group of students. The pilot participants'
feedback was instrumental in refining the questionnaire to
improve its clarification, coherence, and usability. This
iterative process was essential to ensuring that the
questionnaire captured the nuances of student experiences
accurately.
Step 5: Distribution of questionnaires and data collection.
Following the pilot phase, the refined questionnaire was
disseminated systematically to a diverse cross-section of the
institution's students. The distribution procedure included
plain and concise instructions, which encouraged participants
to provide consistent and accurate responses.
Step 6: Data Analysis using IBM SPSS Statistics 27.
The collected data were subjected to a rigorous analysis using
IBM SPSS Statistics 27. Using descriptive statistical
methods, the study quantitatively summarized each
questionnaire item's responses. This systematic analysis
provided valuable insights into the prevalence and
significance of the seven most significant negative effects
identified.
By meticulously adhering to these sequential stages, the study
aimed to achieve an exhaustive examination of the negative
effects of AI integration in education on students. This
methodological approach, enriched by expert perspectives
and student experiences, sought to provide a comprehensive
understanding of the difficulties associated with AI
integration. The findings are likely to inform educational
institutions' strategies for effectively navigating these
challenges and maximizing AI's positive impact potential.
III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
This study started by review of literature related to this study
and then, collecting the data from students UiTM Seremban
regarding to the AI in education. After that, the data was
analysed by SA. Figure 1 show about the research process of
SA.
Demographics
Table I provides the demographic profile of the students from
UiTM Seremban 3 who participated in the survey.
TABLE I. DEMOGRAPHICS
Do you use any AI tools in Yes
your study?
No
Age 18 - 19 years
20 - 21 years
22 years and above
Faculty FSKM
FSPPP
FSR
Gender Male
Female
Education Level Diploma
Degree
Master
PhD
Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MARA. Downloaded on November 10,2023 at 04:29:07 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
The provided demographic information reveals
more about the individuals who responded "Yes" or "No" to
the query "Do you use AI?" Among the 200 individuals who
filled out the questionnaire, 166 responded "Yes" (83%) and
34 responded "No" (17%). 35 respondents (17.5%) were
between the ages of 18 and 19, 88 respondents (44%) were
between the ages of 20 and 21, and 77 respondents (38.5%)
were at least 22 years old. Most respondents were between
the ages of 20 and 21, and this age group comprised more
than half of all respondents. According to the distribution of
responses by gender, there were 80 male participants (40%)
and 120 female participants (60%) in total. Interestingly,
most individuals who answered "Yes" to the query "Do you
use AI?" were female. In addition, the respondents were
sorted by their faculty. There were 73 respondents for FSKM
(36.5%), 63 respondents for FSPPP (31.5%), and 64
respondents for FSR (32%). Most respondents came from the
FSKM faculty, closely followed by the FSPPP faculty.
Regarding educational credentials, 63 respondents (31.5%)
held a Diploma, 135 respondents (67.5%) a bachelor’s
degree, and 2 respondents (1%) a master’s degree. There
were no respondents with a doctoral degree.
A) Personal Disconnection
Information on the personal disconnect of AI in education is
presented in Table II, with an emphasis on the causes of
disconnect and its potential effects on student learning.
TABLE II. PERSONAL DISCONNECTION
PERSONAL DISCONNECTION MN SD SK
AI makes it harder for me to communicate 3.18 .773 -.085
with my lecturers and peers.
AI doesn't give me enough chances to work 3.16 .794 .080
with my peers in groups or on projects
together.
The average score for the statement "AI makes it harder for
me to communicate with my lecturers and peers" is 3.18,
revealing that people thought AI might make it harder to talk
to other people, which is an important part of learning. Also,
the average score for the statement “AI doesn't give me
enough chances to work with my peers in groups or on
projects together" is 3.16. The respondents thought AI might
make it harder for students to learn how to work together and
collaborate, which are important skills to learn. These
findings suggest that while AI in education may offer
personalized learning experiences and increased adaptability,
it may also reduce interpersonal communication and
collaboration. Thus, AI's role in education must be
166
thoroughly evaluated to ensure that it augments rather than
34 replaces traditional teaching methods and promotes student
35
learning. The effects of AI on education and how to mitigate
88 them may require additional research.
77
73
63 B) Limited Customization
64
80 The limited customization option that are accessible to
deploy AI in educational settings are outlined in Table III.
120
63
135
2
0
— 196 —
 2023 4th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Data Sciences (AiDAS)
TABLE III. LIMITED CUSTOMIZATION
Limited Customization MN SD
AI doesn't help me enough when I'm having 3.51 .865
trouble with a concept or skill.
The average mean for the statement "AI doesn't help me
enough when I'm having trouble with a concept or skill" was
3.51. This shows that learners may feel that AI does not help
them enough when they're having trouble with a concept or
skill. This could be because people don't know how to use AI
tools well or because the AI systems themselves have limited
abilities. The other scoring means for the statement "AI
reduces my creativity and innovation in learning, making
learning less interesting and motivating" was 3.56,
suggesting that learners may worry that AI might harm their
creativity and motivation. AI systems may be too
prescriptive, focused on specific results, or hinder learners'
exploration and discovery.
C) Wrong Information
Students' wrong perceptions of AI's use in educational
settings have led to the outcomes presented in Table IV.
TABLE IV. WRONG INFORMATION
Wrong Information MN SD
I have consistently received inaccurate or
misleading information from AI.
3.72 .799
Wrong information given by Ai leads to my
3.73 .788
bad performance in education.
Some respondents were concerned about AI education data
accuracy. "I have consistently received inaccurate or
misleading information from AI", earned a mean score of
3.72, indicating that some respondents doubted AI's
accuracy. The score means the statement "Wrong information
given by AI leads to my bad performance in education." was
3.73 showing that several respondents believed that AI-
provided faulty information might negatively impact their
academic achievement. So, it's important to make sure that
AI systems used in education are accurate and trustworthy,
and that there are ways to fix any mistakes.
D) Privacy and Security
The information on the privacy and security of AI in
education that influences students' privacy is shown in Table
V.
TABLE V. PRIVACY AND SECURITY
Privacy and Security MN SD
I am uncomfortable with how much personal
information AI collect about me.
3.75 .694
AI could be used to keep track of what I do
3.75 .711
online without my knowledge or permission.
The average score for the statements "I am uncomfortable
with how much personal information AI collects about me"
and "AI could be used to keep track of what I do online
without my knowledge or permission" were 3.75. This means
that the people who answered the survey were worried about
how much personal information AI systems collect and how
it can be used to track their online behaviour without their
Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MARA. Downloaded on November 10,2023 at 04:29:07 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
knowledge or permission. These findings show AI in
SK education raises data privacy and security risks. These issues
-1.01 must be addressed to protect personal data. Data should be
acquired responsibly, securely, and with consent. This would
help students trust AI systems, which is essential for AI in
education.
E) Technology Dependence
The results of a survey on the extent of technology reliance
in the field of AI within the educational context among
student participants are shown in Table VI.
TABLE VI. TECHNOLOGY DEPENDENCE
Technology Dependence MN SD SK
AI has a negative impact to my think
3.69 .768 -1.36
critically and solve problem-solving skills.
AI causes me to become overly dependent
3.77 .676 -1.00
on AI systems for learning.
The mean score for the statement "AI has a negative impact
on my ability to think critically and solve problems" was
3.69. This shows that people think using AI in education may
make it harder for students to think critically and solve
problems. This is a big problem because these skills are
SK
important for success in school and the workplace. The
-1.11 average score for the statement "AI causes me to become
overly dependent on AI systems for learning" was 3.77,
-1.07 which shows that people think using AI in education may
cause students to rely too much on AI systems to learn. This
could make students less interested in learning on their own
and hurt their ability to learn and remember knowledge
outside of AI systems.
F) Lack of Emotional Intelligence
The findings of a research investigation into the perspectives
of students about the deficiency of emotional intelligence
shown by AI used in educational settings are presented in
Table VII.
TABLE VII. LACK OF EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE
Lack of Emotional Intelligence MN SD SK
AI cannot understand my emotional needs as
3.55 .710 -.533
a student and respond to them.
Relying too much on AI led to feel
disconnected or isolated from human 3.60 .713 -.852
interaction.
The statistical analysis of survey responses suggests that
students are concerned about how AI might damage their
SK
emotional well-being and social connections. Students are
-.939 concerned that AI may not be able to meet their emotional
requirements, as the mean score for AI cannot understand my
-1.02 emotional needs as a student and respond to them" was 3.55.
The mean score for "Relying too much on AI led me to feel
disconnected or isolated from human interaction" was 3.60,
suggesting that students worry that too much AI use would
lead to social isolation. When introducing AI in educational
institutions, educators and policymakers should address its
effects on students' emotional needs and social connections.
They must also provide pupils with emotional support and
social connection to prevent social isolation and encourage
healthy emotional development.
— 197 —
 2023 4th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Data Sciences (AiDAS)

G) Increased Screen Time range values fall between -1.126 to -0.004. This implies that
The information presented in Table VII pertains to the the distributions for each component are slightly negatively
increased screen time of AI within the educational context, skewed, with the largest negative skewness found for
among students. "Technology Dependence." The uniformity of the deviation
skewness, as evidenced by the constant value of 0.188,
TABLE VII. INCREASED SCREEN TIME suggests that the skewness values for each aspect are
Increased Screen Time MN SD SK relatively stable and do not deviate greatly from one another.
With AI, I spent more time in front of a
screen can make me less focused and less 3.70 .813 -.904 IV. CONCLUSION AND FURTHER
able to stay on task. RESEARCH
AI increase the screen time usage, which can
be bad for my physical and mental health.
3.78 .781 -.897 This research effectively identified the negative
impacts of AI integration in education among UiTM
Seremban students. These factors include personal
The statistical analysis of the survey findings showed that separation, restricted customisation, the distribution of
people were worried about how AI might impact the physical erroneous information, privacy and security problems,
and mental health of students, especially if it made them technology reliance, a lack of emotional intelligence, and
spend more time in front of screens. The average result for increased screen time. The findings of this study provide
the statement "With AI, I spent more time in front of a screen significant recommendations for educators and
can make me less focused and less able to stay on task" was administrators in the development and deployment of AI-
3.70, which showed that people thought AI might make them driven tools and platforms suited to student requirements,
less able to focus and stay on task because they would be hence improving the educational experience.
spending more time in front of a screen. The statement “AI As AI technology advances, there is a chance for future study
increase the screen time usage, which can be bad for my to use extension fuzzy set theory [20]–[30], which provides a
physical and mental health" was 3.78, showed that people rigorous analytical framework for delving further into the
were worried about how more screen time could hurt their multiple consequences of AI in education. Incorporating
physical and mental health. These findings imply that while DEMATEL analysis may also provide a systematic
AI in education may bring benefits like individualized knowledge of the causal links between the detected negative
learning experiences and better adaptability, excessive screen consequences, allowing for the formulation of targeted
time may negatively impact students' concentration and treatments and initiatives [31]–[37]. Prioritizing data security
physical and mental health. Thus, AI's position in education and ethical issues in AI applications is still critical.
must be carefully considered to avoid excessive screen time Educational institutions may reduce the dangers associated
with AI integration and data breaches by protecting students'
and harm to students' well-being.
privacy, preferences, and skill levels. Furthermore,
advocating for free access to AI-enabled resources might help
The Overall Negative Impact of AI in Education limit negative repercussions by encouraging students'
Table VIII provides an overview of the negative impact of AI creativity and critical thinking while supporting ethical
in education as perceived by students. It includes different technology usage.
factors that are negatively influenced by AI implementation The study's results give useful insights for education
in education. The table also shows the frequency of stakeholders to solve the issues faced by AI integration while
occurrence of these negative impacts as reported by students, ensuring student well-being, privacy, and learning outcomes
with some factors being reported more frequently than others. are maintained. Educators, institutions, and governments can
exploit the full promise of AI while proactively addressing its
Table VII. The Overall Negative Impact of AI in education repercussions by adopting sophisticated methodology and
Negative Impact of AI MN SD SK Ranking
transdisciplinary approaches. Finally, future research efforts
might expand on thefoundation established by this work by
Personal Disconnection 3.169 0.750 -0.004 7
combining sophisticated analytical methods and ethical
Limited Customization 3.533 0.767 -0.918 6
issues to enhance our knowledge of AI's role in education and
Wrong Information 3.729 0.727 -1.003 4 its larger social influence.
Privacy And Security 3.747 0.662 -0.905 1
Technology Dependence 3.732 0.662 -1.126 3
Lack Of Emotional 3.572 0.643 -0.551 5 REFERENCE
Intelligence
Increase Screen Time 3.738 0.756 -0.858 2
[1] B. Alexander et al., Educause Horizon report: 2019 Higher Education
edition. 2019.
The data provided describes the negative aspects of AI in [2] A. Gocen and F. Aydemir, “Artificial Intelligence in Education and
education, such as personal disconnection (3.169), Limited Schools,” Res. Educ. Media, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 13–21, 2020, doi:
Customization (3.533), Wrong Information (3.729), Privacy 10.2478/rem-2020-0003.
and Security (3.7470), Technology Dependence (3.732), [3] T. Hamid, M. Chhabra, K. Ravulakollu, P. Singh, S. Dalal, and R.
Dewan, “A Review on Artificial Intelligence in Education,” Proc. 2022
Lack of Emotional Intelligence (3.572) and Increase Screen 9th Int. Conf. Comput. Sustain. Glob. Dev. INDIACom 2022, pp. 365–
Time (3.738). The observed standard deviation range values 369, 2022, doi: 10.23919/INDIACom54597.2022.9763178.
from 0.642592 to 0.767000. This shows that the degree of [4] N. Rani and B. Gates, “One Day National Seminar ‘ DIGITALIZATION
variation in the scores for each element is comparable, with OF HIGHER EDUCATION ’ Digitalization of higher education in
India - A technological revolution,” pp. 282–285, 2019.
no noticeable outliers or extreme numbers. The skewness

— 198 —
Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MARA. Downloaded on November 10,2023 at 04:29:07 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 2023 4th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Data Sciences (AiDAS)
[5] A. Haleem, M. Javaid, M. A. Qadri, and R. Suman, “Understanding the
role of digital technologies in education: A review,” Sustain. Oper.
Comput., vol. 3, no. February, pp. 275–285, 2022, doi:
10.1016/j.susoc.2022.05.004.
[6] A. Jaiswal and C. J. Arun, “Potential of Artificial Intelligence for
transformation of the education system in India,” Int. J. Educ. Dev.
using Inf. Commun. Technol., vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 142–158, 2021.
[7] S. Duggan, “AI in Education: Change at the Speed of Lightening.
UNESCO IITE Policy Brief.,” p. 37, 2020.
[8] K. Ahmad et al., “Artificial Intelligence in Education: A Panoramic
Review,” 2020.
[9] Rehmat Ullah, “Advantages and Disadvantages of Artificial Intelligence
in Education,” 2022.
[10] X. Cheng, L. Su, X. Luo, J. Benitez, and S. Cai, “The good, the bad, and
the ugly: impact of analytics and artificial intelligence-enabled
personal information collection on privacy and participation in
ridesharing,” Eur. J. Inf. Syst., vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 339–363, 2022, doi:
10.1080/0960085X.2020.1869508.
[11] N. A. Smuha, “Pitfalls and pathways for Trustworthy Artificial
Intelligence in education,” Ethics Artif. Intell. Educ., no. February, pp.
113–145, 2022, doi: 10.4324/9780429329067-7.
[12] E. Southgate, “Artificial Intelligence, Ethics, Equity and Higher
Education: A ‘beginning-of-the-discussion’ paper.,” Natl. Cent.
Student Equity High. Educ., pp. 1–19, 2020.
[13] G. J. Hwang, H. Xie, B. W. Wah, and D. Gašević, “Vision, challenges,
roles and research issues of Artificial Intelligence in Education,”
Comput. Educ. Artif. Intell., vol. 1, no. September, 2020, doi:
10.1016/j.caeai.2020.100001.
[14] I. A. P. Wogu, S. Misra, P. A. Assibong, E. F. Olu-Owolabi, R.
Maskeliūnas, and R. Damasevicius, “Artificial intelligence, smart
classrooms and online education in the 21st century: Implications for
human development,” J. Cases Inf. Technol., vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 66–79,
2019, doi: 10.4018/JCIT.2019070105.
[15] S. Bhbosale, V. Pujari, and Z. Multani, “Advantages and Disadvantages
of Artificial Intelligence,” Aayushi Int. Interdiscip. Res. J., no. 77, pp.
227–230, 2020.
[16] K. Chhaya, A. Khanzode, and R. D. Sarode, “Advantages and
Disadvantages of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning: A
Literate Review,” Int. J. Libr. Inf. Sci., vol. 9, no. 1, p. 3, 2020.
[17] P. Lodha, “Internet Addiction, Depression, Anxiety and Stress among
Indian Youth,” vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 427–442, 2018.
[18] A. Pandya and P. Lodha, “Social Connectedness, Excessive Screen
Time During COVID-19 and Mental Health: A Review of Current
Evidence,” Front. Hum. Dyn., vol. 3, no. July, pp. 1–9, 2021, doi:
10.3389/fhumd.2021.684137.
[19] W. Holmes, M. Bialik, and C. Fadel, “Artificial intelligence in
education: Promises and Implications for Teaching and Learning,”
Cent. Curric. Redesign, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 251–259, 2019.
[20] Z. Rodzi, A. G. Ahmad, N. Sa, and W. N. Mohamad, “Z-Score
Functions of Dual Hesitant Fuzzy Set and Its Applications in Multi-
Criteria Decision Making,” vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 225–232, 2021, doi:
10.13189/ms.2021.090303.
[21] Z. Rodzi, A. G. Ahmad, N. F. Ismail, and N. L. Abdullah, “Z-Score
Functions of Hesitant Fuzzy Sets,” Math. Stat., vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 445–
455, 2021, doi: 10.13189/ms.2021.090405.
[22] K. Kabassi, A. Amelio, V. Komianos, and K. Oikonomou, “Evaluating
Museum Virtual Tours: The case study of Italy,” Inf., vol. 10, no. 11,
pp. 1–11, 2019, doi: 10.3390/info10110351.
— 199 —
Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MARA. Downloaded on November 10,2023 at 04:29:07 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
[23] Z. Md Rodzi and N. Hassan, “A Hamming score distance of hesitant
fuzzy sets,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser., vol. 1212, no. 1, pp. 1–8, 2019, doi:
10.1088/1742-6596/1212/1/012020.
[24] Z. Rodzi and A. G. Ahmad, “Application of Parameterized Hesitant
Fuzzy Soft Set Theory in Decision Making,” Math. Stat., vol. 8, no. 3,
pp. 244–253, 2020, doi: 10.13189/ms.2020.080302.
[25] Z. Rodzi and A. G. Ahmad, “Fuzzy Parameterized Hesitant Fuzzy
Linguistic Term Soft Sets ( FPHFLTSSs ) in Multi-Criteria Decision
Making,” Int. J. Innov. Technol. Explor. Eng., vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 909–
916, 2020, doi: 10.35940/ijitee.E2519.039520.
[26] Z. Rodzi and A. G. Ahmad, “Fuzzy Parameterized Dual Hesitant Fuzzy
Soft Sets and Its Application in TOPSIS,” Math. Stat. 8, vol. 8, no. 1,
pp. 32–41, 2020, doi: 10.13189/ms.2020.080104.
[27] Z. Bashir, T. Rashid, J. Watróbski, W. Salabun, and a. Malik, “Hesitant
probabilistic multiplicative preference relations in group decision
making,” Appl. Sci., vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 1–31, 2018, doi:
10.3390/app8030398.
[28] L. Yang, H. Zou, C. Shang, X. Ye, and P. Rani, “Adoption of
information and digital technologies for sustainable smart
manufacturing systems for industry 4.0 in small, medium, and micro
enterprises (SMMEs),” Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change, vol. 188, no.
March 2022, p. 122308, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2022.122308.
[29] L. Rodrigo, M. Palacios, and J. Romero, “Technological Forecasting &
Social Change Organisational commitment in the digital social
innovation context : does qualitative comparative analysis add
information to linear regression ?,” Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang.,
vol. 179, no. March, 2022.
[30] A. Mardani, E. K. Zavadskas, K. Govindan, A. A. Senin, and A. Jusoh,
“VIKOR technique: A systematic review of the state of the art literature
on methodologies and applications,” Sustain., vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 1–38,
2016, doi: 10.3390/su8010037.
[31] Z. M. Rodzi et al., “Uncovering Obstacles to HouseholdWaste
Recycling in Seremban, Malaysia through Decision-Making Trial and
Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL) Analysis,” Sci. Technol. Indones.,
vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 422–428, 2023.
[32] Z. M. Rodzi, M. N. H. Bin Kamarulamirin, N. Q. B. A. Halim, and Y.
B. Ya’akop, “The DEMATEL Approach to Analyzing the Factors
Influencing University Students’ Purchase of Smartphones,” 2021 2nd
Int. Conf. Artif. Intell. Data Sci. AiDAS 2021, no. September, pp. 1–6,
2021, doi: 10.1109/AiDAS53897.2021.9574256.
[33] Z. bin M. Rodzi et al., “Integrated Single-Valued Neutrosophic
Normalized Weighted Bonferroni Mean (SVNNWBM)-DEMATEL
for Analyzing the Key Barriers to Halal Certification Adoption in
Malaysia,” Int. J. Neutrosophic Sci., vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 106–114, 2023.
[34] J. N. Ismail et al., “The Integrated Novel Framework : Linguistic
Variables in Pythagorean Neutrosophic Set with DEMATEL for
Enhanced,” Int. J. Neutrosophic Sci., vol. 21, no. 02, pp. 129–141,
2023.
[35] L. Abdullah, Z. Ong, and N. Rahim, “An intuitionistic fuzzy decision-
making for developing cause and effect criteria of subcontractors
selection,” Int. J. Comput. Intell. Syst., vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 991–1002,
2021, doi: 10.2991/ijcis.d.210222.001.
[36] G. Büyüközkan and S. Güleryüz, “Evaluation of Renewable Energy
Resources in Turkey using an integrated MCDM approach with
linguistic interval fuzzy preference relations,” Energy, vol. 123, pp.
149–163, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2017.01.137.
[37] C. P. Garg, “Modeling the e-waste mitigation strategies using grey-
theory and DEMATEL framework,” J. Clean. Prod., vol. 281, p.
124035, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124035.