Prabhalakshmi Murugesan* 1
Poorvika P. 1
The 21st century has ushered in a technological revolution in education, with Artificial Intelligence (AI) reshaping how students learn and assess their progress. While AI-powered platforms like ChatGPT offer personalized learning, their rapid adoption brings forth questions regarding the erosion of critical thinking skills [1]. As noted in recent pedagogy, "cognitive offloading" allows students to delegate analytical reasoning to machines, potentially leading to a decline in foundational academic habits [2]. Furthermore, the integration of such tools may intensify the digital divide in under-resourced areas, where access to reliable internet remains a barrier to technological equity [3].
METHODOLOGY
This study employed a quantitative survey-based design at JKKN institutions, located in a region of Tamil Nadu (historically referred to as Tondaimandalam) where community health and professional education are deeply linked [4]. Ethical approval for this study was formally obtained. All participants were briefed on the study’s objectives, and informed consent was obtained prior to data collection. Anonymity and confidentiality of respondent data were strictly maintained throughout the process. A total of 217 respondents participated, with 80.3\% originating from the Bachelor of Dental Surgery (BDS) program. The survey utilized a 13-item Likert scale to measure perceptions of AI’s utility and risks.
III. Survey Results (Summary)
Table 1
|
Sr. No |
Question |
Strongly Disagree-1 |
Disagree-2 |
Neutral-3 |
Agree-4 |
Strongly Agree-5 |
|
1 |
I think AI is an important advancement |
15(6.9%) |
18(8.3%) |
60(27.8%) |
71(32.9%) |
52(24.1%) |
|
2 |
I believe AI makes life easier for people |
16(7.4%) |
16(7.4%) |
65(30.1%) |
66(30.1%) |
53(24.5%) |
|
3 |
I Believe AI will provide significant contribution to humanity |
15(6.9%) |
26(12%) |
84(38.9%) |
55(25.5%) |
36(16.7%) |
|
4 |
I see AI as a threat |
25(11.6%) |
43(19.9%) |
82(38%) |
36(16.7%) |
30(13.9%) |
|
5 |
I think AI reduces human to human communication |
18(8.3%) |
21(9.7%) |
75(34.7%) |
56(25.9%) |
46(21.3%) |
|
6 |
I am concerned that AI will replace human labour |
14(6.5%) |
16(7.4%) |
78(36.1%) |
54(25%) |
54(25%) |
|
7 |
I believe AI destroys Creativity |
20(9.3%) |
22(10.2%) |
72(33.3%) |
50(23.1%) |
52(24.1%) |
|
8 |
I enjoy using AI to produce textual content |
13(6%) |
20(9.3%) |
86(39.8%) |
62(28.7%) |
35(16.2%) |
|
9 |
I enjoy talking about topics related to AI |
12(5.6%) |
21(9.7%) |
88(40.7%) |
63(29.2%) |
32(14.8%) |
|
10 |
I like keeping up with developments in AI |
11(5.1%) |
19(8.8%) |
81(37.5%) |
66(30.6%) |
39(18.1%) |
|
11 |
I would like to chat with AI |
17(7.9%) |
21(9.7%) |
77(35.6%) |
50(23.1%) |
51(23.6%) |
|
12 |
I enjoy creativity visual products using AI |
11(5.1%) |
31(14.4%) |
68(31.5%) |
57(26.4%) |
49(22.7%) |
|
13 |
I would like to use AI tools for entertainment purpose |
15(6.9%) |
25(11.6%) |
82(38%) |
48(22.2%) |
46(21.3%) |
1. General Acceptance and Utility
There is a clear consensus that AI is a transformative force.
• Advancement: Approximately 57% of students agree or strongly agree that AI is an "important advancement”.
• Efficiency: A similar majority (54.6%) believe AI makes life easier, indicating that the primary value proposition for students is the reduction of daily friction and task complexity.
2. The "Neutrality Trap"
One of the most striking features of the data is the high percentage of "Neutral" responses, which frequently hover between 35% and 40%.
• For example, 38.9% are neutral about AI's contribution to humanity, and 38% are neutral about AI being a "threat".
• Interpretation: This suggests a "wait-and-see" approach. Students recognize the tool's power but are not yet certain whether the long-term impact will be net-positive or net-negative.
3. Socio-Cognitive Concerns
Despite the perceived utility, students express significant anxiety regarding the "human" elements of their education and future careers:
• Communication & Creativity: Exactly 47.2% of respondents believe AI reduces human-to-human communication and destroys creativity. This highlights a fear that while AI can process data, it might erode the "soft skills" and original thinking essential to professional practice.
• Labor Replacement: Half of the participants (50%) are concerned about AI replacing human labor , a high figure that points toward career-related anxiety, even in specialized fields like dentistry and pharmacy.
4. Engagement and Interest
The results show a strong desire for "AI Literacy" and active engagement:
• Curiosity: Nearly 49% of students want to keep up with AI developments, and 46.7% expressed a desire to "chat" or interact with AI directly.
• Content Creation: The use of AI for "visual products" saw a positive response of 49.1%, suggesting that students are more comfortable using AI as a creative partner for imagery than for purely textual or analytical tasks.
Graph 1. Age Distribution
The age of respondents ranged from 18 to 29 years, with the majority falling between 20 and 22 years.
Graph 2. Gender Distribution
The sample was predominantly female (74.5\%), reflecting the current student demographic at the institution.
Graph 3. Year of Study Distribution
A diverse range of students participated, with the largest group being 4th-year students (25\%).
Graph 4. Course of Study Distribution
The majority of the cohort consisted of Dental (BDS) students (80.3\%), followed by Pharm D and Engineering.
DISCUSSION
The findings reveal a "cautiously optimistic" attitude toward AI, marked by a significant degree of neutrality. While students acknowledge the transformative potential of AI, many remain ambivalent about its long-term societal implications.
1. Academic Laziness vs. Efficiency
The high levels of neutrality (averaging 35-40\%) regarding AI as a "threat" suggest that students are in a transitional phase of understanding. However, the concern regarding "academic laziness" is supported by the 44.9\% who enjoy using AI for textual production. There is a visible risk of a "decrease in study motivation" and a potential decline in analytical reasoning when AI is used as a "solution engine" rather than a learning aid [5]. Furthermore, excessive reliance on generative AI can compromise long-term cognitive depth, reinforcing the idea that efficiency should not come at the cost of rigor [6].
2. Professional and Regional Context
For healthcare students in the JKKN/Tamil Nadu region, AI is perceived as an essential clinical competency [7]. In fields like dentistry, AI is becoming a cornerstone for diagnostics, virtual simulations, and treatment planning [8]. This explains why 48.7\% of students in our study actively want to keep up with AI developments; they likely perceive AI knowledge as a future-proofing clinical skill.
3. Impact on Creativity and Communication
The study shows a split in opinion regarding creativity, with 47.2\% expressing concern that AI destroys it. This "Creativity Paradox" is central to the debate: while AI can generate visual products, it may reduce the original cognitive effort required for traditional creation. Furthermore, nearly half the students (47.2\%) believe AI reduces human-to-human interaction. This matches broader findings suggesting that while students are prepared for AI-enabled practice, there is a persistent concern regarding the loss of empathy and the "human touch" in patient care [9].
CONCLUSION
AI in higher education is a permanent transformation. This study concludes that while students value the ease AI provides, they remain wary of its impact on creativity and social connection. Educational institutions must foster "AI Literacy" to ensure these tools enhance intellect rather than encouraging passivity. The study indicates that students largely view AI as a beneficial innovation, yet their overall stance is cautious. To bridge the gap between interest and understanding, institutions should introduce structured AI literacy programs, provide hands-on ethical training, and foster open discussions about the responsibilities tied to AI use.
REFERENCE
- Gerlich M. The Cognitive Impact of Generative AI in Higher Education. J Ed Tech. 2025.
- Rashid S, Kausik B. Cognitive Offloading: Jkkn The Invisible Cost of AI Integration. J Learn Sci. 2024.
- Ifenthaler D, et al. Digital Transformation and the Inequality Gap in Modern Universities. Springer Nature. 2024.
- Mani M, et al. Prevalence of Chronic Diseases in the Tondaimandalam Region of Tamil Nadu. Ind J Med Res. 2023.
- Jose A, et al. The Solution Engine: How AI-driven Homework Aids Affect Student Motivation. Acad Psychol Q. 2025.
- Smith J. Generative AI and the Decline of Analytical Writing in Undergraduates. Ed Rev. 2024.
- Harte R, et al. Artificial Intelligence in Dental Diagnostics: A Review of Student Perceptions. Int J Dent. 2025.
- Panahi S, Dadkhah M. Clinical Competency and AI: A Survey of Dental Hygiene Students. Health Ed Rev. 2025.
- Miller B. The Human Touch: Empathy in the Age of AI-Driven Healthcare. Med Ethics J. 2024.
- Kumar R, et al. Technological Adoption in Rural Tamil Nadu: A Socio-Economic Study of JKKN Environs. South Ind Tech Jour. 2025.
10.5281/zenodo.19479590