Ethical reasoning and responsible use of ChatGPT in higher education: Integrating technology acceptance and moral cognition

The rapid integration of generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools such as ChatGPT into higher education has raised important questions about how students evaluate the ethical implications of AI-assisted academic practices and whether those evaluations are linked to intentions to use these tools responsibly. While previous research has largely focused on technology adoption and acceptance, it has paid less attention to the relationship between ethical reasoning and intentions to use these tools responsibly. This study develops and tests an integrated framework that combines the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and moral cognition theory to examine how technology perceptions and academic and cognitive factors relate to students’ ethical reasoning and intentions to use ChatGPT responsibly. The study used a quantitative, cross-sectional survey design among business and management students in Oman and analysed the data using structural equation modelling. The findings indicate that perceived ease of use, academic pressure, and moral disengagement are positively associated with ethical reasoning, whereas perceived usefulness is not significantly associated with ethical reasoning. Ethical reasoning is positively associated with behavioural intention to use ChatGPT responsibly. In contrast, ChatGPT usage does not significantly moderate the relationship between academic pressure and ethical reasoning. These findings suggest that students’ responsible-use intentions are associated with their ethical evaluations of ChatGPT-assisted academic practices, while conventional technology acceptance perceptions and usage frequency alone offer a more limited explanation of ethical reasoning. The study contributes to emerging research on responsible generative AI use by extending TAM beyond conventional adoption outcomes and integrating it with a moral cognition perspective. It highlights the relationship between ethical reasoning and responsible-use intentions while distinguishing ethical evaluation from technology acceptance and usage frequency. The findings also provide context-specific evidence from Omani higher education, while recognising the limitations of the cross-sectional design, self-reported measures, and a context-specific sample.