Students’ Creativity, Originality, and Use of Generative AI in Irish Art, Design, and Technology Education
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55737/tk/v5i1.51147Keywords:
ChatGPT, Large Language Models, Creative Cognition, Intellectual Homogenisation, Higher Education Policy, Generative Artificial Intelligence, Cognitive Delegation, IADT, Atlantic Technological UniversityAbstract
The introduction of large language models to creative and technical education has exacerbated the discussion around their impact on student creativity and cognitive growth. Although productivity improvements have been in the spotlight of many studies, there has been less emphasis on the impact of continued algorithmic support on creative confidence and student work uniqueness. This paper fills this gap by conducting a quantitative survey on 100 undergraduate and postgraduate participants from two Irish institutions, Dún Laoghaire Institute of Art, Design and Technology (IADT) and Atlantic Technological University (ATU), representing varying disciplinary backgrounds. The group consisted of 31 female participants and 69 male participants, stratified to reflect disciplinary variance. The survey investigated trends in generative AI utilization, attitudes towards creative self-efficacy, and student perceptions of originality and ideational similarity. Results show a high degree of ambivalence. There was broad support among participants to use ChatGPT to increase efficiency in time, facilitate idea generation, and explain concepts; nevertheless, most complained of a lack of confidence and work becoming more generic. It is important to note that 68.0% said that their ideas were more similar to those of other users and 71.0% thought that even what they considered as original ideas showed similarities with regular AI-generated work. These findings suggest that AI-aided writing has pedagogic benefits but also implies cognitive reliance, standardisation, and absence of intellectual originality in areas that place emphasis on originality. The research contributes to concerns regarding cognitive offloading and the necessity of educational systems that do not compromise independent
References
Almeshal, Z. A., Alenazi, M. E., Albasheer, A. Z., Alanazi, S. R., & Alsalman, A. S. (2026). Algorithmic Mediation and Student Creativity: Large Language Models, Academic Writing, and the Convergence of Ideas in Irish Higher Education. Review Journal of Social Psychology & Social Works, 4(1), 524-541. https://doi.org/10.71145/rjsp.v4i1.550
Amabile, T. M. (1982). Social psychology of creativity: A consensual assessment technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43(5), 997–1013. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.43.5.997
Anderson, B. R., Shah, J. H., & Kreminski, M. (2024). Homogenization effects of large language models on human creative ideation. Creativity and Cognition, 413–425. https://doi.org/10.1145/3635636.3656204
Bacha, A. T., Ali, S., & Irfan, M. (2026). The Diffusion of AI Innovation in media education: A critical assessment of teacher literacy. Regional Lens, 5(1), 92. https://doi.org/10.55737/rl.v5i1.26167
Boden, M. A. (1998). Creativity and artificial intelligence. Artificial Intelligence, 103(1–2), 347–356. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0004-3702(98)00055-1
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Chirayath, G., Premamalini, K., & Joseph, J. (2025). Cognitive offloading or cognitive overload? How AI alters the mental architecture of coping. Frontiers in Psychology, 16(1699320), 1699320. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1699320
Doshi, A. R., & Hauser, O. P. (2024). Generative AI enhances individual creativity but reduces the collective diversity of novel content. Science Advances, 10(28), eadn5290. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.adn5290
Fisher, R., Gogan, T., Williams, J., Laferriere, R., Campbell, G., Gunasekara, A., & Nguyen, J. (2025). Can ChatGPT enhance business student creativity? Evidence from a randomised controlled trial. Studies in Higher Education, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2025.2515512
Irfan, M. (2025). Enhancing critical thinking and journalism skills through artificial intelligence literacy: A case study of journalism students in Tajik National University, Tajikistan. University of Limerick. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijonses.014
Irfan, M., & Murray, L. (2023a) Empowering critical skills of teaching and learning with artificial intelligence (AI) tools. University of Limerick repository preprint. https://doi.org/10.34961/researchrepository-ul.22788506
Irfan, M., & Murray, L. (2023b). Micro-Credential: A guide to prompt writing and engineering in higher education: A tool for Artificial Intelligence in LLM. University of Limerick repository preprint.
Irfan, M., Abdulaziz Almeshal, Z., & Anwar, M. (2023). Unleashing transformative potential of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in countering terrorism, online Radicalisation, extremism, and possible recruitment. Global Strategic & Securities Studies Review, VIII(IV), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.31703/gsssr.2023(viii-iv).01
Irfan, M., Aldulaylan, F., & Alqahtani, Y. (2023a). Ethics and privacy in Irish higher education: A comprehensive study of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools implementation at University of Limerick. Global Social Sciences Review, VIII(II), 201–210. https://doi.org/10.31703/gssr.2023(viii-ii).19
Irfan, M., Murray, L., & Ali, S. (2023). Integration of artificial intelligence in academia: A case study of critical teaching and learning in higher education. Global Social Sciences Review, 8(1), 352–364. https://doi.org/10.31703/gssr.2023(VIII-I).32
Irfan, M., Murray, L., & Ali, S. (2023b). Insights into student perceptions: Investigating Artificial Intelligence (AI) tool usability in Irish higher education at the University of Limerick. Global Digital & Print Media Review, VI(II), 48–63. https://doi.org/10.31703/gdpmr.2023(vi-ii).05
Irfan, M., Murray, L., & Ali, S. (2023d). The role of AI in shaping Europe’s higher education landscape: Policy implications and guidelines with a focus on Ireland. Research Journal of Social Sciences and Economics Review, 4(2), 231–243. https://doi.org/10.36902/rjsser-vol4-iss2-2023(231-243
Irfan, M., Murray, L., Aldulaylan, F., alQahtani, Y., & Latif, F., (2025). Sentiments and discourses: how Ireland perceives artificial intelligence. Remittances Review, 8(4), 3625-3642. https://doi.org/10.33182/rr.v8i4.250
Katsenou, R., Kotsidis, K., Papadopoulou, A., Anastasiadis, P., & Deliyannis, I. (2025). Beyond assistance: Embracing AI as a collaborative co-agent in education. Education Sciences, 15(8), 1006. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15081006
Kusano, S., Wright, M., & Conger, A. (2016). Development and assessment of self-agency, and the ability to innovate and take risks. Center for Research on Learning and Teaching Occasional Paper, 34, 1–12.
Li, J., Long, T., Zhu, X., & Pan, D. (2025). AI-supported collaborative projects for enhancing problem-solving skills in STEM education. 2025 7th International Conference on Computer Science and Technologies in Education (CSTE), 565–571.
Mei, P., Brewis, D. N., Nwaiwu, F., Sumanathilaka, D., Alva-Manchego, F., & Demaree-Cotton, J. (2025). If ChatGPT can do it, where is my creativity? generative AI boosts performance but diminishes experience in creative writing. Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans, 4(100140), 100140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbah.2025.100140
Melker, S., Gabrils, E., Villavicencio, V., Faraon, M., & Rönkkö, K. (2025). Artificial intelligence for design education: a conceptual approach to enhance students’ divergent and convergent thinking in ideation processes. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 35(5), 1871–1899. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-025-09964-3
Moon, K., Green, A. E., & Kushlev, K. (2025). Homogenizing effect of large language models (LLMs) on creative diversity: An empirical comparison of human and ChatGPT writing. Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans, 6(100207), 100207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbah.2025.100207
O’Sullivan, J., Lowry, C., Woods, R., & Conlon, T. (2025). Generative AI in higher education in teaching & learning: Policy framework. Higher Education Authority. https://doi.org/10.82110/073E-HG66
Qu, Y., Tan, M. X. Y., & Wang, J. (2024). Disciplinary differences in undergraduate students’ engagement with generative artificial intelligence. Smart Learning Environments, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-024-00341-6
Runco, M. A., & Jaeger, G. J. (2012). The standard definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 92–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2012.650092
Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1999). The concept of creativity: Prospects and paradigms. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of Creativity (pp. 3–15). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511807916.003.
Youcefi, N., & Irfan, M (2023). From Europe to Ireland: Artificial intelligence pivotal role in transforming higher education policies and guidelines. Journal of Namibian Studies, 33(S1), 1935-1959.
Youcefi, N., Irfan, M., & Aldylaylan, F. (2023). The effects of stress and anxiety on the Academic Performance of Students: A cross-sectional experimental study. Journal of Educational Research and Social Sciences Review (JERSSR), 3(2), 199-207. https://ojs.jerssr.org.pk/index.php/jerssr/article/view/228
Zhou, Y., Liu, Q., Huang, J., & Li, G. (2026). Creative scar without generative AI: Individual creativity fails to sustain while homogeneity keeps climbing. Technology in Society, 84(103087), 103087. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2025.103087
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2025 Copyright in the THE KNOWLEDGE is retained by the author(s). Authors also grant any third party the right to use the article freely as long as its integrity is maintained and its original authors, citation details and publisher are identified.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
