ChatGPT in Social Studies Education: A Systematic Literature Review of Critical Thinking and Collaborative Learning in Junior High Schools (2023–2026)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61166/elm.v4i1.110Keywords:
ChatGPT, Social Studies Education, Critical Thinking, Collaborative Learning, Systematic Literature ReviewAbstract
This study aims to synthesize and analyze the development of research on the use of ChatGPT in Social Studies education to support the development of critical thinking and collaborative learning skills among junior high school students during the 2023–2026 period. This study employed a Systematic Literature Review approach following the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Literature searches were conducted across Scopus, ERIC, Dimensions, and Google Scholar using keywords related to ChatGPT, Social Studies education, critical thinking, collaborative learning, and junior high school contexts. The inclusion criteria comprised peer-reviewed journal articles published between 2023 and 2026, written in English or Indonesian, focused on Social Studies education, and available in full text. The selection process resulted in eight eligible articles for analysis. The findings indicate that publications on the use of ChatGPT in education have increased substantially since 2023; however, studies specifically addressing Social Studies education at the junior high school level remain limited. The thematic analysis identified four major benefits of ChatGPT, including enhanced critical thinking skills, support for personalized learning, strengthened collaborative learning, and improved access to information. Nevertheless, several challenges were also identified, including academic integrity concerns, the quality of AI-generated responses, teachers’ readiness, and students’ digital literacy. This study contributes to the growing body of literature on the integration of generative artificial intelligence in Social Studies education by identifying existing research gaps and future research directions. Further studies are recommended to develop AI-based instructional models for Social Studies education and empirically examine their effectiveness in junior high school settings.
Downloads
References
Agostini, D., Bellotti, F., Geraci, E., & Pozzi, S. (2026). When ChatGPT joins the team: A mixed-methods study of AI-mediated collaborative lesson design. Frontiers in Education, 11, Article 1751618. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2026.1751618
Al-Zubidy, A., & Carver, J. C. (2019). Identifying relevant studies for software engineering systematic literature reviews: A visual text mining approach. Empirical Software Engineering, 24(1), 71–104. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-018-9631-8
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Chiu, J., Hidayat, A., & Suryani, N. (2025). Developing 21st-century skills in elementary school students through artificial intelligence. PIJIES (Persian Journal of Islamic Education Studies), 8(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.24256/pijies.v8i1.6362
Crompton, H., & Burke, D. (2023). Artificial intelligence in higher education: The state of the field. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1), Article 22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00392-8
EPPI Reviewer. (2024). Generative AI in education and research: A systematic literature review (ERIC Report No. EJ1436570). ERIC. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1436570
Fraiwan, M., & Khasawneh, N. (2023). A review of ChatGPT applications in education, marketing, software engineering, and healthcare: Benefits, drawbacks, and research directions. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2305.00237
Garg, J., & Garg, K. (2023). ChatGPT as an empowering catalyst: Unveiling the impact on political awareness and civic education. Journal on School Educational Technology, 12(4), 7–16. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1406375
Gu, J., & Yan, Z. (2025). Effects of GenAI interventions on student academic performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 42(3), 123–145. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331251349620
Gusenbauer, M., & Haddaway, N. R. (2020). Which academic search systems are suitable for systematic reviews or meta-analyses? Evaluating retrieval qualities of Google Scholar, PubMed, and 26 other resources. Research Synthesis Methods, 11(2), 181–217. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1378
Harahap, D. S. (2024). Implementation of ChatGPT to improve students' critical thinking abilities. Indonesian Journal of Education and Social Humanities, 1(2), 58–72. https://doi.org/10.62945/ijesh.v1i2.58
Kasneci, E., Sessler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., Gasser, U., Groh, G., Günnemann, S., Hüllermeier, E., Krusche, S., Kutyniok, G., Michaeli, T., Nerdel, C., Pfeiffer, F., Poquet, O., Sailer, M., Schmidt, A., Seidel, T., ... Kasneci, G. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103, Article 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274
Larson, A., Thompson, M., & Anderson, K. (2024). Critical thinking in the age of generative AI. VU Research Portal. https://research.vu.nl/ws/portalfiles/portal/382320511/larson-et-al-2024-critical-thinking-in-the-age-of-generative-ai.pdf
Lo, C. K. (2023). What is the impact of ChatGPT on education? A rapid review of the literature. Education Sciences, 13(4), Article 410. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13040410
McDonald, N., Johri, A., Ali, A., & Hingle, A. (2024). Generative artificial intelligence in higher education: Evidence from an analysis of institutional policies and guidelines. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2402.01659
National Council for the Social Studies. (2013). The college, career, and civic life (C3) framework for social studies state standards: Guidance for enhancing the rigor of K–12 civics, economics, geography, and history. NCSS.
OECD. (2023). Shaping digital education: Enabling factors for quality, equity and efficiency. OECD Publishing.
OpenAI. (2022, November 30). Introducing ChatGPT. https://openai.com/index/chatgpt/
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., ... Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, Article n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Panagopoulou, F., Parpoula, C., & Karpouzis, K. (2023). Legal and ethical considerations regarding the use of ChatGPT in education. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2306.10037
Pati, D., & Lorusso, L. N. (2018). How to write a systematic review of the literature. HERD: Health Environments Research & Design Journal, 11(1), 15–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/1937586717747384
Peters, M. D. J., Marnie, C., Tricco, A. C., Pollock, D., Munn, Z., Alexander, L., McInerney, P., Godfrey, C. M., & Khalil, H. (2020). Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews. JBI Evidence Synthesis, 18(10), 2119–2126. https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-20-00167
Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039
Thomas, J., & Harden, A. (2008). Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 8(1), Article 45. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-8-45
Tlili, A., Shehata, B., Adarkwah, M. A., Bozkurt, A., Hickey, D. T., Huang, R., & Agyemang, B. (2023). What if the devil is my guardian angel: ChatGPT as a case study of using chatbots in education. Smart Learning Environments, 10(1), Article 15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-023-00237-x
Trust, T., & Maloy, R. (2025). AI-generated lesson plans fall short on inspiring students (civics lesson plans). Modern Sciences, 3(2), 45–62. https://modernsciences.org/ai-lesson-plans-critical-thinking-multicultural-content-october-2025/
UNESCO. (2024). AI and technologies in education. https://www.unesco.org/en/digital-education
UNESCO. (2024). Artificial intelligence in education. https://www.unesco.org/en/digital-education/artificial-intelligence
UNESCO. (2024). Guidance for generative AI in education and research. UNESCO.
World Economic Forum. (2024). Shaping the future of learning: The role of AI in education. https://www.weforum.org/
Wu, D., & Zhang, J. (2025). Generative artificial intelligence in secondary education: Applications and effects on students' innovation skills and digital literacy. PLOS ONE, 20(5), Article e0323349. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0323349
Zawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M., & Gouverneur, F. (2019). Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education—Where are the educators? International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1), Article 39. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Isnaeni Fatmiyati, Bambang Syaeful Hadi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
