Skip to main content
We gratefully acknowledge support from the Simons Foundation, member institutions, and all contributors. Donate
arXiv logo
Cornell University Logo

Computer Science > Computers and Society

arXiv:2502.18066 (cs)
[Submitted on 25 Feb 2025]

Title:To Deepfake or Not to Deepfake: Higher Education Stakeholders' Perceptions and Intentions towards Synthetic Media

Authors:Jasper Roe (1), Mike Perkins (2), Klaire Somoray (3), Dan Miller (3), Leon Furze (4) ((1) Durham University, United Kingdom, (2) British University Vietnam, Vietnam, (3) James Cook University, Australia, (4) Deakin University, Australia)
View PDF
Abstract:Advances in deepfake technologies, which use generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) to mimic a person's likeness or voice, have led to growing interest in their use in educational contexts. However, little is known about how key stakeholders perceive and intend to use these tools. This study investigated higher education stakeholder perceptions and intentions regarding deepfakes through the lens of the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology 2 (UTAUT2).
Using a mixed-methods approach combining survey data (n=174) with qualitative interviews, we found that academic stakeholders demonstrated a relatively low intention to adopt these technologies (M=41.55, SD=34.14) and held complex views about their implementation. Quantitative analysis revealed adoption intentions were primarily driven by hedonic motivation, with a gender-specific interaction in price-value evaluations. Qualitative findings highlighted potential benefits of enhanced student engagement, improved accessibility, and reduced workload in content creation, but concerns regarding the exploitation of academic labour, institutional cost-cutting leading to automation, degradation of relationships in education, and broader societal impacts.
Based on these findings, we propose a framework for implementing deepfake technologies in higher education that addresses institutional policies, professional development, and equitable resource allocation to thoughtfully integrate AI while maintaining academic integrity and professional autonomy.
Subjects: Computers and Society (cs.CY); Human-Computer Interaction (cs.HC)
Cite as: arXiv:2502.18066 [cs.CY]
  (or arXiv:2502.18066v1 [cs.CY] for this version)
  https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2502.18066

Submission history

From: Mike Perkins [view email]
[v1] Tue, 25 Feb 2025 10:32:19 UTC (662 KB)
Full-text links:

Access Paper:

  • View PDF
  • Other Formats
license icon view license
Current browse context:
cs.CY
< prev   |   next >
new | recent | 2025-02
Change to browse by:
cs
cs.HC

References & Citations

export BibTeX citation

Bookmark

BibSonomy logo Reddit logo

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)
CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)
DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)
Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)
Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)
Papers with Code (What is Papers with Code?)
ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)

Demos

Replicate (What is Replicate?)
Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)
TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)

Recommenders and Search Tools

Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)
CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)