AI-Mediated Academic Discourse in Marketing Education: A Systematic Review of Pedagogical Practices, Learning Outcomes, and Literacy Challenges

Creative Commons License

Canbulut M., YETKİN ÖZBÜK R. M., DÖRTYOL İ. T., GÜVEN A., Oktay Bayhan B., Alkan A.

NALANS: Journal of Narrative and Language Studies, cilt.14, sa.29 Special Issue, ss.167-179, 2026 (Scopus)

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Derleme
  • Cilt numarası: 14 Sayı: 29 Special Issue
  • Basım Tarihi: 2026
  • Doi Numarası: 10.59045/nalans.2026.102
  • Dergi Adı: NALANS: Journal of Narrative and Language Studies
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Scopus, MLA - Modern Language Association Database, Directory of Open Access Journals, MLA International Bibliography
  • Sayfa Sayıları: ss.167-179
  • Anahtar Kelimeler: Disagreement Strategies, Meta Analysis, Taxonomy
  • Açık Arşiv Koleksiyonu: AVESİS Açık Erişim Koleksiyonu
  • Akdeniz Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

The rapid integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into higher education has transformed academic discourse, with significant implications for marketing education. This systematic literature review (SLR) synthesizes 59 peer-reviewed studies to examine how AI tools influence academic discourse and shape pedagogical practices, learning outcomes, and AI literacy challenges in marketing education. In accordance with PRISMA 2020 guidelines, studies were obtained from Web of Science and Scopus and subjected to a thematic synthesis. Five themes emerged: (1) AI as discursive mediator; (2) pedagogical integration and curriculum innovation; (3) learning outcomes and cognitive engagement; (4) academic integrity, ethics, and dependency; and (5) AI literacy as an emerging competency. The dominant orientation on artificial intelligence in the studies is generally positive, but concerns remain regarding characteristics such as overconfidence, over-reliance, and the displacement of basic reasoning abilities. The geographical focus on North American contexts, the methodological dominance of perception-based measurements, and the limited theorization at the discourse level in the findings suggest that researchers and practitioners should examine these issues.