IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/bri/uobdis/25-786.html

ChatGPT as Economics Tutor: Capabilities and Limitations

Author

Listed:
  • Natalie Brose
  • Christian Spielmann
  • Christian Tode

Abstract

Since the public release of ChatGPT in late 2022, the role of Generative AI chatbots in education has been widely debated. While some see their potential as automated tutors, others worry that inaccuracies and hallucinations could harm student learning. Thisstudy assesses ChatGPT models (GPT-3.5, GPT-4o, and o1preview) across important dimensions of student learning by evaluating their capabilities and limitations to serve as a non-interactive, automated tutor. In particular, we analyse performance in two tasks commonly used in principles of economics courses: explaining economic concepts and answering multiple-choice questions. Our findings indicate that newer models generate very accurate responses, although some inaccuracies persist. A key concern is that ChatGPT presents all responses with full confidence, making errors difficult for students to recognize. Furthermore, explanations are often quite narrow, lacking holistic perspectives, and the quality of examples remains poor. Despite these limitations, we argue that ChatGPT can serve as an effective automated tutor for basic, knowledge-based questions—supportingstudents while posing a relatively low risk of misinformation. Educators can hence recommend Generative AI chatbots for student learning, but should teach students the limitations of the technology.

Suggested Citation

  • Natalie Brose & Christian Spielmann & Christian Tode, 2025. "ChatGPT as Economics Tutor: Capabilities and Limitations," Bristol Economics Discussion Papers 25/786, School of Economics, University of Bristol, UK.
  • Handle: RePEc:bri:uobdis:25/786
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.bristol.ac.uk/efm/media/workingpapers/working_papers/pdffiles/dp25786.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Walczak Krzysztof & Cellary Wojciech, 2023. "Challenges for higher education in the era of widespread access to Generative AI," Economics and Business Review, Paradigm, vol. 9(2), pages 71-100, April.
    2. Joy Buchanan & Stephen Hill & Olga Shapoval, 2024. "ChatGPT Hallucinates Non-existent Citations: Evidence from Economics," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 69(1), pages 80-87, March.
    3. Anton Korinek, 2023. "Generative AI for Economic Research: Use Cases and Implications for Economists," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 61(4), pages 1281-1317, December.
    4. Wayne Geerling & G. Dirk Mateer & Jadrian Wooten & Nikhil Damodaran, 2023. "ChatGPT has Aced the Test of Understanding in College Economics: Now What?," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 68(2), pages 233-245, October.
    5. Wood, David A. & Achhpilia, Muskan P. & Adams, Mollie T. & Aghazadeh, Sanaz & Akinyele, Kazeem & Akpan, Mfon & Allee, Kristian D. & Allen, Abigail M. & Almer, Elizabeth D. & Ames, Daniel & Arity, Vikt, 2023. "The ChatGPT artificial intelligence chatbot: How well does it answer accounting assessment questions?," Other publications TiSEM b4a29b3e-18a1-4259-a70c-d, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    6. Bröse, Natalie & Spielmann, Christian & Tode, Christian, 2026. "ChatGPT as economics tutor: Capabilities and limitations," International Review of Economics Education, Elsevier, vol. 51(C).
    7. Jörg Garrel & Jana Mayer, 2023. "Artificial Intelligence in studies—use of ChatGPT and AI-based tools among students in Germany," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-9, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bröse, Natalie & Spielmann, Christian & Tode, Christian, 2026. "ChatGPT as economics tutor: Capabilities and limitations," International Review of Economics Education, Elsevier, vol. 51(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Fatih Uludağ & Eylem Kılıç & H.Eray Çelik, 2025. "Artificial intelligence, social influence, and AI anxiety: analyzing the intentions of science doctoral students to use ChatGPT with PLS-SEM," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 12(1), pages 1-17, December.
    2. Firuz Kamalov & David Santandreu Calonge & Patrik T. Hultberg & Linda Smail & Dima Jamali, 2025. "Comparative analysis of leading artificial intelligence chatbots in the context of entrepreneurship," Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 1-27, December.
    3. Dong, Mengming Michael & Stratopoulos, Theophanis C. & Wang, Victor Xiaoqi, 2024. "A scoping review of ChatGPT research in accounting and finance," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 55(C).
    4. Valérie Mignon & Marc Joëts & Christophe Hurlin, 2026. "ZICO: A Credit Scoring Approach to Detecting Zombie Papers," Working Papers hal-05699398, HAL.
    5. Modestino Matarazzo, Filippo Sciarrone, Roberto Caldelli, and Barbara Martini, 2025. "The Impact of Artificial Intelligence and Generative AI in Education: A~Review~of The Post-Chatgpt Era," MakeLearn 2025: Accelerated Innovation (AI); Sustainability for Better Humanity,, ToKnowPress.
    6. Iñaki Aldasoro & Ajit Desai, 2025. "Money Talks: AI Agents for Cash Management in Payment Systems," Staff Working Papers 25-35, Bank of Canada.
    7. Joy Buchanan & Stephen Hill & Olga Shapoval, 2024. "ChatGPT Hallucinates Non-existent Citations: Evidence from Economics," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 69(1), pages 80-87, March.
    8. Francesco Venturini, 2025. "Generative AI and Income Growth: Early Evidence on Global Data," Gospodarka Narodowa. The Polish Journal of Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, issue 3, pages 31-46.
    9. Cristina Angelico & Enrico Bernardini, 2026. "Can GenAI fill banks' emissions data gaps?," Questioni di Economia e Finanza (Occasional Papers) 1003, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    10. Ballantine, Joan & Boyce, Gordon & Stoner, Greg, 2024. "A critical review of AI in accounting education: Threat and opportunity," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    11. Dragan Filimonovic & Christian Rutzer & Conny Wunsch, 2025. "GenAI-Assisted Writing and Academic Performance: Evidence from the Social and Behavioral Sciences," Papers 2510.02408, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2026.
    12. Arjun Prakash & Shruti Aggarwal & Jeevan John Varghese & Joel John Varghese, 2025. "Writing without borders: AI and cross-cultural convergence in academic writing quality," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 12(1), pages 1-11, December.
    13. Chen, Kairan & Granville, Brigitte & Matousek, Roman, 2026. "Decoding central bank communications with large language models," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    14. John R. Graham & Campbell R. Harvey & Manish Jha, 2026. "CFOs Meet LLMs," Papers 2606.13812, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2026.
    15. Alexander Eliseev & Sergei Seleznev, 2026. "Fake Date Tests: Can We Trust In-sample Accuracy of LLMs in Macroeconomic Forecasting?," Papers 2601.07992, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2026.
    16. Hurley, Sean P., 2025. "A Checklist for Managing AI Use in Agribusiness and Applied Economics Courses," Applied Economics Teaching Resources (AETR), Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 7(5), November.
    17. Iñaki Aldasoro & Ajit Desai, 2025. "AI agents for cash management in payment systems," BIS Working Papers 1310, Bank for International Settlements.
    18. Fetzer, Thiemo & Lambert, Peter John & Feld, Bennet & Garg, Prashant, 2024. "AI-Generated Production Networks: Measurement and Applications to Global Trade," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 733, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    19. Aldijana Bunjak & Olivier Zehnder, 2026. "Quantifying the gig economy’s evolution: A bibliometric exploration of historical patterns and future projections," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 36(1), pages 1-26, December.
    20. de Bondt, Gabe J. & Sun, Yiqiao, 2026. "Enhancing GDP nowcasts with ChatGPT: A novel application of PMI news releases," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 48(3).

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bri:uobdis:25/786. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: School of Economics Research Support Team (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/sebriuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.