Institutional logics of knowledge exchange via social media in the Age of AI: Chinese academics’ perspective

AI Reshapes Chinese Scholarship

China's aggressive push into AI has transformed academic life. In 2025, the Ministry of Education mandated AI curricula for primary and secondary schools, requiring at least eight hours annually. By 2026, this extends to higher education, with institutions like Beijing University integrating AI into core subjects. This surge stems from national strategies like the AI+ Plan, aiming to upgrade the economy amid deflation and an aging population. Yet, it coincides with strict regulations: bans on U.S.-developed tools like ChatGPT, enforced by the Cyberspace Administration since 2023, have spurred domestic alternatives such as Wenxin Yiyan and Kimi Chat.

These shifts profoundly affect how Chinese academics exchange knowledge via social media. Platforms now embed AI features—recommendation algorithms, content ranking, auto-summaries—that prioritize efficiency and accessibility. Academics must adapt, becoming 'responsible communicators' to boost visibility and collaboration. But this creates real-world impacts: scholars in fields like engineering report using AI daily (20.95% in one 2025 study), enhancing productivity yet raising plagiarism concerns. Universities like Fudan and Tianjin have imposed limits—banning AI in research design or capping generated content at 40% in theses—to safeguard integrity.

The stakes are concrete. Deadlines loom: full AI curriculum rollout in regions like Beijing by 2026, with costs in the billions for infrastructure and training. Consequences of misuse include academic sanctions, as seen in 2025 policies at top institutions. Risks of inaction? A literacy gap, per World Economic Forum projections, could exacerbate unemployment, with AI eliminating nine million jobs while creating eleven million by 2026. Affected parties span academics, students, and platform operators, with surveys revealing 94% of students demanding clear policies to navigate ethical hazards.

Non-obvious tensions abound. Geopolitical frictions—U.S. export controls on chips since 2025—hamper domestic AI development, pushing efficiency-focused models like DeepSeek. Yet, this fosters innovation in small-scale AI, balancing state control with academic freedom. Trade-offs emerge: AI aids personalized learning but amplifies biases, social isolation, and surveillance fears, as noted in Carnegie Endowment analyses. Counterarguments highlight opportunities—66% of researchers believe AI elevates research quality—but warn of eroded creativity if overrelied upon. Amid U.S.-China rivalries, China's approach contrasts Western debates, embracing AI while enforcing boundaries to maintain order.