## 3 Results
### Students' Opinion and Use
Overall, the confidence in the mathematical background of the ChatGPT responses was found to be very high (Mean = 4.21, Median = 4, SD = 0.73), with a fairly low standard deviation (see Table 6. As far as the authors have been able to verify, the ChatGPT responses regarding the problems at hand have been very accurate, without considering the calculations, and are capable of providing a fairly reliable step-by-step guide. However, when comparing the confidence means between men and women, a slight but significant difference was observed (\(p\)-value = 0.024). Specifically, women expressed slightly lower confidence levels than men (see third and fourth columns of Table 6). From Table 6, we infer that the confidence in the computational aspect of ChatGPT's answers is not as high as in the theoretical one. Indeed, a significant difference was found between the means obtained in confidence in the theoretical and calculistic aspects of ChatGPT (\(p\)-value = 0.001, Independent Sample T Test). However, when studying the difference between the means of the responses of men and women in terms of the reliability of the calculations, no significant difference was found (\(p\)-value = 0.617). After examining general use and reliability, we now analyze the usefulness of ChatGPT in fostering the learning of mathematical concepts. The survey question Q9 asked: \"Do you think that the use of ChatGPT has helped you to learn/reinforce some mathematical concepts used in the subject of Mathematics I?\" Responses ranged from 1 (no, it has not helped me) to 5 (yes, a lot of times). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l l l l l l} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Gender**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Statistic**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Std. Error**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Statistic**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Std. Error**} \\  & & **Theory** & & **Calculations** & \\ \hline Female & Mean & 3.93 & 0.15 & 2.29 & 0.22 \\  & Median & 4.00 & & 2.00 & \\  & Variance & 0.59 & & 1.32 & \\  & Std. Deviation & 0.77 & & 1.15 & \\  & Skewness & \(-\)0.41 & 0.44 & 0.49 & 0.44 \\  & Kurtosis & 0.15 & 0.86 & \(-\)0.54 & 0.86 \\ \hline Male & Mean & 4.31 & 0.08 & 2.38 & 0.11 \\  & Median & 4.00 & & 2.00 & \\  & Variance & 0.49 & & 1.00 & \\  & Std. Deviation & 0.70 & & 1.00 & \\  & Skewness & \(-\)0.50 & 0.27 & 0.38 & 0.27 \\  & Kurtosis & \(-\)0.83 & 0.53 & \(-\)0.58 & 0.53 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 6: Statistics of confidence regarding mathematical theoretical content with gender as a factor. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l l l l l l} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Gender**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Statistic**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Std. Error**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Statistic**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Std. Error**} \\  & & **General** & & **Mathematics I** & \\ \hline Female & Mean & 3.43 & 0.202 & 2.89 & 0.23 \\  & Median & 4.00 & & 3.00 & \\  & Variance & 1.14 & & 1.51 & \\  & Std. Deviation & 1.07 & & 1.23 & \\  & Skewness & \(-\)0.39 & 0.44 & 0.09 & 0.44 \\  & Kurtosis & \(-\)0.48 & 0.86 & \(-\)0.84 & 0.86 \\ \hline Male & Mean & 2.94 & 0.15 & 2.72 & 0.12 \\  & Median & 3.00 & & 3.00 & \\  & Variance & 1.84 & & 1.27 & \\  & Std. Deviation & 1.35 & & 1.13 & \\  & Skewness & \(-\)0.01 & 0.27 & 0.42 & 0.27 \\  & Kurtosis & \(-\)1.12 & 0.53 & \(-\)0.49 & 0.53 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 5: Statistics of use frequency considering gender as a factor. Responses (see Table 7) show a positive appreciation of the usefulness of ChatGPT in learning or reinforcing mathematical concepts (Mean = 3.50, Median = 4.00, SD = 1.03). When considering gender, the mean for men (Mean = 3.46) and women (Mean = 3.61) did not differ significantly (\(p\)-value = 0.506). Table 7 also shows the results related to the question Q10: \"Do you think that the use of ChatGPT has helped you in solving problems/exercises in the subject of Mathematics I?\" Responses ranged from 1 (no, it has not helped me) to 5 (many times).