Effects of Artificial Intelligence Feedback on Students’ Self-Regulated Learning in Higher Education: A Three-Level Meta-Analysis

IF 11.9 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL
Chang-Qin Huang, Ling-Nuo Lu, Qiong-Hao Huang, Yin-Rong Zhang, Tao He, Yun-Fang Tu, Gwo-Jen Hwang
{"title":"Effects of Artificial Intelligence Feedback on Students’ Self-Regulated Learning in Higher Education: A Three-Level Meta-Analysis","authors":"Chang-Qin Huang, Ling-Nuo Lu, Qiong-Hao Huang, Yin-Rong Zhang, Tao He, Yun-Fang Tu, Gwo-Jen Hwang","doi":"10.1007/s10648-026-10166-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As higher education environments become digitized and complex, self-regulated learning (SRL) remains a pivotal cornerstone of student achievement. While artificial intelligence (AI) offers new possibilities for supporting SRL through feedback, its efficacy remains controversial. A three-level meta-analysis of 85 articles (<italic>k</italic> = 387; <italic>N</italic> = 9,564) published between 2015 and 2025 was conducted. The results demonstrated a significant, medium-sized positive effect of AI feedback on students’ SRL (<italic>g</italic> = 0.509). Dimension-specific analyses revealed that effects were stronger for the motivational and cognitive dimensions, but comparatively weaker for behavioral and metacognitive outcomes. Notably, the wide 95% prediction interval [-0.661, 1.678] indicates substantial heterogeneity, suggesting that AI feedback effects are conditional rather than uniformly beneficial. Hierarchical multilevel meta-regression identified feedback source and AI technology type as primary drivers of between-study heterogeneity. AI-led feedback yielded larger effect sizes than human-AI hybrid feedback, and generative AI dialogue systems and intelligent tutoring systems demonstrated stronger effects than non-generative AI dialogue systems and learning analytics systems. Feedback modality and academic subject yielded marginally significant or dimension-specific differences. Additionally, within-category analyses indicated that the effects of generative AI dialogue systems were not significantly moderated across conditions, with the exception of a marginal effect for feedback modality. However, within the learning analytics systems group, the study design demonstrated a significant moderating role. Overall, these findings not only quantify the efficacy of AI feedback on SRL outcomes, but also delineate its boundary conditions, offering empirically grounded implications to instructors, designers, and researchers.","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"40 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":11.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-026-10166-z","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

As higher education environments become digitized and complex, self-regulated learning (SRL) remains a pivotal cornerstone of student achievement. While artificial intelligence (AI) offers new possibilities for supporting SRL through feedback, its efficacy remains controversial. A three-level meta-analysis of 85 articles (k = 387; N = 9,564) published between 2015 and 2025 was conducted. The results demonstrated a significant, medium-sized positive effect of AI feedback on students’ SRL (g = 0.509). Dimension-specific analyses revealed that effects were stronger for the motivational and cognitive dimensions, but comparatively weaker for behavioral and metacognitive outcomes. Notably, the wide 95% prediction interval [-0.661, 1.678] indicates substantial heterogeneity, suggesting that AI feedback effects are conditional rather than uniformly beneficial. Hierarchical multilevel meta-regression identified feedback source and AI technology type as primary drivers of between-study heterogeneity. AI-led feedback yielded larger effect sizes than human-AI hybrid feedback, and generative AI dialogue systems and intelligent tutoring systems demonstrated stronger effects than non-generative AI dialogue systems and learning analytics systems. Feedback modality and academic subject yielded marginally significant or dimension-specific differences. Additionally, within-category analyses indicated that the effects of generative AI dialogue systems were not significantly moderated across conditions, with the exception of a marginal effect for feedback modality. However, within the learning analytics systems group, the study design demonstrated a significant moderating role. Overall, these findings not only quantify the efficacy of AI feedback on SRL outcomes, but also delineate its boundary conditions, offering empirically grounded implications to instructors, designers, and researchers.
人工智能反馈对高校学生自主学习的影响:一个三层次元分析
随着高等教育环境的数字化和复杂化,自我调节学习(SRL)仍然是学生成就的关键基石。虽然人工智能(AI)通过反馈为支持SRL提供了新的可能性,但其有效性仍然存在争议。对2015年至2025年间发表的85篇文章(k = 387; N = 9564)进行了三水平荟萃分析。结果显示AI反馈对学生的SRL有显著的中等正向影响(g = 0.509)。具体维度分析显示,动机和认知维度的影响更强,而行为和元认知结果的影响相对较弱。值得注意的是,95%的宽预测区间[-0.661,1.678]表明存在很大的异质性,这表明人工智能反馈效应是有条件的,而不是一致的有益。分层多水平元回归发现反馈来源和人工智能技术类型是研究间异质性的主要驱动因素。人工智能主导的反馈比人类-人工智能混合反馈产生更大的效应,生成式人工智能对话系统和智能辅导系统比非生成式人工智能对话系统和学习分析系统显示出更强的效果。反馈方式和学术科目产生了边际显著或维度特定的差异。此外,类别内分析表明,除了反馈模式的边际效应外,生成式人工智能对话系统的影响在不同条件下并没有显着缓和。然而,在学习分析系统组中,研究设计显示出显著的调节作用。总的来说,这些发现不仅量化了人工智能反馈对SRL结果的有效性,而且描绘了它的边界条件,为教师、设计师和研究人员提供了基于经验的启示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Educational Psychology Review
Educational Psychology Review PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL-
CiteScore
15.70
自引率
3.00%
发文量
62
期刊介绍: Educational Psychology Review aims to disseminate knowledge and promote dialogue within the field of educational psychology. It serves as a platform for the publication of various types of articles, including peer-reviewed integrative reviews, special thematic issues, reflections on previous research or new research directions, interviews, and research-based advice for practitioners. The journal caters to a diverse readership, ranging from generalists in educational psychology to experts in specific areas of the discipline. The content offers a comprehensive coverage of topics and provides in-depth information to meet the needs of both specialized researchers and practitioners.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书