{"title":"生成式人工智能对学习结果影响的荟萃分析","authors":"Nan Ma, Zhiyong Zhong","doi":"10.1111/jcal.70117","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>With the rapid advancement of technology, the integration of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI) in education has gained considerable attention. Many studies have examined GAI's impact on learning outcomes, yet their conclusions are inconsistent, highlighting the need for a comprehensive review to clarify its overall effects and identify influential factors.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>This study aims to conduct a meta-analysis of the effects of GAI on student learning outcomes across cognitive, competency and affective dimensions. Additionally, it seeks to explore how various moderating factors, including subject discipline, instructional duration, knowledge type, prior knowledge and tool type, influence GAI's effectiveness.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>A meta-analysis was performed on 34 experimental and quasi-experimental studies published internationally. Effect sizes were calculated for overall learning outcomes and categorised by dimension. Further analysis was conducted to assess the influence of moderating variables on the impact of GAI.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The meta-analysis indicates that Generative Artificial Intelligence has a significant positive impact on overall learning outcomes, with a combined effect size of 0.68 (<i>p</i> < 0.001). The impact is particularly pronounced in the cognitive dimension (<i>g</i> = 0.795) and the competency dimension (<i>g</i> = 0.711), while its effect on the affective dimension (<i>g</i> = 0.507) is moderate but still significant. The analysis of moderating variables reveals that the effectiveness of GAI is influenced by discipline type but is not significantly affected by instructional period, knowledge type, prior knowledge level, or tool type. Specifically, GAI exhibits the highest positive effects in mathematics, science and humanities, whereas its impact is relatively lower yet still significant in computer science and medical/nursing education. Additionally, GAI's effectiveness does not significantly differ across various instructional periods, different knowledge types, learners with varying prior knowledge levels, or different AI tool versions.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>To optimise GAI's use in education, the study suggests aligning GAI with specific subject needs, adapting tools for different student levels, integrating GAI with traditional teaching and establishing monitoring mechanisms. These strategies aim to maximise GAI's positive impact on learning efficiency and quality across educational settings.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48071,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Computer Assisted Learning","volume":"41 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Meta-Analysis of the Impact of Generative Artificial Intelligence on Learning Outcomes\",\"authors\":\"Nan Ma, Zhiyong Zhong\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jcal.70117\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>With the rapid advancement of technology, the integration of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI) in education has gained considerable attention. Many studies have examined GAI's impact on learning outcomes, yet their conclusions are inconsistent, highlighting the need for a comprehensive review to clarify its overall effects and identify influential factors.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objectives</h3>\\n \\n <p>This study aims to conduct a meta-analysis of the effects of GAI on student learning outcomes across cognitive, competency and affective dimensions. Additionally, it seeks to explore how various moderating factors, including subject discipline, instructional duration, knowledge type, prior knowledge and tool type, influence GAI's effectiveness.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>A meta-analysis was performed on 34 experimental and quasi-experimental studies published internationally. Effect sizes were calculated for overall learning outcomes and categorised by dimension. Further analysis was conducted to assess the influence of moderating variables on the impact of GAI.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>The meta-analysis indicates that Generative Artificial Intelligence has a significant positive impact on overall learning outcomes, with a combined effect size of 0.68 (<i>p</i> < 0.001). The impact is particularly pronounced in the cognitive dimension (<i>g</i> = 0.795) and the competency dimension (<i>g</i> = 0.711), while its effect on the affective dimension (<i>g</i> = 0.507) is moderate but still significant. The analysis of moderating variables reveals that the effectiveness of GAI is influenced by discipline type but is not significantly affected by instructional period, knowledge type, prior knowledge level, or tool type. Specifically, GAI exhibits the highest positive effects in mathematics, science and humanities, whereas its impact is relatively lower yet still significant in computer science and medical/nursing education. Additionally, GAI's effectiveness does not significantly differ across various instructional periods, different knowledge types, learners with varying prior knowledge levels, or different AI tool versions.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>To optimise GAI's use in education, the study suggests aligning GAI with specific subject needs, adapting tools for different student levels, integrating GAI with traditional teaching and establishing monitoring mechanisms. These strategies aim to maximise GAI's positive impact on learning efficiency and quality across educational settings.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48071,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Computer Assisted Learning\",\"volume\":\"41 5\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Computer Assisted Learning\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcal.70117\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Computer Assisted Learning","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcal.70117","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
A Meta-Analysis of the Impact of Generative Artificial Intelligence on Learning Outcomes
Background
With the rapid advancement of technology, the integration of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI) in education has gained considerable attention. Many studies have examined GAI's impact on learning outcomes, yet their conclusions are inconsistent, highlighting the need for a comprehensive review to clarify its overall effects and identify influential factors.
Objectives
This study aims to conduct a meta-analysis of the effects of GAI on student learning outcomes across cognitive, competency and affective dimensions. Additionally, it seeks to explore how various moderating factors, including subject discipline, instructional duration, knowledge type, prior knowledge and tool type, influence GAI's effectiveness.
Methods
A meta-analysis was performed on 34 experimental and quasi-experimental studies published internationally. Effect sizes were calculated for overall learning outcomes and categorised by dimension. Further analysis was conducted to assess the influence of moderating variables on the impact of GAI.
Results
The meta-analysis indicates that Generative Artificial Intelligence has a significant positive impact on overall learning outcomes, with a combined effect size of 0.68 (p < 0.001). The impact is particularly pronounced in the cognitive dimension (g = 0.795) and the competency dimension (g = 0.711), while its effect on the affective dimension (g = 0.507) is moderate but still significant. The analysis of moderating variables reveals that the effectiveness of GAI is influenced by discipline type but is not significantly affected by instructional period, knowledge type, prior knowledge level, or tool type. Specifically, GAI exhibits the highest positive effects in mathematics, science and humanities, whereas its impact is relatively lower yet still significant in computer science and medical/nursing education. Additionally, GAI's effectiveness does not significantly differ across various instructional periods, different knowledge types, learners with varying prior knowledge levels, or different AI tool versions.
Conclusions
To optimise GAI's use in education, the study suggests aligning GAI with specific subject needs, adapting tools for different student levels, integrating GAI with traditional teaching and establishing monitoring mechanisms. These strategies aim to maximise GAI's positive impact on learning efficiency and quality across educational settings.
期刊介绍：
The Journal of Computer Assisted Learning is an international peer-reviewed journal which covers the whole range of uses of information and communication technology to support learning and knowledge exchange. It aims to provide a medium for communication among researchers as well as a channel linking researchers, practitioners, and policy makers. JCAL is also a rich source of material for master and PhD students in areas such as educational psychology, the learning sciences, instructional technology, instructional design, collaborative learning, intelligent learning systems, learning analytics, open, distance and networked learning, and educational evaluation and assessment. This is the case for formal (e.g., schools), non-formal (e.g., workplace learning) and informal learning (e.g., museums and libraries) situations and environments. Volumes often include one Special Issue which these provides readers with a broad and in-depth perspective on a specific topic. First published in 1985, JCAL continues to have the aim of making the outcomes of contemporary research and experience accessible. During this period there have been major technological advances offering new opportunities and approaches in the use of a wide range of technologies to support learning and knowledge transfer more generally. There is currently much emphasis on the use of network functionality and the challenges its appropriate uses pose to teachers/tutors working with students locally and at a distance. JCAL welcomes: -Empirical reports, single studies or programmatic series of studies on the use of computers and information technologies in learning and assessment -Critical and original meta-reviews of literature on the use of computers for learning -Empirical studies on the design and development of innovative technology-based systems for learning -Conceptual articles on issues relating to the Aims and Scope
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
