ArticleBMC psychology2025
The development and validation of the AI-supported self-regulated science and mathematics learning scale (AI-SSRSML) among secondary school students in Saudi Arabia.
Article in BMC psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Developing the parenting concerns scale for cancer survivors and assessment of its validity and reliability in China.BMC psychology · 2026Article
- Reality erosion in digital environments: the concept of digital blur and scale development.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to develop and validate the AI-Supported Self-Regulated Science and Mathematics Learning Scale (AI-SSRSML Scale) for technology-enhanced educational settings in Tabuk Province, Saudi Arabia.
methodsThis study used an exploratory sequential mixed-methods design. In 2025, data were collected from students in Tabuk Province, Saudi Arabia. The scale was developed using a systematic literature review, 18 semi-structured interviews with secondary students, and iterative psychometric testing. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), exploratory graph analysis (EGA), convergent and discriminant validity, measurement invariance by gender, and an exploratory Random Forest regression model were used to analyze data from a pilot study (n = 60) and a large-scale survey (n = 920) to establish the construct validity and predictive utility of the scale. Reliability was investigated using Cronbach's alpha, McDonald's omega, composite reliability (CR), and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC).
resultsEFA and CFA. results supported a six-factor solution: Meta-Cognitive Planning, Growth Mindset Endorsement, Self-Monitoring and Reflection, Strategic AI Utilization, Motivational Resilience, and Adaptive Help-Seeking, which accounted for 62.3% of the variance. The final AI-SSRSML Scale included 48 items (eight items per factor). The final model had acceptable fit indices (RMSEA = 0.075, CFI = 0.928, TLI = 0.911), and reliability indices showed excellent internal consistency and temporal stability (Cronbach's α = 0.914-0.959; McDonald's ω = 0.914-0.959; CR = 0.903-0.959; ICC = 0.758-0.869). The measurement invariance was supported by gender. The Random Forest analysis. results showed that items from the Meta-Cognitive Planning factor were the most important in predicting the overall AI-SSRSML score.
conclusionThe AI-SSRSML Scale is a valid, reliable, and gender-invariant instrument for measuring AI-supported self-regulated learning in secondary science and mathematics education. The scale has the potential to provide a psychometrically sound foundation for research, intervention design, and educational policy to support students' cognitive, motivational, and metacognitive engagement in technology-enhanced, growth-oriented educational settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.