Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41383430›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025

Serendipitous sparks: AI information encounter, cognitive flexibility, AI literacy, and university student creativity.

Xiaoyan Chen, Limin Xiao

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Xiaoyan ChenCollege of Business Administration, Huaqiao University, Quanzhou, China.
Limin XiaoSchool of Business, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As university students increasingly interact with AI, understanding how student-AI interaction behaviors are associated with creativity has gained increasing scholarly attention in recent years. However, previous research has yet to examine the correlation between human information behavior and creativity in AI usage, particularly in relation to information encountered with greater cognitive transformation potential. This study introduces the concept of AI information encounter in the context of student-AI interactions and explores its association with university students' creativity, including its mechanisms and boundary conditions, through the lens of Cognitive Flexibility Theory. Survey data were collected from 645 university students across different grades, regions, and majors. We complemented PROCESS with CB-SEM and PLS-SEM to triangulate the model, and the convergence across methods supports the model's stability. The results showed that AIIE positively predicted students' creativity, with cognitive flexibility serving as a positive mediator. Notably, the mediation of cognitive flexibility was only significant among students with medium to high levels of AI literacy, demonstrating a moderated mediation effect. The findings highlight the relevance of AI information encounters among university students and identify a mediating role linking AIIE to individual creativity, and shed light on practical implications for higher education institutions and teachers to cultivate university student creativity effectively.

Indexed as

AI information encounterAI literacycognitive flexibilitycognitive flexibility theorycreativityhuman information behavior

Identifiers

PMID41383430
PMCPMC12689981

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.