ReviewJournal of Intelligence2025
Does Generative Artificial Intelligence Improve Students' Higher-Order Thinking? A Meta-Analysis Based on 29 Experiments and Quasi-Experiments.
Review in Journal of Intelligence, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Artificial intelligence learning environments and educational psychology (2016-2025): a systematic bibliometric synthesis and review.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Pooled it
- Effects of generative artificial intelligence on students' learning motivation: evidence from a meta-analysis.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Pooled it
- From Confidence to Commitment: Self-Perceived Competence and the Motivational Pathways to Intellectual Engagement with AI Learning Tools.Journal of Intelligence · 2026Article
- AI Learning Self-Efficacy and Self-Perceived Digital Creative Functioning: A Conditional Indirect-Association Model.Journal of Intelligence · 2026Article
- Enhancing Higher-Order Cognitive Abilities Through AI-Powered Smart Assistants: Implications for Digital Entrepreneurship and Future Problem-Solving in Higher Education.Journal of Intelligence · 2026Article
- Generative AI Use and Critical Thinking Dispositions in Higher Education: A Cross-Sample Study of the Sequential Role of Metacognitive Weakness and Epistemic Laziness.Journal of Intelligence · 2026Article
- When Thinking Is Outsourced: Cognitive Offloading and the Heterogeneity of Critical Thinking Among Chinese University Students Using Generative Artificial Intelligence.Journal of Intelligence · 2026Article
- Coding Alone? AI-Assisted Software Work and the Decoupling of Productivity from Public Knowledge-Infrastructure Participation.Journal of Intelligence · 2026Article
- Prompt engineering competence, knowledge management, and technology fit as drivers of educational sustainability through generative AI.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- The Role of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Developing Cognitive and Research Talent Among Postgraduate Students.Journal of Intelligence · 2026Article
- AI literacy and college students' innovative thinking: chain mediating roles of AI interaction perception and AI attitudes.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- The association between generative AI use and university students' critical thinking: a moderated mediation model of GenAI feedback literacy and reflective thinking.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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The widespread application of Generative Artificial Intelligence (Gen-AI) is transforming educational practices and driving pedagogical innovation. While cultivating higher-order thinking (HOT) represents a central educational goal, its achievement remains an ongoing challenge. Current evidence regarding the impact of Gen-AI on HOT is relatively fragmented, lacking systematic integration, particularly in the analysis of moderating variables. To address this gap, a meta-analysis approach was employed, integrating data from 29 experimental and quasi-experimental studies to quantitatively assess the overall impact of Gen-AI on learners' HOT and to examine potential moderating factors. The analysis revealed that Gen-AI exerts a moderate positive effect on HOT, with the most significant improvement observed in problem-solving abilities, followed by critical thinking, while its effect on creativity is relatively limited. Moderation analyses further indicated that the impact of Gen-AI is significantly influenced by experimental duration and learners' self-regulated learning (SRL) abilities: effects were strongest when interventions lasted 8-16 weeks, and learners with higher SRL capacities benefited more substantially. Based on the research findings, this study proposed that Gen-AI should be systematically integrated as a targeted instructional tool to foster HOT. Medium- to long-term interventions (8-16 weeks) are recommended to enhance learners' problem-solving and critical thinking abilities. At the same time, effective approaches should also be explored to promote creative thinking through Gen-AI within existing pedagogical frameworks. Furthermore, individual learner differences should be accounted for by adopting dynamic and personalized scaffolding strategies to foster SRL, thereby maximizing the educational potential of Gen-AI in cultivating innovative talents.
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.