ArticleFrontiers in artificial intelligence2025
Research on middle school teachers' technostress empowered by artificial intelligence.
Article in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Artificial intelligence and teacher competence: a scoping review of assessment, analytics, and professional development.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Pooled it
- Human-Machine Collaboration Depth and Teacher Burnout: A Dual-Path Moderated Mediation Model of Empowerment and Depletion.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Implementation of active methodologies: a six-phase instructional design model from a neuroeducational perspective.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Technostress is an essential factor in predicting middle school teachers' willingness to adopt artificial intelligence (AI) in future educational practices and their actual use of such technologies. This study examines technostress among middle school teachers in the context of AI integration and explores how personal competence (including digital awareness, digital technology knowledge and skills, and digital application competence), role conflict, organizational support, and technological features influence technostress. Methods: The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) is employed as the theoretical underpinning for the present research, using survey data from 301 middle school teachers, a path model was constructed to analyze these relationships. Results: The results indicate that the overall level of technostress is relatively low; however, different teacher groups experience distinct sources of stress. Specifically, appropriate technological features and strong digital awareness effectively alleviate technostress, while role conflict intensifies it. Furthermore, these factors play a significant mediating role between organizational support and technostress. Discussion: Based on these findings, the study proposes several strategies to mitigate technostress among middle school teachers. First, a tiered and category based approach should be adopted to provide targeted support according to teachers' actual needs. Second, it is important to balance the relationship between technological supply and educational demand to ensure sustainable implementation. Third, showcasing typical successful cases can help enhance teachers' digital awareness and confidence in using AI. Finally, strengthen role positioning and work flexibility to ease teachers' role conflict. These strategies offer practical guidance for educational administrators seeking to promote the effective integration of AI technologies in middle school education.
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.