ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
The impact of career adapt-abilities on AI anxiety among English majors: a dual perspective analysis based on core self-evaluations at the person- and variable-centered.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. 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.
- The relationship between career adaptability, job search self-efficacy, and EFL college students' employment anxiety: the perspective of proactive personality.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Is employment anxiety among vocal music students associated with AI replacement concerns? The roles of AI anxiety and vocal-performance replacement perception.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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies in language services, education, and knowledge production has imposed substantial occupational displacement pressures on English majors, thereby triggering significant AI-related anxiety. However, existing research rarely systematically explores the formation mechanisms of AI anxiety among English majors, especially lacking an in-depth analysis of the protective role of career adapt-abilities and their internal heterogeneity. This study adopts a dual-perspective approach-integrating variable-centered and person-centered analyses-to investigate how career adapt-abilities influence AI anxiety and the mediating role of core self-evaluations. A total of 444 English major students from four comprehensive universities in Sichuan, China, were recruited during July and August 2025. Measurements included the Career Adapt-Abilities Scale, Core Self-Evaluation Scale, and AI Anxiety Scale. Results show that career adapt-abilities significantly and negatively predict AI anxiety, with core self-evaluations partially mediating this relationship. Latent profile analysis identified three distinct career adapt-abilities subgroups-low, medium, and high-with significant differences in core self-evaluations and AI anxiety levels among them. Notably, the low career adapt-abilities group exhibited the highest AI anxiety, while the high group showed the lowest. Both analytic strategies converge to demonstrate that career adapt-abilities constitute an essential psychological resource mitigating AI anxiety in English majors, with core self-evaluations serving as a key cognitive mechanism. This study reveals a dual-pathway influence of career adapt-abilities on AI anxiety, offering a novel theoretical framework for understanding technological anxiety formation. Moreover, the pronounced heterogeneity of career adapt-abilities underscores the necessity for stratified career development education and psychological interventions tailored to diverse student groups, providing practical guidance for optimizing talent cultivation in English major programs.
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.