ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Exploring the influence of AI self-study rooms on K-12 learners' motivation, self-regulation, enjoyment, and engagement.
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.
- Family-school autonomy support for children's responsible use of generative artificial intelligence: a self-determination theory synthesis and developmental research agenda.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Review
- Generative Artificial Intelligence Use and Adolescent Mental Health.Current pediatrics reports · 2026Review
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
Background: Advances in artificial intelligence (AI) have enabled the development of AI-based self-study rooms that may influence K-12 learners' motivation, engagement, enjoyment, and self-regulation. This study was guided by Zimmerman's self-regulated learning framework to explore whether AI-equipped self-study environments can foster more autonomous and effective learning compared to traditional self-study settings. Methods: A quasi-experimental design was conducted with 383 primary-school students in mainland China, randomly assigned to either an experimental group (AI self-study rooms) or a control group (traditional self-study). Over a 10-week period, participants completed standardized pre- and post-tests, as well as validated scales measuring motivation, engagement, enjoyment, and self-regulation. Data were analyzed using ANCOVA to control for baseline equivalences. Results: Findings revealed that students exposed to AI self-study rooms recorded notably higher post-intervention scores on all measured constructs than those in traditional self-study settings. ANCOVA results showed that group membership significantly affected motivation ( Conclusion: This study suggests that AI study rooms may be able to provide K-12 students with a more customized, responsive, and engaging learning experience that improves key elements of their learning. Future inquiries could employ longitudinal designs, diversify educational contexts, and integrate broader psychological variables to enrich understanding of how AI-driven tools might shape learners' trajectories over time.
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.