ReviewBehavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2026
The Impact of AI-Assisted Learning on the Agency of Foreign Language Learners: A Meta-Analysis.
Review in Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study employs a meta-analytic approach to synthesize empirical evidence on the impact of AI-assisted learning on the agency of foreign language learners. The overall synthesis indicates positive associations between AI-assisted learning and multiple dimensions of learner agency; however, the magnitude of these associations varies substantially across studies. Among these outcomes, engagement shows the largest pooled effect size (r = 0.648), whereas enjoyment demonstrates the smallest (r = 0.392). Due to extreme heterogeneity, these pooled estimates serve only as descriptive summaries of the literature rather than evidence of robust effects, as variability significantly constrains their interpretability. Moderator analyses and meta-regression were conducted to explore potential sources of this heterogeneity. Although subgroup analyses reveal that neither learners' first-language background, educational level, nor AI tool type significantly accounts for between-study variability, indicating that contextual factors likely shape outcomes in complex ways. These findings underscore the robust potential of AI-assisted learning while emphasizing the importance of investigating specific conditions-such as task design, teacher intervention, and learner profiles-that optimize agency development. Future research should move beyond global effect estimates toward context-sensitive strategies for maximizing AI's impact on learner agency.
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.