Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41993829›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026

Research on the application behavior of generative artificial intelligence learning of college students based on self-determination theory.

Xu Fang, Junci Feng

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Xu Fang *College of Educational Sciences, Nantong University, Nantong, China.
Junci Feng *College of Educational Sciences, Nantong University, Nantong, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: In recent years, the application of generative artificial intelligence (GAI) in higher education has gained increasing prevalence, accompanied by a concerning rise in student "over-reliance". Such excessive dependence can undermine critical thinking and hinder innovation development. Consequently, guiding college students toward a "deep processing" mode of GAI use has become a crucial issue in higher education. Methods: Grounded in self-determination theory, this study constructs a model to examine the factors influencing college students' GAI usage behaviors. To test the proposed model and its hypothesized relationships, An empirical study has been conducted,including survey instrument distribution and path analysis. Results: The main findings emerge: First, among basic psychological needs, perceived competence plays a pivotal role in curbing over-reliance and promoting deep processing, exerting a stronger influence than perceived autonomy or relatedness. Second, all three basic psychological needs (perceived autonomy, perceived competence, and perceived relatedness) indirectly influence deep processing and over-reliance through intrinsic motivation. Discussion: The hypotheses proposed in the article has been verified. Based on these findings, practical suggestions are proposed across multiple levels to foster more reflective and self-determined GAI use, including constructing a need-supportive Learning Ecosystem, building a "guided" GAI tool, establishing a hierarchical support and constraint framework, fostering a shift from instrumental to alue rationality.

Indexed as

deep processinggenerative artificial intelligencelearning behaviorover-dependenceself-determination theory

Identifiers

PMID41993829
PMCPMC13079672

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.