ArticleJournal of Intelligence2026
The Role of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Developing Cognitive and Research Talent Among Postgraduate Students.
Article in Journal of Intelligence, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI) is rapidly transforming higher education by introducing new mechanisms for supporting the development of advanced cognitive processes and research-related capabilities. This study examines how postgraduate students employ GAI to develop their cognitive and research talent, conceptualized here as higher-order academic skills such as analysis, synthesis, and critical reasoning, across six domains: literature review, theoretical development, research design, data analysis, academic writing, ethical use, and challenges encountered-signaled explicitly rather than listed line by line. We administered a validated multidimensional scale to 214 postgraduate students, and the results indicate a moderate overall use of GAI, with notably high involvement in practices that emphasize ethics and responsibility. Students reported clear cognitive benefits in tasks involving information processing, linguistic refinement, and conceptual clarification while showing caution toward delegating higher-order analytical or theoretical reasoning to AI systems. Key challenges included limited institutional training, concerns about data privacy and academic integrity, and difficulties evaluating the originality and reliability of AI-generated content. Inferential analyses indicated significant differences based on gender, academic level, and general technology proficiency, whereas no differences emerged across age groups, departments, or specializations. Overall, this study demonstrates how GAI can contribute to the development of higher-level cognitive skills and research competencies, with "moderate use" operationalized as consistent but selective engagement across domains, while underscoring the need for structured training, clear guidelines, and teaching approaches that foster the responsible and effective incorporation of AI within postgraduate research. The results highlight practical implications for higher education, including the importance of institutional training programs, governance frameworks for responsible AI use, and pedagogical models that foster critical engagement with GAI.
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.