ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Beyond facilitation and inhibition: a configurational mechanism study of cognitive transitions in human-AI collaboration.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ongoing debates in higher education regarding whether artificial intelligence should be further integrated or deliberately constrained call for empirical research that offers a more explanatory analytical framework. However, existing studies on the human-AI collaboration (HAC) paradox are largely grounded in a binary logic of facilitation versus inhibition, leaving the dynamic mechanisms underlying complex cognitive processes insufficiently explored. To address this issue, this study adopts a dialectical perspective on explicit and tacit knowledge in knowledge conversion, and systematically examines the mechanisms of cognitive conflict, regulation, and equilibrium underlying cognitive transitions in HAC. Drawing on data collected from 316 participants in an authentic instructional context, this study constructs a configurational model incorporating social interaction (SI), tacit knowledge acquisition (TKA), internalization (I), self-motivation (SM), and trust in AI (TiAI), and employs fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) to examine multiple equifinal pathways leading to higher-level cognition. The findings identify two distinct types of driving mechanisms underlying cognitive transitions: a high human-centered engagement pathway in the absence of AI, and a compensatory pathway in which AI offsets deficiencies in human-centered conditions. These results suggest that cognitive transitions emerge not from the linear effect of isolated factors but from the dynamic counterbalancing and configuration of psychological characteristics and technological conditions. In this specific educational context, AI functions as a mediating and compensatory agent that mitigates cognitive imbalance. Methodologically, this study demonstrates the logical compatibility between fsQCA and knowledge spiral; theoretically, it extends the explanatory boundaries of the HAC paradox; and practically, it provides evidence-based guidance for the structural deployment of AI support in higher education.
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.