ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Multidimensional responses to generative AI in higher education: an integrative framework linking institutional governance, teaching practice, and student psychological adaptation.
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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This research establishes and validates an integrative framework to examine the multi-layered responses of higher education to generative AI, focusing on the interplay between institutional governance, pedagogical practices, and student psychological adaptation. Using a student survey sample of 477 respondents across three disciplinary clusters and linking these data to institution- and course-level governance and implementation indicators, we estimate multilevel models and identify response profiles that differentiate adaptation outcomes. The findings indicate that the congruence between governance mandates and classroom execution, bolstered by robust implementation capacity, correlates significantly with enhanced student engagement, self-efficacy, and agency, while concurrently mitigating academic anxiety. Although evidence-based integrity controls facilitate the internalization of ethical norms, they may inadvertently heighten student anxiety in the absence of explicit regulatory frameworks and accessible institutional support. Latent response profiles further reveal that a conditional-aligned, high-support configuration yields the most favorable adaptation pattern, whereas low-clarity and low-support environments correspond to reduced positive adaptation and heightened anxiety. Equity analyses indicate meaningful heterogeneity across institutional tiers and disciplinary contexts, underscoring that effective and fair GenAI governance depends on operational clarity, verification-ready assessment design, and resource-backed support.
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.