Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42193614›Full record

ArticleBehavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2026

Predictors of High School Students' Intentions and Behaviors in Using AI Learning Tools: An Extended Theory of Planned Behavior Approach.

Ziqi Zhang, Fuhai An

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Ziqi ZhangJing Hengyi School of Education, Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou 311121, China.
Fuhai AnJing Hengyi School of Education, Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou 311121, China.

Funding

National Social Science Foundation of China VAA230006.
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

AI learning tools are now common enough in secondary education that students are expected to know how to use them, yet we still know relatively little about what drives their use among high school students. This study applied an extended theory of planned behavior (TPB) model to examine whether affective attitude, instrumental attitude, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control, and AI anxiety predicted students' intention to use AI learning tools and their use behaviors, the latter encompassing three dimensions: seeking AI help, evaluating AI responses, and applying AI output. Attitude was divided into affective and instrumental components, and AI anxiety was added as a separate emotional predictor. Data were collected from 513 students in three public high schools in Hangzhou, China, and analyzed with structural equation modeling. Affective attitude, instrumental attitude, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control all positively predicted intention. AI anxiety did not significantly predict intention, but it negatively predicted seeking AI help, evaluating AI responses, and applying AI output. The results suggest that, for these students, AI anxiety is more closely associated with behavioral engagement than intention formation. This distinction helps to clarify how adolescents use AI learning tools and may inform more focused school support for responsible AI use.

Indexed as

AI anxietyAI learning toolshigh school studentsintentionlearning behaviortheory of planned behavior

Identifiers

PMID42193614
PMCPMC13203645

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.