ArticlePloS one2026
The impact of university students' computational thinking on AI literacy: A longitudinal study based on SEM-PLS.
Article in PloS one, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Artificial intelligence literacy is a core competency that underpins individual development. Although previous studies have demonstrated a cross-sectional association between computational thinking and artificial intelligence literacy, there has been little analysis of their longitudinal effects. This study utilized a sample of 216 undergraduate students from southern China and employed structural equation modeling (SEM-PLS) and paired-sample t-tests. Through a two-stage longitudinal data analysis, the study found that computational thinking has a significant positive effect on artificial intelligence literacy and that both competencies improved significantly over time. By tracking the evolution of these two competencies, this study offers a novel longitudinal perspective, confirms their synchronous development, and highlights the stability of their cross-sectional relationship, thereby providing theoretical foundations and methodological references for educational practice.
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.