ArticleScientific reports2026
The impact of large language models on collaborative learning processes and outcomes in higher education for English translation.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Collaborative learning is an important teaching method in English translation in Chinese higher education and is affected by the development of Large Language Models (LLMs). Previous studies mainly focus on the application of LLMs by individual students, but there is a lack of information about the influence of these models on the group dynamics when they are used in collaborative work. To fill this gap, our research examines the effect of an LLM, as a third participant, on the collaborative learning procedures and results. A comparative experimental design is conducted, involving 372 undergraduate and graduate students majoring in English in China, who are randomly divided into two groups: a control group working together without the LLM and an experimental group where the LLM is included in a human-human-AI collaboration team. The translation quality, questionnaire data and process records of both groups are analyzed by a mixed-method approach to make a comparison. The findings show that there is no significant difference in the final translation quality between the two groups, but the experimental group reports a significantly higher perceived efficiency and task satisfaction. A qualitative analysis clarifies this result, indicating that the participation of the LLM changes the collaborative procedure. This change involves a transition from a generative to an evaluative negotiation in the decision-making process, and also leads to the formation of informal roles. The study concludes that in collaborative learning, LLMs affect the process rather than enhance the content directly. These findings are of great importance for the design of effective human-ai English translation teaching in the Chinese higher education environment.
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.