ArticleFrontiers in physiology2026
The effect of using a chatbot integrated with the ARCS motivation model in physiology education: a mixed-methods study.
Article in Frontiers in physiology, 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
Introduction: This study examined the effects of integrating the ARCS (Attention, Relevance, Confidence, and Satisfaction) Model of Motivational Design with an AI-supported chatbot on academic achievement and learner perceptions in physiology education. Methods: The study was conducted with 75 students enrolled in university-level physiology courses. The control group (Traditional) received instruction using traditional teaching methods, while the teaching process for the second group (ARCS) was structured according to the ARCS model. The third group used a chatbot-supported learning environment in addition to the ARCS model (ARCS +Chatbot). Academic achievement and cognitive load were assessed using pretest and post-test measurements in all groups, while technology acceptance was measured only in the ARCS+Chatbot group using the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) before and after implementation. Additionally, to examine the chatbot-supported learning experience in greater depth, a semi-structured interview form was administered to students in this group, and the data were analyzed using thematic analysis. Results: Quantitative findings indicated that academic achievement increased significantly across all groups from the pre-test to the post-test (p<.001). However, the increase in achievement differed across groups, with the ARCS+Chatbot group performing significantly better than both the traditional instruction group (p<.001) and the ARCS group (p<.01) on the posttest. In contrast, no significant differences were found in pre-test and post-test measurements of cognitive load or in between-group comparisons (p>.05). TAM analyses revealed that chatbot use significantly increased perceived usefulness (p<.05) but did not result in a significant change in perceived ease of use (p>.05). Qualitative findings indicated that students tend to perceive the chatbot as a tool that supports their learning process and complements the instructor's role. Discussion: The integration of an AI-supported chatbot into the ARCS model improved academic achievement without increasing cognitive load, suggesting its potential as an effective instructional approach in physiology 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.