ArticleCognitive processing2026
Amplifier or inhibitor? A moderated mediation analysis of generative AI's impact on creative self-efficacy through dual-process thinking.
Article in Cognitive processing, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study examined the impact of generative AI use on university students' creative self-efficacy-a key motivational construct within the broader domain of creative cognition-through a moderated parallel mediation model. Drawing on the dual-process model of creativity and self-efficacy construct, we investigated divergent and convergent thinking as mediators and creativity traits as a moderator. Data were collected from 963 Chinese undergraduate and graduate students via an online survey. Parallel mediation analysis revealed partial mediation: generative AI use positively predicted creative self-efficacy directly and indirectly through both divergent and convergent thinking. Moderation analyses showed that creativity traits significantly strengthened the positive effects of generative AI use on divergent and convergent thinking at higher levels, with negative or attenuated effects at lower levels. Moderated mediation confirmed conditional indirect effects, yielding strong positive pathways for high-trait students and negative pathways for low-trait individuals-a "double-edged sword" pattern. These findings highlight the non-universal benefits of generative AI, underscoring individual differences as a critical boundary condition. Theoretical implications extend creativity models to human-AI contexts, while practical recommendations advocate trait-sensitive AI integration in higher education to promote equitable creative development.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42295658What 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.