SynthesisFrontiers in psychology2026
AI-driven psychological and cognitive decision processes in professional practice: a systematic review using music teachers as an instrumental case.
Synthesis in Frontiers in psychology, 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
Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly entering professional practice, raising questions about how professionals interpret algorithmic authority, protect judgment autonomy, and negotiate human-AI boundaries. This systematic review uses music teachers as an instrumental case to examine AI-related psychological responses, cognitive appraisals, and professional decisions in a judgment-intensive and emotionally involved educational context. Following PRISMA 2020, 20 studies published from 2023 onwards were synthesized through thematic synthesis, directed content analysis, and higher-order evidence-to-theme mapping. MMAT 2018 was used for quality appraisal, with evidence-tiering applied to classify evidence strength. The synthesis identified four interrelated psychological-cognitive-professional decision pathways: professional boundaries and retention of judgment authority, learning-process regulation and critical engagement, adaptive co-creation and professional capacity reconstruction, and risk perception with bounded adoption. Across these pathways, music teachers did not simply accept or reject AI; rather, they selectively integrated AI by weighing technological convenience, pedagogical value, professional responsibility, and risks to student agency or cultural interpretation. A further synthesis showed that the depth and mode of AI adoption were jointly shaped by individual capability, organizational environment, and technological characteristics. The review suggests that AI training for music teachers should move beyond tool operation toward judgment-oriented preparation, including task-suitability evaluation, output review, critical-use pedagogy, and ethical guidance. For psychology-related professions, the findings should be treated as hypothesis-generating propositions rather than direct clinical recommendations, because psychological service contexts involve higher ethical responsibility, decision-making risk, and professional accountability.
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.