ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Learning-centred use of generative AI and later academic functioning: a baseline-adjusted three-wave panel study.
Article 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) is rapidly entering higher education, but measures of adoption, frequency, intention, or general attitude do not explain whether students use GenAI in ways that support academic work. This study focused on learning-centred use of GenAI in academic work (LCU), defined as a task-focused, verification-oriented, and non-substitutive pattern of GenAI integration, and tested time-ordered paths from LCU to later academic functioning through self-regulated learning (SRL) and academic self-efficacy (ASE). Methods: We analysed a de-identified three-wave panel dataset from university students in China. The valid baseline panel included 1,200 students; 984 students were retained at T2, where SRL and ASE were measured in separated modules (T2a and T2b); and 788 complete cases were retained at T3, where academic procrastination and learning engagement were assessed. Baseline-adjusted composite-score path models controlled for prior SRL, ASE, procrastination, engagement, demographic characteristics, and GenAI-use covariates. Inverse probability weighting and auxiliary behavioural and rater indicators were used as sensitivity and convergence checks. Results: T1 LCU positively predicted T2a SRL ( Discussion: These findings show that the academic value of GenAI use is realised when students integrate it into learning-centred regulatory practice. Compared with frequency-based accounts, the present model identifies LCU as the behavioural condition that connects GenAI use with later academic functioning through strengthened SRL and ASE. The study advances a psychologically grounded account of GenAI in higher education and highlights the need to guide students toward task-focused, verification-oriented, and non-substitutive use that supports planning, monitoring, persistence, and engagement.
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.