Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42505962›Full record

ArticleJournal of Intelligence2026

Beyond Cognitive Support: Social Interaction and Affective Experience in AI-Assisted Creative Thinking Among University Students.

Yawen Cheng, Xiaoting Huang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of Intelligence, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Yawen ChengSchool of Education, Central China Normal University, Wuhan 430079, China.ORCID 0000-0002-4136-3065
Xiaoting HuangGraduate School of Education, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China.ORCID 0000-0002-7139-273X

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China 72574007
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Creative thinking has become an increasingly important competence in education, yet less is known about how it may be supported in human-AI collaboration as large language models (LLMs) are increasingly employed as partners in learning and problem solving. This study examined whether and how cognitive support and social interaction in AI-assisted collaboration were associated with divergent and convergent thinking. A total of 92 undergraduate students completed creative problem-solving tasks with GPT-4.0. Data were collected from task outputs and self-report measures, and the hypothesized associations were tested using structural equation modeling, with indirect effects examined as supplementary analyses. Results showed that in human-AI collaboration, social interaction rather than cognitive support was associated with more positive affective experiences, and this affective pathway was linked specifically to convergent thinking rather than divergent thinking. These findings suggest that associations between AI-assisted collaboration and creative thinking may depend less on perceived cognitive support alone than on the extent to which collaboration is experienced as socially engaging and affectively positive, particularly for convergent thinking.

Indexed as

artificial intelligenceconvergent thinkingcreative thinkingdivergent thinkingundergraduate students

Identifiers

PMID42505962
PMCPMC13413310

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.