Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42510271›Full record

ReviewBehavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2026

Generative AI, Cognitive Offloading, and Learner Agency in Higher Education: A Scoping Review.

Guanhua Wang, Wenna Wang, Daozhou Yang, Jifan Ren

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 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

4 authors.

Guanhua WangSchool of Economics and Management, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China.ORCID 0000-0002-6589-1049
Wenna WangSchool of Economics and Management, Harbin Institute of Technology, Shenzhen 518055, China.ORCID 0000-0003-2685-9449
Daozhou YangHubei Science and Technology Industry Information Research Center, Hubei University of Economics, Wuhan 430205, China.
Jifan RenSchool of Economics and Management, Harbin Institute of Technology, Shenzhen 518055, China.ORCID 0000-0003-4593-802X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) is increasingly integrated into higher education, where it supports writing, feedback, problem solving, and research-related tasks while also raising concerns about cognitive offloading and learner dependence. This scoping review maps the literature on the relationships among GenAI, cognitive offloading, and learner agency in higher education. Following PRISMA-ScR guidance, searches were conducted on 24 June 2026 across six database sources: Web of Science Core Collection, Scopus, EBSCOhost ERIC, EBSCOhost Education Source, APA PsycInfo via ProQuest, and ProQuest Education Collection via ProQuest Social Science Premium Collection. English-language peer-reviewed or scholarly journal literature published from 2022 to 24 June 2026 was eligible for inclusion. Data were charted using a structured extraction matrix and synthesized through descriptive mapping and theory-informed configurative synthesis. After duplicate removal, 5327 records were screened by title and abstract, 691 full-text reports were assessed, and 123 studies were included in the final charting matrix and synthesis. The review shows that learner agency is conceptualized as a multidimensional construct involving self-regulation, reflective judgement, intentionality, and responsible action. Across the literature, GenAI is best interpreted through an interpretive dual-pattern account: agency-supportive patterns are associated with self-regulated learning, self-efficacy, feedback literacy, and reflective engagement, whereas agency-eroding patterns are associated with cognitive offloading, overreliance, dependence, uncritical uptake, and weakened judgement. These patterns should be interpreted as a configurative synthesis of heterogeneous evidence rather than as causal effect estimates. Overall, the findings suggest that the educational value of GenAI depends less on the technology itself than on how it is pedagogically embedded, with augmentation-oriented and scaffolded use being more supportive of learner agency than replacement-oriented use.

Indexed as

cognitive offloadinggenerative artificial intelligencehigher educationlearner agencyoverreliancescoping reviewself-regulated learning

Identifiers

PMID42510271
PMCPMC13405335

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.