ArticleBehavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Teacher or Artificial Intelligence? The Effect of Decision-Making Agent on Junior High School Students' Decision Acceptance: A Moderated Mediation Model.
Article in Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly used in educational decision-making. This raises important questions about how students perceive and accept outcomes from non-human agents. Based on authority acceptance theory and organizational justice theory, this study explored three research questions: how decision-making agents (teachers vs. AI) affect junior high school students' acceptance of educational decisions, the mediating mechanism of perceived fairness, and the moderating effect of explanatory feedback. This study adopted a 2 (decision-making agent: teacher vs. AI) × 2 (explanatory feedback: with vs. without explanation) between-subjects experimental design, with 250 seventh-grade students as participants. Results showed that students reported significantly higher decision acceptance and perceived fairness for teacher-made decisions than for AI-generated decisions. Perceived fairness partially mediated the relationship between the decision-making agent and decision acceptance. The mediating effect accounted for 67.52% of the total effect. Explanatory feedback positively moderated only the path from the decision-making agent to perceived fairness, with no significant moderating effect on the direct link between the decision-making agent and decision acceptance. Provision of explanations widened the human-AI gap in perceived fairness, which in turn further enlarged the gap in decision acceptance via the mediating pathway of perceived fairness. These findings extend research on explanatory feedback to the basic education context, while highlighting the significance of teacher-led human-AI collaboration and interpretable AI design amid the digital transformation of education.
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.