ArticleBMC psychology2026
Trust formation and fairness perception in GenAI: the divergent psychological pathways of computer science and business-related students.
Article in BMC 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe rapid proliferation of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) in higher education raises critical concerns regarding educational equity. However, the psychological mechanisms linking algorithmic characteristics to students' perceptions of fairness remain underexplored. Integrating fairness heuristic theory, privacy calculus theory, and the technology acceptance model, this study examines how GenAI attributes influence perceived educational fairness and explores differences between computer science students and students in selected business-related majors.
methodsSurvey data were collected from 419 Chinese university students using a purposive sampling method, including 222 computer science students and 197 students in business-related majors. A covariance-based structural equation modeling approach was utilized to analyze the pathways through which GenAI algorithms influence perceived educational fairness, alongside a multi-group analysis to evaluate the structural differences between the disciplinary groups.
resultsStructural equation modeling reveals that algorithmic transparency enhances perceived algorithmic fairness (β = 0.434, p < 0.001), which sequentially builds technological trust (β = 0.582, p < 0.001). This trust positively influences perceived learning impact (β = 0.551, p < 0.001) and perceived educational fairness (β = 0.425, p < 0.001). Data privacy concerns negatively affect technological trust (β = -0.090, p = 0.037). Crucially, multi-group analysis uncovered divergent psychological pathways between disciplinary groups. The positive effect of transparency on perceived algorithmic fairness was stronger among students in business-related majors than among computer science students (β = 0.597 vs. 0.257, p = 0.022), whereas the negative association between data privacy concerns and technological trust was statistically significant only within the computer science group (β = -0.154, p = 0.027). Furthermore, perceived learning impact mediated the trust-fairness relationship only among computer science students (B = 0.158, p < 0.001). Conversely, the mediating effect of perceived algorithmic fairness between transparency and trust was stronger among students in business-related majors than among computer science students (B = 0.329 vs. 0.134, p = 0.017).
conclusionThis study provides a nuanced explanation of how GenAI influences students' perceptions of educational fairness, offering insights for designing inclusive AI-driven educational environments. Furthermore, it highlights that preventing GenAI from exacerbating the digital divide requires differentiated governance strategies tailored to the distinct cognitive pathways of students from different academic majors.
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.