ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
An exploratory pilot study of artificial intelligence-based instructional program for developing productive thinking skills among female King Faisal University students.
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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of a teaching program based on artificial intelligence in developing productive thinking skills among female university students. Methods: The study adopted a quasi-experimental design with a single experimental group. The participants were nine female students enrolled in the Educational Technology course at the College of Sharia, King Faisal University, in the Al-Ahsa Governorate, during the first semester of the 2024-2025 academic year. The sample was purposefully selected from the study population. The instrument used was a Productive Thinking Skills Questionnaire consisting of 20 items distributed across seven core skills: originality, fluency, flexibility, inference, interpretation, expansion, and imagination. To address psychometric robustness, face validity was established via a panel of five expert judges, and construct validity was substantiated by assessing item-total correlations alongside the internal consistency coefficient. A five-point Likert scale was used to score the responses, ranging from "Needs Improvement" to "Excellent." The reliability of the scale was confirmed with a Cronbach's alpha coefficient of 0.84. The study applied a teaching program based on artificial intelligence, and data were analyzed using the R statistical software through descriptive and inferential statistics, including means, standard deviations, effect sizes, Cronbach's alpha, and the Wilcoxon signed-rank test due to the small sample size. Confidence intervals (95% CI) for median differences were computed using exact distribution methods. Results: The results revealed statistically significant improvements between pre- and post-test scores, suggesting the potential effectiveness of the program within this exploratory pilot context. Discussion: Given the small sample size (
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.