ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Adaptive AI-generated feedback in higher education: exploring associations with cognitive flexibility and academic psychological safety among engineering 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
Background: Adaptive AI-generated feedback (AIF) is increasingly integrated into higher education; however, its cognitive and psychological implications remain insufficiently understood, particularly in engineering education. Grounded in feedback intervention theory and emotion regulation theory, this study developed and tested an integrative model examining the perceived relationships between AIF, cognitive flexibility (CF), and academic psychological safety (APS), including mediating and moderating patterns. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among 471 engineering students. Data were analyzed using partial least squares structural equation modeling. The measurement model demonstrated satisfactory reliability and validity, with factor loadings above 0.70, AVE values exceeding 0.50, composite reliability values ranging from 0.908 to 0.936, Cronbach's alpha values ranging from 0.887 to 0.921, and HTMT values below 0.85. The structural model showed moderate explanatory power for CF ( Results: AIF was significantly associated with CF ( Conclusion: Perceived AIF was associated with APS directly and indirectly through CF, while emotional and mindfulness-supportive features were associated with a greater strength in these relationships. Given the study's cross-sectional design, the findings indicate associations rather than causal effects. This study advances the current understanding of cognitive and affective patterns in AI-supported engineering education and highlights the importance of integrating adaptive, emotional, and reflective features into AI feedback systems.
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.