ArticleJournal of Intelligence2026
The Effects of Immediate Versus Delayed Timing of AI Support on EFL Learners' Reading Comprehension Performance: An Experimental Study.
Article in Journal of Intelligence, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The growing integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into second-language reading instruction has intensified debate regarding whether AI-mediated support facilitates comprehension or reduces the cognitive effort required for independent meaning construction. Although previous research has reported generally positive effects of AI-assisted reading, limited attention has been directed toward the timing of support during the reading process itself. The present study examined whether immediate versus delayed AI support produced different effects on EFL learners' reading comprehension performance. A pretest-posttest experimental design was employed, involving 90 undergraduate EFL learners, randomly assigned to three instructional conditions: Immediate AI Support, Delayed AI Support, and No-Support control. The intervention was conducted over a ten-week period using AI-assisted reading tasks administered under controlled instructional conditions. Reading comprehension performance was measured using validated pre- and post-test instruments that assessed literal, inferential, and global comprehension. Psychometric validation procedures incorporating Classical Test Theory and Item Response Theory supported the instrument's reliability and measurement adequacy. One-way ANOVA revealed statistically significant differences across the three instructional conditions, F(2, 87) = 18.679,
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.