ArticleJournal of Intelligence2026
Generative AI-Assisted Academic Writing Experience and University Students' Academic Self-Efficacy: Parallel Indirect Associations Through Academic Emotions.
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
Abstract
Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) is increasingly used in academic writing, yet its associations with students' broader academic emotions and capability beliefs remain unclear. Drawing on control-value theory and social cognitive theory, this cross-sectional study examined positive and negative academic emotions as parallel statistical pathways between GenAI-assisted writing experience and general academic self-efficacy. Participants were 1128 students from universities in eastern China. A covariate-adjusted parallel pathway model was estimated with 5000 bootstrap resamples. GenAI-assisted writing experience was positively associated with self-efficacy (total association B = 0.733, β = 0.670) and broader positive emotions (B = 0.778, β = 0.631), and negatively associated with broader negative emotions (B = -0.457, β = -0.298). The positive-emotion indirect association was 0.471 (standardized β = 0.431), 95% CI [0.409, 0.531], whereas the negative-emotion indirect association was 0.033 (standardized β = 0.030), 95% CI [0.018, 0.052]. The direct association remained positive (B = 0.229, β = 0.209). After positive academic emotions were controlled, the coefficient linking GenAI-writing experience with negative emotions changed from negative to positive, indicating a statistical suppression pattern. A sensitivity model excluding emotional-motivation items reproduced both indirect associations. Given the limited discriminant validity between positive emotions and self-efficacy and the concurrent self-report design, the larger positive indirect association warrants cautious interpretation. The findings indicate that GenAI-assisted writing experience is associated with broader academic emotions and efficacy beliefs while retaining a smaller residual negative-emotion component.
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.