Meta-analytic evidence on GenAI and critical thinking shows a positive mean association with a prediction interval spanning harm to benefit¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · theoretical r3 · q2 · i2 medium
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i2 A three-level meta-analysis of GenAI and critical thinking reports a positive mean association (g = 0.544) with a 95% prediction interval from −0.588 to 1.677 and unexplained heterogeneity. → Daiki Nakamura 2026

Evidence¶

Daiki Nakamura 2026¶

Daiki Nakamura. (2026). Augmentation or Erosion? Regulating Cognitive Offloading in Generative AI-Supported STEM Learning. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-026-10224-6

q2 · i2 · theoretical · r3

The review reports, citing Sun et al., a three-level meta-analysis of GenAI and critical thinking. The review states the "positive mean association (g = 0.544)" coexists with a prediction interval containing both harm and benefit, with heterogeneity study characteristics largely fail to explain.

"A recent three-level meta-analysis of GenAI and critical thinking makes the pattern precise: a positive mean association (g = 0.544) is accompanied by a 95% prediction interval running from − 0.588 to 1.677 and by substantial heterogeneity that measured study characteristics largely fail to explain"

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Critical Thinking — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• GenAI shows a dual-mechanism profile: meta-analytic learning benefits coexist with dependence-related costs to critical thinking — related
• Meta-reviews reach contradictory conclusions on whether AI reliance harms or helps critical thinking, with substantial design limitations limiting generalizability — related
• The positive GenAI writing effect is robust across dependence-aware, sensitivity, and risk-of-bias specifications, but the wide prediction interval spans near-zero to large effects — related
• Prior meta-analytic evidence indicates chatbot technology has a substantial positive effect on overall learning outcomes and knowledge retention, but not on critical thinking, engagement, or motivation — related
• Effect sizes across studies show substantial heterogeneity, with wide prediction intervals spanning large negative to large positive true effects — related