Self-regulated learning ability significantly moderates Gen-AI's effect on HOT: high-SRL students show ES = 0.863 versus ES = 0.284 for low-SRL students¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesisr3·q3·i2medium
Currency · newest study 2025 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q3 i2 SRL exerts a significant moderating effect (Q = 40.962, p < 0.001); high-SRL students show a substantial effect (ES = 0.863) while low-SRL students show a small-to-moderate effect (ES = 0.284). → Zhao Yan 2025
Evidence¶
Zhao Yan 2025¶
Zhao Yan, Yue Yuhe, Sun Zhonghua, Jiang Qiang, Li Gangsheng. (2025). Does Generative Artificial Intelligence Improve Students’ Higher-Order Thinking? A Meta-Analysis Based on 29 Experiments and Quasi-Experiments. Journal of Intelligence. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence13120160
q3 · i2 · quant-synthesis · r3
Moderator analysis (Table 5) comparing high-SRL (N = 31) and low-SRL (N = 25) subgroups, with significant between-groups difference (Q = 40.962, p < 0.001). The quote reports both subgroup effect sizes and their significance.
"students with high SRL demonstrated a substantial positive effect (ES = 0.863, p < 0.001), whereas those with low SRL exhibited only a small to moderate effect (ES = 0.284, p < 0.001)"
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Evidence suggests over-reliance on generative AI may negatively affect students' self-regulated learning behaviors, potentially harming retention and transfer to novel contexts — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it
- Educational level does not significantly moderate Gen-AI's effect on HOT, though K-12 subgroups show a larger effect (ES = 0.857) than post-secondary (ES = 0.539) — related
- Gen-AI's effect on HOT is strongest for problem-solving ability (g = 0.745), followed by critical thinking (g = 0.691), with a smaller effect on creativity (g = 0.444) — related
- Gen-AI has a moderate positive overall effect on students' higher-order thinking (g = 0.609) across 29 experimental and quasi-experimental studies — related
- Self-regulated learning moderates the cognitive load–critical thinking relationship, buffering the negative effect of load — related
- Self-regulated learning strategies have a large pooled effect (d = 0.859) on academic achievement across 21 Turkish studies — related
- Instructional method does not significantly moderate Gen-AI's effect on HOT, though project-based learning shows the largest subgroup effect (ES = 0.717) and lecture-based instruction a small non-significant effect (ES = 0.396) — related
- The pooled effect of self-regulated learning does not differ significantly by course type, though mathematics shows the largest descriptive effect — related
- Intervention duration significantly moderates Gen-AI's effect on HOT, with the strongest effects at 8–16 weeks (ES = 0.759) and weaker effects for shorter (0.494) and longer (0.372) interventions — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
genai-srl-moderator |
title |
Self-regulated learning ability significantly moderates Gen-AI's effect on HOT: high-SRL students show ES = 0.863 versus ES = 0.284 for low-SRL students |
description |
Self-regulated learning ability significantly moderates Gen-AI's effect on HOT: high-SRL students show ES = 0.863 versus ES = 0.284 for low-SRL students |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2025 |
source_checked |
2026-10-20 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-12 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — zhao-yan-2025 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.