Higher academic self-efficacy profiles report greater overall academic AI use, with a large effect (η² = .36)¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associationalr1·q2·i3large
Currency · newest study 2026 · 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.
q2 i3 AI use differed significantly across the three self-efficacy profiles, F(2, 99) = 27.84, p < .001, η2 = .36, with means of 2.41 (low), 3.56 (moderate), and 4.68 (high). → Suriá-Martínez R 2026
Evidence¶
Suriá-Martínez R 2026¶
Suriá-Martínez R, García-Castillo F, López-Sánchez C and García del Castillo JA (2026). Between perceived competence and artificial intelligence: academic self-efficacy profiles in university students with motor disabilities. Front. Educ. 11:1956192. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2026.1956192
q2 · i3 · associational · r1
One-way ANOVA comparing reported AI use across the three LPA profiles (N = 102), with Bonferroni post hoc comparisons significant among all three profiles (p < .05). The quote fragment "F(2, 99) = 27.84, p < .001, η2 = .36" grounds the large effect; means were 2.41, 3.56, and 4.68.
"Analysis of variance showed significant group differences in AI use, F(2, 99) = 27.84, p < .001, η2 = .36, representing a large effect size."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Self-efficacy profiles differ in AI use for educational support (η² = .36), the highest-rated support type in the high profile — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
- Self-efficacy profiles differ in AI use for informational support (η² = .28) and emotional support (η² = .18) — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
- The four profiles differ in academic self-efficacy, time/study management, and effort regulation, with HL highest, but not in help seeking — related
- AI-attitude profiles differ significantly in career crafting, with High-Perception High-Vigilance and Positive Empowerment highest and Low-Perception Detached lowest — related
- Profiles differ in self-perceived academic skills: Engaged and Literate users report the highest problem-solving and cognitive endurance gains, while Uncritical Reliant users report the highest independent thinking — related
- Three academic self-efficacy profiles (low, moderate, high) are identified among university students with motor disabilities using Latent Profile Analysis — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
higher-self-efficacy-profiles-greater-ai-use |
title |
Higher academic self-efficacy profiles report greater overall academic AI use, with a large effect (η² = .36) |
description |
Higher academic self-efficacy profiles report greater overall academic AI use, with a large effect (η² = .36) |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2026 |
source_checked |
2026-10-20 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-11 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — suriá-martínez-r-2026 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.