Structural paths did not differ significantly across AI usage-frequency groups, though exploratory coefficients varied numerically¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · associational r1–r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? The multi-group analysis did not identify significant differences in structural paths across low-, moderate-, and high-frequency AI use groups. → Zhu K 2026 q2 i? Exploratory group-specific coefficients showed the trust-to-dependence coefficient rising numerically from low- to high-frequency users. → Zhu K 2026 (2)

Evidence¶

Zhu K 2026¶

Zhu K, Ma Y, Zhang J and Liu J (2026). Perceived AI empowerment and threat in relation to university students' dependence on GenAI: the indirect role of trust in AI. Front. Psychol. 17:1940317. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1940317

q2 · i? · associational · r1

Supplementary multigroup SEM comparing unconstrained and path-constrained models across three usage-frequency groups; no significant deterioration in fit was reported, so no moderation was established.

"Finally, the multi-group analysis did not identify significant differences in structural paths across AI usage-frequency groups."

Zhu K 2026 (2)¶

Zhu K, Ma Y, Zhang J and Liu J (2026). Perceived AI empowerment and threat in relation to university students' dependence on GenAI: the indirect role of trust in AI. Front. Psychol. 17:1940317. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1940317

q2 · i? · associational · r2

Descriptive group-specific coefficients from Table 9; the authors present these as "descriptive observations rather than evidence of confirmed group differences" because measurement invariance was not tested.

"The trust-to-dependence coefficient increased from 0.287 in the low-frequency group to 0.435 in the moderate-frequency group and 0.593 in the high-frequency group."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• AI dependency differs by AI usage frequency and academic year but not gender — related
• Focal paths are robust to background controls, which did not directly predict AI integration intention — related
• Perceived AI threat is negatively associated with university students' trust in AI and their dependence on GenAI — related
• Trust in AI partially mediates the associations of both perceived AI empowerment and perceived AI threat with GenAI dependence — related
• Trust in AI is positively associated with university students' dependence on GenAI — related
• The relationship between professional identity and innovative behavior is stronger among teachers with lower reported frequencies of GenAI tool use — reports the opposite
• ASR usage frequency moderately predicts reflective behavior but does not significantly predict learning motivation — related
• Perceived gains in creativity, independent thinking and motivation rise sharply among students with more than three years of GenAI experience, though the comparison is cross-sectional — related
• Higher GenAI usage clusters report greater perceived difficulty, lower self-assessed understanding, and different trust in AI-generated code — reports the opposite
• Main structural paths remain substantively unchanged after controlling for gender, major, and AI tool use frequency — related
• Midterm self-efficacy (comfort and confidence) did not differ between conditions after three assignments, though both varied significantly across algorithmic topics — related
• Exploratory multi-group analyses suggest competence-related paths differ by educational level and gender, with heterogeneity concentrated downstream of intention — related
• An exploratory path model suggests perceived responsible behavior mediates the association between KBD and both learner motivation and acceptance — related
• Among Chinese higher vocational students, GenAI usage habits and usage contexts are positively associated with perceived learning outcomes while usage frequency is negatively associated, controlling for gender and grade — related
• Teachers who see AI usage opportunities more frequently use AI significantly more often (r = .45 in class) — related
• GAI-related and GAI-unrelated AI tools show no significant difference in their moderating effects on K-12 STEM learning outcomes — related
• Innovative competence differs by background variables, with AI interest level showing the strongest association — related
• High-frequency LLM users show higher minimum course outcomes and reduced score variability, though interaction level is not a dominant outcome predictor — related
• Across the student body as a whole, no clear statistical trend was confirmed between AI usage levels and code comprehension — related
• GenAI learning outcomes depend more on use quality (capability, reflective engagement, retained agency) than on frequency of use — related
• Perceived GAI advocacy–practice inconsistency is positively associated with both hindrance and challenge appraisal in students' actual experiences — related
• CVT structural relations are largely stable across gender and prior-education groupings, supporting relative universalism under variable-centered tests — related
• No significant subgroup difference was found in the magnitude of the direct effect of MA on reading comprehension for any moderator (except lower elementary non-significance) — related