Low- and intermediate-proficiency students report higher perceived usefulness, ease of use, and satisfaction for AI-assisted English tools than high-proficiency students¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 2 studies · 2 associational r2 · q2 · i1–i2
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i1 Both Low- and Intermediate-proficiency groups reported higher perceived usefulness than the High-proficiency group (mean differences 0.377 and 0.381), while Low and Intermediate did not differ. → Wu J 2026 q2 i2 Perceived ease of use and satisfaction also differed across proficiency groups by omnibus ANOVA (PEOU η2 = 0.051; satisfaction η2 = 0.036), with High-proficiency students lowest. → Wu J 2026 (2)

Evidence¶

Wu J 2026¶

Wu J, Wang Y, He Y, Yin X, Chen F and Wan B (2026) Acceptance of AI-assisted English language learning tools in higher education: psychological correlates across disciplinary and proficiency groups. Front. Psychol. 17:1806457. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1806457

q2 · i1 · associational · r2

Tukey HSD post hoc comparisons following a significant omnibus ANOVA for perceived usefulness, F(2, 207) = 4.25, p = 0.016, η2 = 0.039; the quote reports the "mean difference = 0.377" and 0.381 contrasts against the High group. High-proficiency n = 30.

"Tukey HSD comparisons indicated that both the Low-proficiency group (mean difference = 0.377, p = 0.009) and the Intermediate-proficiency group (mean difference = 0.381, p = 0.006) reported higher perceived usefulness than the High-proficiency group."

Wu J 2026 (2)¶

Wu J, Wang Y, He Y, Yin X, Chen F and Wan B (2026) Acceptance of AI-assisted English language learning tools in higher education: psychological correlates across disciplinary and proficiency groups. Front. Psychol. 17:1806457. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1806457

q2 · i2 · associational · r2

Omnibus one-way ANOVA across Low (n = 77), Intermediate (n = 103), and High (n = 30) proficiency groups on perceived ease of use shows a significant difference with "η2 = 0.051"; satisfaction also differed significantly (F = 3.85, p = 0.023, η2 = 0.036), with the High group lowest on both.

"For perceived ease of use, mean levels also differed across proficiency groups, F(2, 207) = 5.59, p = 0.004, η2 = 0.051."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Humanities students report higher perceived usefulness, ease of use, and behavioral intention for AI-assisted English tools than STEM students, with small effect sizes — related
• Some ESL learners felt their English was not high enough to use ASR because their speech was not always intelligible to it, although overall perceived usefulness was positive — related
• Gender, age and English proficiency show nuanced group differences in chatbot attitudes and concerns — related
• Participation in the short INSIGHT training session is associated with a significant pre-post increase in teachers’ perceived ease of use of AI-based technologies — related
• Students in secondary mathematics report high acceptance of the domain-specific AI chatbot ADA across all Technology Acceptance Model dimensions — related