Cited by 104Artificial Intelligence in EducationEducational Technology in LearningIntelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning

Exploring the impact of integrating AI tools in higher education using the zone of proximal development

Cai, Lianyu, Msafiri, Mgambi Msambwa, Kangwa, Daniel·2025·Education and Information Technologies

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10639-024-13112-0

Cites

195 of 195 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cai, L., Msafiri, M. M., & Kangwa, D.
Affiliations
Zhejiang Normal University (CN)
Corresponding author
Msafiri, Mgambi Msambwa
Venue
Education and Information Technologies
Published
2024-10-22
Volume
30
Issue
6
Pages
7191-7264
ISSN
  • 1360-2357 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-7608
OpenAlex
W4403654863
Cited by
104
References
195
Citations by year
2026: 64 · 2025: 36 · 2024: 4
FWCI
39.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Education and Information Technologies (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Educational Technology in Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
Keywords
artificial intelligence in education, higher education, zone of proximal development, scaffolding, cooperative learning, student motivation, self-assessment, academic integrity, teacher professional development, ethical AI, student engagement, learning outcomes

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review