The impact of adopting AI educational technologies on projected course satisfaction in university students
Open accessAbstract
Artificial Intelligence (AI) applications for education are being developed at an increasing pace. It seems reasonable to assume that these applications would enhance student experiences and course satisfaction, and that therefore educational institutions should invest in these technologies to enhance their student offer. However, this should be tested empirically. In the current study a gender-balanced sample of 302 UK students rated course satisfaction, completed the General Attitudes towards AI Scale (GAAIS), comfortableness with AI educational applications, and course satisfaction if AI educational applications were adopted. Although students were, on average, moderately comfortable with AI educational applications, course satisfaction dropped in response to their hypothetical adoption. AI applications that assigned summative grades or that offered wellbeing support gave rise to the highest levels of discomfort. Students were more comfortable with career support, formative course support, and administrative support. Positive and Negative AI attitudes predicted the satisfaction difference, with mediation via comfortableness with applications. We recommend that Higher Education Institutions exercise caution before making major investments in AI educational applications.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Engaging with a technology that lacks empathy might be seen as an insufficient form of support, even though it has the capability to offer helpful advice.
“As Rodway and Schepman (2023) expand, engaging with a technology that lacks empathy might be seen as an insufficient form of support, even though it has the capability to offer helpful advice.”
From Exploring the effects of artificial intelligence on student and academic well-being in higher education: a mini-review (2025) · cites this paper as Rodway and Schepman, 2023
One of the key drawbacks in academic settings is the increasing reliance on AI tools.
“On the contrary, research studies (Cambra-Fierro et al., 2024; Rodway and Schepman, 2023; Zhai et al., 2024) show that one of the key drawbacks in academic settings is the increasing reliance on AI tools.”
From Exploring the effects of artificial intelligence on student and academic well-being in higher education: a mini-review (2025) · cites this paper as Rodway and Schepman, 2023
Some students prefer automated assistance over human support to avoid feeling judged.
“Some research suggests some students prefer automated assistance over human support to avoid feeling judged [54, 113]”
From AI Sensing and Intervention in Higher Education: Student Perceptions of Learning Impacts, Affective Responses, and Ethical Priorities (2026) · cites this paper as [113]
The effectiveness of AIED on learning achievement remains questionable.
“Despite the various technologies and techniques in AIED, the effectiveness of AIED on learning achievement remains questionable (Rodway & Schepman, 2023).”
From A systematic review of literature reviews on artificial intelligence in education (AIED): a roadmap to a future research agenda (2024) · cites this paper as Rodway & Schepman, 2023
Cites
<b>lavaan</b> : An <i>R</i> Package for Structural Equation Modeling
Rosseel, Y. (2012) · Journal of Statistical Software · doi:10.18637/jss.v048.i02 · Cited by 27,955 · see citing works
Zawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M., & Gouverneur, F. (2019) · International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education · doi:10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0 · Cited by 7,242 · see citing works
Algorithm aversion: People erroneously avoid algorithms after seeing them err.
Dietvorst, B. J., Simmons, J. P., & Massey, C. (2015) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: General · doi:10.1037/xge0000033 · Cited by 3,232 · see citing works
Li, C.-H. (2016) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/s13428-015-0619-7 · Cited by 3,031 · see citing works
Kyriazos, T. A. (2018) · Psychology · doi:10.4236/psych.2018.98126 · Cited by 1,882 · see citing works
Lee, M. K. (2018) · Big Data & Society · doi:10.1177/2053951718756684 · Cited by 1,338 · see citing works
Chiu, T. K. F., Xia, Q., Zhou, X., Chai, C. S., & Cheng, M. (2023) · Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100118 · Cited by 1,181 · see citing works
Machine learning in medicine: Addressing ethical challenges
Vayena, E., Blasimme, A., & Cohen, I. G. (2018) · PLOS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1002689 · Cited by 912 · see citing works
Ouyang, F., Zheng, L., & Jiao, P. (2022) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-022-10925-9 · Cited by 831 · see citing works
Chatbots for learning: A review of educational chatbots for the Facebook Messenger
Smutny, P., & Schreiberova, P. (2020) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103862 · Cited by 770 · see citing works
Kaya, F., Aydin, F., Schepman, A., Rodway, P., Yetişensoy, O., & Demir Kaya, M. (2024) · International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2022.2151730 · Cited by 688 · see citing works
Self-citationHuang, A. Y. Q., Lu, O. H. T., & Yang, S. J. H. (2023) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104684 · Cited by 605 · see citing works
Systematic Review: Trust-Building Factors and Implications for Conversational Agent Design
Rheu, M., Shin, J. Y., Peng, W., & Huh-Yoo, J. (2021) · International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2020.1807710 · Cited by 360 · see citing works
Chocarro, R., Cortiñas, M., & Marcos-Matás, G. (2023) · Educational Studies · doi:10.1080/03055698.2020.1850426 · Cited by 343 · see citing works
Nye, B. D. (2015) · International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education · doi:10.1007/s40593-014-0028-6 · Cited by 259 · see citing works
Pitchforth, J., Fahy, K., Ford, T., Wolpert, M., Viner, R. M., & Hargreaves, D. S. (2019) · Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1017/s0033291718001757 · Cited by 227 · see citing works
AI: New source of competitiveness in higher education
Hannan, E., & Liu, S. (2023) · Competitiveness Review: An International Business Journal · doi:10.1108/cr-03-2021-0045 · Cited by 172 · see citing works
Artificial intelligence and the value of transparency
Walmsley, J. (2021) · AI & SOCIETY · doi:10.1007/s00146-020-01066-z · Cited by 131 · see citing works
Trust in artificial Intelligence: a five country study
Gillespie, N., Lockey, S., & Curtis, C. (2021) · doi:10.14264/e34bfa3 · Cited by 104 · see citing works
Kaufmann, E. (2021) · Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2021.100028 · Cited by 36 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Klimova, B., & Pikhart, M. (2025) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1498132 · Cited by 203 · see citing works
Shi, J., Liu, W., & Hu, K. (2025) · Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.3390/bs15050705 · Cited by 77 · see citing works
Han, B., Ma, Y., Coghlan, S., McKay, D., Buchanan, G., & Smith, W. (2026) · Proceedings of the 2026 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3772318.3790360 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
- Authors
- Rodway, P., & Schepman, A.
- Affiliations
- University of Chester (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Rodway, Paul
- Venue
- Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2023
- Volume
- 5
- Pages
- 100150
- ISSN
- 2666-920X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4381686884
- Cited by
- 144
- References
- 20
- Citations by year
- 2026: 33 · 2025: 52 · 2024: 49 · 2023: 10
- FWCI
- 33.79
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Educational Technology and Pedagogy
- Keywords
- course satisfaction, university students, well-being support, career support, artificial intelligence adoption
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
