Cited by 46Artificial Intelligence in EducationArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationIntelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) on students’ motivation and engagement

Open access
Xia, Qi, Li, Weijia, Yang, Yiming, Weng, Xiaojing, Chiu, Thomas K.F.·2025·Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence

Abstract

The rapid development of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) technologies has revolutionized higher education, enhancing personalized learning and teaching practices. This study conducts a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the effects of GenAI on university students' motivation and engagement (cognitive, behavioural, emotional, and agency). By synthesizing experimental studies and applying association rule mining, the study (i) identifies significant positive impacts of GenAI on students' motivation and engagement across diverse educational settings. (ii) key moderating variables, such as subject category, learning strategy, and context of GenAI usage, are shown to influence these effects. (iii) subject category impacts cognitive and emotional engagement, while sample size moderates behavioural engagement. (iv) However, no significant moderating effects were observed on agency engagement. (v) The findings further highlight that individual and small group learning with GenAI, especially using ChatGPT, significantly enhances cognitive and emotional engagement. These findings contribute to the practical application of GenAI in higher education by offering actionable insights into optimizing learning strategies and engagement.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100455

Cites

82 of 82 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

1 of the 83 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Xia, Q., Li, W., Yang, Y., Weng, X., & Chiu, T. K. F.
Affiliations
  • Zhejiang University (CN)
  • Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (DE)
  • University of Science and Technology of China (CN)
  • Education University of Hong Kong (HK)
  • Chinese University of Hong Kong (HK)
Corresponding author
Weng, Xiaojing
Venue
Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2025-12
Volume
9
Pages
100455
ISSN
2666-920X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4412988376
Cited by
45
References
83
Citations by year
2026: 41 · 2025: 4
FWCI
6.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
The Education University of Hong Kong
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 › Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
Keywords
generative AI, student motivation, student engagement, higher education, ChatGPT, cognitive engagement, behavioral engagement, emotional engagement, learning strategies, subject categories, small group learning, individual learning

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