The DOI matches its Crossref record; 127 of the 127 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Intelligent tutoring systems and learning outcomes: A meta-analysis
Abstract
Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITS) are computer programs that model learners’ psychological states to provide individualized instruction. They have been developed for diverse subject areas (e.g., algebra, medicine, law, reading) to help learners acquire domain-specific, cognitive and metacognitive knowledge. A meta-analysis was conducted on research that compared the outcomes from students learning from ITS to those learning from non-ITS learning environments. The meta-analysis examined how effect sizes varied with type of ITS, type of comparison treatment received by learners, type of learning outcome, whether knowledge to be learned was procedural or declarative, and other factors. After a search of major bibliographic databases, 107 effect sizes involving 14,321 participants were extracted and analyzed. The use of ITS was associated with greater achievement in comparison with teacher-led, large-group instruction (g .42), non-ITS computer-based instruction (g .57), and textbooks or workbooks (g .35). There was no significant difference between learning from ITS and learning from individualized human tutoring (g –.11) or small-group instruction (g .05). Significant, positive mean effect sizes were found regardless of whether the ITS was used as the principal means of instruction, a supplement to teacher-led instruction, an integral component of teacher-led instruction, or an aid to homework. Significant, positive effect sizes were found at all levels of education, in almost all subject domains evaluated, and whether or not the ITS provided feedback or modeled student misconceptions. The claim that ITS are relatively effective tools for learning is consistent with our analysis of potential publication bias.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
In the citing paper
“Every learner has unique learning contexts based on their prior knowledge about the topic, social background, economic well-being and emotional state [41].”
From Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIEd): a high-level academic and industry note 2021 (2022) · cites this paper as [41]
In the citing paper
“Despite being limited in terms of the domain that a particular intelligent tutoring system addresses, they have proven to be effective in providing relevant content to students, interacting with students [6] and improving students’ academic performance [18, 41].”
From Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIEd): a high-level academic and industry note 2021 (2022) · cites this paper as [41]
Citations
Cites
(1988) · Cited by 16,582
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/003465430298487 · Cited by 12,905
Wasserman, S. S., Hedges, L. V., & Olkin, I. (1988) · Journal of Educational Statistics · doi:10.2307/1164953 · Cited by 10,377
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2021) · doi:10.1002/9781119558378 · Cited by 9,799
(2000) · Cited by 9,198
The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results.
Rosenthal, R. (1979) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.86.3.638 · Cited by 9,068
An introduction to latent semantic analysis
Landauer, T. K., Foltz, P. W., & Laham, D. (1998) · Discourse Processes · doi:10.1080/01638539809545028 · Cited by 4,880
Fixed-and random-effects models in meta-analysis.
Hedges, L. V., & Vevea, J. L. (1998) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.3.4.486 · Cited by 2,977
The 2 Sigma Problem: The Search for Methods of Group Instruction as Effective as One-to-One Tutoring
BLOOM, B. S. (1984) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x013006004 · Cited by 2,734 · cited 1×
“Another notable contribution of VanLehn's review was that he reported an effect size of d ϭ 0.79 for human tutoring compared with no-treatment controls, a value much smaller than the frequently cited, twosigma effect sizes reported by Bloom (1984).”
ResultInfluentialHays, W. (1983) · Contemporary Psychology · doi:10.1037/022267 · Cited by 2,399
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 701–800 of 840
USO DE AGENTES INTELIGENTES EM CONTEXTOS EDUCACIONAIS: CHATBOTS EDUCACIONAIS E TUTORES INTELIGENTES
Almeida, A. B. B. (2026) · Revista Multidisciplinar do Nordeste Mineiro · doi:10.61164/v3qvve66
Yetik, S. S. (2024) · DergiPark (Istanbul University)
Lörch, L., & Brod, G. (2026) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-8797891/v1
Wang, W., & Zheng, W. (2025) · International Conference on Educational Technology (ICET) · doi:10.1109/icet67421.2025.11380603
“Despite these advancements, traditional ITS systems still face several limitations, including static knowledge, limited interaction forms, coarse-grained feedback, and rigid learning path design [35].”
Onwuzurike, M. A., & Ojochide, F. (2025) · International Journal of Scientific Research and Modern Technology · doi:10.38124/ijsrmt.v4i8.1271 · Cited by 1
Impacto de la percepción universitaria sobre el aprendizaje y uso de la inteligencia artificial
Lemus, L. R., & Rodríguez, C. A. R. (2026) · Revista UNIMAR · doi:10.31948/ru.v44i1.4788
Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Personalized Learning: A Thorough Secondary Research Examination
Shaikh, D. S. A. (2025) · International Journal of Research & Technology · doi:10.64882/ijrt.v13.is4.827
“A meta-analysis conducted by Ma et al. (2014), which included 107 studies, revealed that ITS enhanced learning outcomes with an average effect size of 0.66, indicating a notable improvement compared to traditional teaching methods.”
InfluentialEducators as Cognitive Architects in AI-Augmented Learning Environments
Calado, S. (2026) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-4521-5.ch004
Cognitive Sovereignty: A Theory and Initial Validation of Human Autonomy in Algorithmic EnvironmentsPreprint
Mia, P. D. M. H., & Ali, M. M. (2026) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-9145237/v1
Personalised Educational Scaffolding
Spiteri, B. J., & Dingli, A. (2026) · Lecture notes on data engineering and communications technologies · doi:10.1007/978-981-95-4423-3_15
Reyes-Sánchez, J. D. J. (2026) · IGI Global eBooks · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-3638-1.ch015
CAD: AI-Agent Framework for Learning Word Game
Vu, D.-H., Minh, D. V., The, V. T., & Anh, M. H. (2026) · Communications in computer and information science · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-21625-0_14
Ethical and equitable heutagogy: integrating AI to support learner agency
Newfield, T. (2026) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2026.1780826
Ali, S. R., Khan, M. O., Faraz, M., & Imran, S. A. (2026) · Regional lens. · doi:10.55737/rl.2025.41184
Henning, M., Ramos, V. F. C., Gracioli, G., & Cechinel, C. (2026) · Lecture notes in educational technology · doi:10.1007/978-981-95-7580-0_18
Tithi, S. D., Tian, X., Limke, A., Chi, M., & Barnes, T. M. (2026) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3772318.3791631 · Cited by 1
“Intelligent tutoring systems (ITSs) provide adaptive scaffolding and personalized interventions, demonstrating significant positive impacts on learning outcomes [44, 49].”
Advancing Learning Environments With AI Agents
Dıaconıța, V., & Dinca, L.-G. (2026) · Smart innovation, systems and technologies · doi:10.1007/978-981-95-6136-0_4
Mao, M., Zhu, S., Leng, X., & Qin, Q. (2026) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1705646 · Cited by 2
“Subsequent studies demonstrated that well-designed ITS could produce learning outcomes comparable to those achieved by human instructors, thereby establishing AI as a legitimate instructional tool rather than a purely supplementary technology (Ma et al., 2014).”
Jamil, H. M. (2026) · ACM Transactions on Computing Education · doi:10.1145/3811544
“Meta-analyses report learning gains relative to traditional instruction [12], but effects are typically measured within single courses or tightly scoped exercises.”
Hannan, B., & Bokhove, C. (2026) · International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge (LAK) · doi:10.1145/3785022.3785024
“May 01, 2026, Bergen, Norway Brody Hannan and Christian Bokhove transfer to external learning outcomes such as standardised assessments remain inconclusive [1, 7], or have notable methodological limitations.”
Solving Shaded Area Problems by Deduction-Guided Symbolic Reasoning
Dou, J., Wang, W. L., Yu, X., & Zhang, J. (2025) · International Conference on Intelligent Education and Intelligent Research (IEIR) · doi:10.1109/ieir67391.2025.11491224
“With the continuous advancement of artificial intelligence, computer-assisted education has achieved remarkable progress in mathematics, particularly in automated problem solving [1].”
Wang, T., Yu, X., & Cheng, Y. (2025) · International Conference on Intelligent Education and Intelligent Research (IEIR) · doi:10.1109/ieir67391.2025.11491492
“Meta-analyses by Ma et al. [5] and Kulik & Fletcher [6] shows that ITS interventions generally result in moderate learning gains (effect sizes between 0.3 and 0.4) compared to traditional instruction.”
InfluentialBuilding AI companions that prioritise learning over performance
Khosravi, H., Gašević, D., Sadiq, S. W., Yan, L., Lodge, J. M., Tangen, J. M., Denny, P. C., DiCerbo, K. E., Shum, S. B., & Baker, R. S. (2026) · Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2026.100680 · Cited by 5
Chen, X. (2026) · Cogent Education · doi:10.1080/2331186x.2026.2667534 · Cited by 5
Kumar, S. (2026) · Lecture notes in networks and systems · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-18891-5_11
Opportunities and Solutions for Developing Core Skills and STEM Competencies in Higher Education
Molnár, G., Nagy, E., Orosz, B., & Karl, É. (2026) · Lecture notes in networks and systems · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-18891-5_21
Tracing affect in digital learning: Combining log data and introspective momentary assessments
Hilpert, J., & Janson, M. P. (2026) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2026.105668
The Impact of Intelligent Tutoring Systems on Mathematics Performance in Higher Education StudentsPreprint
Ouadoudi, Y. E., & Vicente, G. R. (2026) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-9149711/v1
AI and ML-Enabled Adaptive Learning Technologies for Personalized Education Pathways
Pardaev, J., Kirillova, E., Nazirjon, R., Klochko, E., & Lydia, E. L. (2026) · Lecture notes in electrical engineering · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-20544-5_50
Alhumaid, K. F., & Ayoubi, K. (2026) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su18115595
Li, H., Liang, L., Han, Y., Zhang, C., Song, Q., & Han, Z. (2026) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci16060876
“Recent studies indicate that evidence-based formative assessment and intelligent tutoring systems can significantly enhance instructional transparency in high-cognitive-load courses, supporting students in conducting efficient self-regulated learning (Ma et al., 2014; Winne, 2022).”
Zaky, H. (2026) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.6810085
Implementing AI-Based Recommender Systems in Anesthesiology Education
Keating, D. P., Pham, P. D., Hollon, M., Booth, G. J., & Woodworth, G. E. (2026) · Anesthesia & Analgesia · doi:10.1213/ane.0000000000008087
An AI-Centric Multimodal Framework for Cognitive Productivity and Digital Wellbeing
Kumar, B., Garg, P., Garg, A., Nanwal, J., & Yadav, P. (2026) · International Conference on Intelligent Computing and Automation for Sustainable Solutions (ICASS) · doi:10.1109/icass69550.2026.11547523
Real-time cognitive-affective dynamics of failure feedback in a technology-based learning task
Ackermann, H., Lange, A. L., Dumont, H., Hafner, V. V., & Lazarides, R. (2026) · Communications Psychology · doi:10.1038/s44271-026-00487-8
“Research on ITS, for example, highlights that the computer-based learning environments can lead to moderate to strong improvements in learning outcomes compared to traditional instruction and, in some cases, their effectiveness is even similar to that of human tutoring 3,27,28 .”
Amiruzzaman, S., & Amiruzzaman, M. (2026) · Impact in Computics · doi:10.65500/computics-2026-003
“For context, Ma et al. [4] reported g = 0.42 for ITS in general education, and Kahn [23] reported d = 0.69 for technology-based literacy interventions for DHH learners (though note that Kahn's analysis included non-AI technologies with generally lower methodological rigor).”
InfluentialKaundal, R. (2026) · Global International Research Thoughts · doi:10.36676/girt.v14.i1.140
Algoritmik Habitus ve Eğitimin Geleceği: Yapay Zekânın Pedagojik, Etik ve Toplumsal Etkileri
Babaoğlan, E., & Çelik, E. (2026) · Toplum ve Kültür Araştırmaları Dergisi · doi:10.48131/jscs.1942303
Farzan, F., & Farzan, R. (2026) · ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale (L@S) · doi:10.1145/3774398.3811590
“Personalizedlearningsystemsgenerally demonstrate positiveachieve-ment effects relative to traditional instruction [19], although large-scale implementations show variable gains, indicating that effectiveness depends on how personalization is designed and enacted [24].”
Artificial intelligence and academic anxiety? a meta-analysis
Wang, W., Diao, L., & Yu, J. (2026) · BMC Psychology · doi:10.1186/s40359-026-05018-y
Gyawali, A., Al-Absi, A. A., & Al-athwari, B. (2026) · Environment-Behaviour Proceedings Journal · doi:10.21834/e-bpj.v11i37.7897
Hatchett, J., Mallick, D. B., Bradford, B. C., & Baraniuk, R. G. (2026) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-29755-6_19
Anonymous, & Bentley, I. (2026) · Physical Review Physics Education Research · doi:10.1103/bdl1-6bn4 · Cited by 1
Exploring the Effects of AI-based Feedback on EFL Students’ L2 Writing Autonomy
Sağlamel, H., & Düz, R. (2026) · Journal of Learning and Teaching in Digital Age · doi:10.53850/joltida.1815563
Awan, A., Marasco, E., & Barcomb, A. (2026) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-30015-7_26
An Agentic AI System for Personalized Learning in Computing Education
Sun, Y., Suleiman, B., & Singh, S. (2026) · IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON) · doi:10.1109/educon67543.2026.11574125
“ITSs have been shown to promote personalized learning and improve outcomes [13].”
Adaptive Tutoring: Leveraging Generative AI to Provide Multi-agent Learning Support to USAF Pilots
Parsons, M., Hernandez, C., Biesler, D., Wierzba, J., Lee, J., Smith, A., Wood, T., & Beck, N. (2026) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-30015-7_14
AI-Driven Personalization in Education
Yadav, P. (2026) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-9725-2.ch001
Borja, S. C. Q., Arana, G. A. M., Farías, B. M. L., & Peña, J. A. A. (2026) · Reincisol · doi:10.65835/reincisol.v5(9)1618
Schmutz, D., Blanchette, J. C., & Strickroth, S. (2026) · ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (ITiCSE) · doi:10.1145/3803400.3809319
“These learning barriers can be addressed by technology-enhanced learning approaches such as virtual learning environments and intelligent tutoring systems [16, 20, 35].”
Exploring OpenClaw’s potential for adaptive, self-hosted educational AI
Baradziej, S., & Pal, R. (2026) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2026.1859178
Akhmetshin, E., Pardaev, J., Bobur, M., Kirillova, E., & Kumar, K. V. (2026) · Lecture notes in electrical engineering · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-20235-2_49
Schaaf, J., Rolfes, T., Nagy, G., & Heinze, A. (2026) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2026.1842708
Behavioral Pathways Behind Students’ Willingness to Pay for GenAI in Higher EducationPreprint
Baral, S., Adhikari, S., Buck, E. B., & Khatiwada, P. (2026) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-10210622/v1
Schroeder, N. L., Zhang, S., Gladstone, J. R., & Bhat, S. (2026) · Journal of Educational Computing Research · doi:10.1177/07356331261467266
“We have decades of evidence about the effects and important features of intelligent tutoring systems (Kulik & Fletcher, 2016; Ma et al., 2014; Steenbergen-Hu & Cooper, 2014; VanLehn, 2011) and educational scaffolding (Belland et al., 2017; Kim et al., 2018) that can help guide the types of…”
Kha, H. T. (2026) · International Conference on Computational Intelligence and Communication Networks (CICN) · doi:10.1109/cicn70047.2026.11594269
LeTendre, G. (2026) · The Conversation · doi:10.64628/aai.a6ttnsygg
From Answer-First to Decision-First: An Interaction Pattern for Creative Judgment in AI Chat
Hacioglu, N., Leva, M. C., & Lee, H. (2026) · Creativity and Cognition · doi:10.1145/3803784.3816828
“Question-based support [6, 8], intelligent tutoring systems [11, 19], and guided learning modes can encourage explanation, reconsideration, and structured feedback cycles [1, 13, 21].”
Generative Künstliche Intelligenz im Kontext von Lehren, Lernen und Beraten
Scheiter, K., Bach, K. M., Bauer, E., Brod, G., Bromme, R., Buhl, H. M., Gagl, B., Greiff, S., Hefter, M. H., Janke, S., et al. (2026) · Psychologische Rundschau · doi:10.1026/0033-3042/a000769
College Student Success and Well-Being
Bowman, N. A., & Perez, M.-V. (2026) · doi:10.1093/9780197759424.003.0025
Udo, M.-A. A., Imafidon, F. I., & Godwin³, A. (2026) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-10443013/v1
Artificial intelligence for online and hybrid teaching, learning, and assessment: Systematic review
Wang, Z., Wang, J., Guo, J., & Hu, G. (2026) · Studies In Educational Evaluation · doi:10.1016/j.stueduc.2026.101656
FANG, Z., Lin, W., Hong, R., Sutarat, P., & Jin, Y. (2026) · Journal of Education and Learning Reviews · doi:10.60027/jelr.2026.e3244
Yankova, N., Cho, J., Li, H., Yang, K., Copur‐Gencturk, Y., & Tang, J. (2026) · Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education · doi:10.1007/s10857-026-09776-9
AI-Supported Lesson Planning for Listening, Speaking, Reading, and Writing
Sharma, S. D. (2026) · IGI Global eBooks · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-8460-3.ch004
Digital Twin-Based Mathematical Modeling of Learning Systems
Gupta, V., Yadav, A. K., & Das, S. (2026) · Studies in big data · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-31204-4_13
The role of artificial intelligence in personalising the teaching process at medical universities
Ślęzak, D. (2026) · Humanities & Social Sciences Reviews · doi:10.18510/hssr.2026.1428
AI-Powered Adaptive Learning Platforms for Personalized Mathematics
Chhabra, V., Chauhan, D., Nishad, C. S., & Sahni, M. (2026) · Studies in big data · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-31204-4_4
Dlamini, L. V., Mosia, M. S., & Egara, F. O. (2026) · F1000Research · doi:10.12688/f1000research.187529.1
Zhang, T. (2026) · Learning and Motivation · doi:10.1016/j.lmot.2026.102322 · Cited by 1
Guaman, L. M. V., & Guallo, E. T. T. (2026) · Ciencia Interdisciplinaria Internacional · doi:10.70577/cieninter.v4i3.45
Naufal, M. A., Tasni, N., Syukriani, A., Sovia, A., & Upu, H. (2026) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci16081248
Alkhayat, A. (2026) · IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Reality (ICIR) · doi:10.1109/icir70631.2026.11628320
“This is further corroborated by the findings of [20], who reported that intelligent tutoring systems enhance learning outcomes compared to traditional instruction, especially through personalized feedback and adaptive support.”
Padmavathi, T., Rajavel Murugan, P., Sethuraman, K. R., & Judson Neslin, J. (2026) · Cureus · doi:10.7759/cureus.114362
“These concepts closely resemble the findings and perceptions proposed by this study [14,15].”
Berame, J. S., Boholst, K. A., & Tawagon, R. R. (2026) · International Conference on e-Education, e-Business, e-Management and e-Learning · doi:10.1109/ic4e69618.2026.11631571
“Studies report that senior high school learners in General Biology struggle with conceptual retention using such methods [6], while meta-analyses indicate that moderate pretest scores allow greater gains when adaptive technologies are introduced [7].”
di Padova, M., Guerriero, M. A., Ruberto, M., Moscatelli, F., Mancini, N., Monda, M., Messina, G., Polito, R., & Colecchia, F. P. (2026) · Communications in computer and information science · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-31853-4_12
Lim, J., Park, K., & Kim, M. (2026) · International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education · doi:10.1007/s10763-026-10711-w
“…ITSs were initially developed for secondary and post-secondary learners in domains such as algebra and physics, they are now increasingly used in elementary education and diverse subject areas, with mathematics remaining a major domain of ITS research (Kulik & Fletcher, 2016; Ma et al., 2014).”
Uncovering AI-Related Risks in Education: Evidence from Archival Incident Reports
Lee, C. K. H., Ho, G. T. S., Tsang, Y. P., & Tse, Y. K. (2026) · International Conference on Information Technology and Education Technology (ITET) · doi:10.1109/itet70052.2026.11650905
“Prior research has predominantly focused on pedagogical and instructional applications, including intelligent tutoring systems [5], personalised and mobile learning environments [6].”
Adaptive and AI-Based Teaching Models for Mathematics, Science, and Engineering Education
Lestari, A., Aswad, M. H., & Irma, T. (2026) · IGI Global eBooks · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-9330-8.ch002
Uddin, S. M. J., Jin, Z., & Chaudhary, N. (2026) · International Journal of Construction Management · doi:10.1080/15623599.2026.2717617
Li, S., Sun, D., Yu, Y., Zhuang, X., & Liu, B. (2026) · International Conference on Computer Science and Technologies in Education (CSTE) · doi:10.1109/cste69562.2026.11649707
“Ma et al.'s [8] meta-analysis of intelligent tutoring systems revealed that such systems have a significant promoting effect on college students' learning.”
AI-Augmented Creativity in Personalized Learning Pathways
Eziokwu, U. J. (2026) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-2600-3663-1.ch007
Effects of AI-Supported Education on Academic Achievement : A Meta-Analysis
Kwak, S.-H., & Gyun, H. E. O. (2026) · Journal of Fisheries and Marine Sciences Education · doi:10.13000/jfmse.2026.8.38.4.686
Alghamdi, L. H., & Alghizzi, T. M. (2026) · Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.3390/bs16091478
Learning and Training: Approaches Based on Serious Games and Virtual Reality
Chittaro, L., & Buttussi, F. (2026) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-27648-9_112-1
Sibley, L., Berner, T., & Schmalfeldt, T. (2026) · Computers and Education Open · doi:10.1016/j.caeo.2026.100420
Bognár, L., Horváth, P., Joós, A., Kenyeres, K. L., Nagy, B., & Takács, A. M. (2026) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci16091389
Hoang, D. D. (2026) · International Conference on Distance Education and Learning (ICDEL) · doi:10.1109/icdel70250.2026.11663719
“Ma et al. report significant learning advantages for ITS versus non-ITS conditions in a broad meta-analysis [8]; Kulik and Fletcher similarly estimate median effects around two-thirds of (RQ2) stepwise scaffolding reliably enhance learning and can sustain on-task behavior [8], [9], [12].”
InfluentialEncouraging Growth in Programming Education: Does Growth Mindset Feedback Influence Learning?
Koch, N. N., Kapfenstein, A.-K., & Wirzberger, M. (2026) · Technology Knowledge and Learning · doi:10.1007/s10758-026-09996-1
Bokhove, C., Davies, B., Cen, J., Špakula, J., & Gammack, D. (2026) · ZDM · doi:10.1007/s11858-026-01829-w
Muñoz-Blat, M., Vicente-Martínez, P., Soria‐Olivas, E., Sánchez-Montañés, M. A., García-Escrivà, M. Á., & William, E. (2026) · International Journal of Gastronomy and Food Science · doi:10.1016/j.ijgfs.2026.101641
(2026) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9781394452484.ref
Carballo, N. G., Gutiérrez, J., & Balcázar, A. (2026) · Revista perspectivas/Perspectiva · doi:10.22463/25909215.5524
Exploring the Effects of Generative AI on Learning Using the ISAR Model
Bauer, E., Greiff, S., Graesser, A. C., Scheiter, K., & Sailer, M. (2026) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-24819-0_3
Xiang, J. (2026) · International Conference on Educational Digitalization and Computer Science in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area · doi:10.1145/3828183.3828338
“Meta-analytic evidence further showed that intelligent tutoring systems can improve learning outcomes relative to several non-ITS conditions [6].”
Hoppe, T., Loibl, K., & Leuders, T. (2026) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2026.1857661
Metadata
- Authors
- Ma, W., Adesope, O. O., Nesbit, J. C., & Liu, Q.
- Affiliations
- Simon Fraser University (CA)
- Washington State University (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Educational Psychology
- Published
- 2014-11
- Volume
- 106
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 901-918
- ISSN
- 0022-0663 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-2176
- OpenAlex
- W2117655204
- Cited by
- 840
- References
- 127
- Citations by year
- 2026: 179 · 2025: 132 · 2024: 99 · 2023: 65 · 2022: 67 · 2021: 69 · 2020: 70 · 2019: 41 · 2018: 43 · 2017: 36 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 17
- FWCI
- 24.90
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Educational Psychology (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
- Washington State University
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
- Keywords
- intelligent tutoring systems, learning outcomes, personalized learning, computer-assisted instruction, teacher-centered instruction, small group instruction, homework help, metacognitive knowledge, feedback, misconceptions, publication bias, effect size
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
