The DOI matches its Crossref record; 58 of the 59 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Exploring AI-mediated informal digital learning of English (AI-IDLE): a mixed-method investigation of Chinese EFL learners’ AI adoption and experiences
Open accessAbstract
Recent advancements in natural language processing and large language models have ushered language learning into the age of artificial intelligence (AI).Recognizing the affordances of generative AI tools, this paper aims to examine the degree to which L2 learners accepted and leveraged large language model platforms (e.g.ChatGPT, Bing Chat) for the informal digital learning of English (IDLE) purposes.Employing an explanatory sequential mixed-method design, this study draws on the technology acceptance model (TAM) and collects data via an adapted TAM questionnaire and an interview guide.A total of 867 Chinese EFL (English as a foreign language) learners answered the online survey, while 20 attended the post-survey interviews.Drawing on a validated structural model that elucidates the inter-factor relationships of perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, intention to use, and actual use, the quantitative analysis provides statistical accounts for EFL learners' adoption of Generative Pre-trained Transformer (GPT) technologies.The qualitative findings, derived from the interview data, reveal three key themes: (1) how perceived usefulness of chatbots for IDLE emerges from hands-on experimentation with these tools; (2) how intention to use increases as learners negotiate chatbot affordances and constraints; and (3) how actual use of chatbots for IDLE involves using these tools as tutors or conversation partners.Connections between quantitative and qualitative findings enhance our understanding of how EFL learners negotiate the affordances and constraints of highly capable AI technologies to participate in creative IDLE practices.By understanding these practices, this study draws attention to the attitudes and practices that constitute AI literacies, ultimately offering implications for future classroom practices and research.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“ChatGPT's ability to deliver immediate feedback and contextualized examples appears to have contributed to learners' vocabulary gains (Karataş et al., 2024;Liu et al., 2024).”
From Integrating ChatGPT for vocabulary learning and retention: A classroom-based study of Saudi EFL learners (2025) · cites this paper as Liu et al., 2024
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences
Muller, K. E., & Cohen, J. (1989) · Technometrics · doi:10.2307/1270020 · Cited by 99,603
Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology
Davis, F. D. (1989) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/249008 · Cited by 68,483
Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling
Tabri, N., & Elliott, C. M. (2012) · Canadian Graduate Journal of Sociology and Criminology · doi:10.15353/cgjsc.v1i1.3787 · Cited by 39,094
A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8 · Cited by 38,459
(1998) · Cited by 36,049
(1998) · DigitalCommons - Kennesaw State University (Kennesaw State University) · Cited by 13,997
Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research
นิลพันธุ์, ม. (2010) · Silpakorn Educational Research Journal · Cited by 9,351
Hanrahan, G. (2008) · CRC Press eBooks · doi:10.1201/9781420067972-10 · Cited by 8,196
(2006) · Cited by 7,081
Venkatesh, V. (2000) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.11.4.342.11872 · Cited by 6,664
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Wang, Y., Derakhshan, A., & Ghiasvand, F. (2025) · System · doi:10.1016/j.system.2025.103791 · Cited by 199
Liu, G., Darvin, R., & Ma, C. (2024) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2024.108362 · Cited by 178
Self-citationLo, C. K., Yu, P. L. H., Xu, S., Ng, D. T. K., & Jong, M. S. (2024) · Smart Learning Environments · doi:10.1186/s40561-024-00342-5 · Cited by 342
Chen, D., Liu, W., & Liu, X. (2024) · Acta Psychologica · doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2024.104442 · Cited by 173
Pan, Z., & Wang, Y. (2025) · European Journal of Education · doi:10.1111/ejed.70020 · Cited by 143
Metadata
- Authors
- Liu, G. L., Darvin, R., & Ma, C.
- Affiliations
- Chinese University of Hong Kong (HK)
- University of British Columbia (CA)
- City University of Hong Kong (HK)
- Corresponding author
- Liu, Guangxiang Leon
- Venue
- Computer Assisted Language Learning
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2024-02-02
- Volume
- 38
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1632-1660
- ISSN
- 0958-8221 (ISSN-L)
- 1744-3210
- OpenAlex
- W4391473908
- Cited by
- 299
- References
- 59
- Citations by year
- 2026: 145 · 2025: 125 · 2024: 29
- FWCI
- 470.26
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Computer Assisted Language Learning (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- CityU Scholars (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
- Social Sciences › Education › English Language Learning and Teaching
- Social Sciences › Education › Artificial Intelligence in Education
- Keywords
- generative AI in language learning, large language models, informal digital learning, English as a foreign language, Chinese learners of English, artificial intelligence adoption, technology acceptance model, perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, intention to use, AI literacy, ChatGPT, Bing Chat
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
