Cited by 45Artificial Intelligence in EducationIntelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive LearningArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education

Influence of artificial intelligence tools on higher order thinking skills: a meta-analysis

Ilgun Dibek, Munevver, Sahin Kursad, Merve, Erdogan, Tolga·2025·Interactive Learning Environments

Abstract

The use of artificial intelligence (AI) has received scholarly attention and is becoming a common trend in the field of education, while the cultivation of higher order thinking (HOT) skills still remains as one of the crucial educational objectives. Recent years have seen substantial amount of research exploring the influence of Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIEd) use on each HOT skills of students, which necessitated a systematic review to amalgamate the findings quantitatively. This meta-analysis study set out to explore the effect of AIEd on students’ separate HOT skills and identify the effect of potential moderator variables. The analysis included 29 articles with a total of 2.966 participants between the years of 2000 and 2023. This research confirmed the use of AIEd had a medium positive effect on skills classified as HOT skills. The findings suggested that instructional settings which incorporated AI technologies enhanced students’ HOT skills 9.3% higher. This review also found that the variables of country, year of publication and AI tool/agent moderated the magnitude of effect sizes significantly. The findings offer extensive examination of AI technologies in educational settings and contribute to understanding of how and to what extent they influence students’ HOT skills.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/10494820.2024.2402028

Cites

144 of 144 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • The central boundary condition is that learning benefits depend on how learners interact with mediation-when students engage with AI outputs by questioning, comparing drafts, rejecting or adapting suggestions, and justifying compositional choices, the interaction constitutes active mediated learning rather than passive text transfer.

    “However, the central boundary condition is that learning benefits depend on how learners interact with mediation—when students engage with AI outputs by questioning, comparing drafts, rejecting or adapting suggestions, and justifying compositional choices, the interaction constitutes active mediated learning rather than passive text transfer (Garzón et al., 2025; Ilgun Dibek et al., 2025).”
  • Systematic reviews of AI in education describe accelerating use of AI tools for adaptive learning, intelligent tutoring, automated assessment feedback, and writing support, with reported associations to enhanced learner engagement, higher feedback quality, and a broad range of cognitive outcomes.

    “Systematic reviews of AI in education describe accelerating use of AI tools for adaptive learning, intelligent tutoring, automated assessment feedback, and writing support, with reported associations to enhanced learner engagement, higher feedback quality, and a broad range of cognitive outcomes (Garzón et al., 2025; Ilgun Dibek et al., 2025).”
  • These outcomes reflect AI's potential to foster higher-order thinking through mechanisms such as real-time feedback, interactive simulations, and scaffolded learning experiences.

    “These outcomes reflect AI's potential to foster higher-order thinking through mechanisms such as real-time feedback, interactive simulations, and scaffolded learning experiences [58].”

Cites

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 147 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ilgun Dibek, M., Sahin Kursad, M., & Erdogan, T.
Affiliations
TED University
Venue
Interactive Learning Environments
Published
2024-09-16
Volume
33
Issue
3
Pages
2216-2238
ISSN
  • 1049-4820 (ISSN-L)
  • 1744-5191
OpenAlex
W4402819405
Cited by
45
References
147
Citations by year
2026: 24 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 1
FWCI
2.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Interactive Learning Environments (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Keywords
artificial intelligence in education, higher-order thinking skills, AI tools, AI agents, cognitive skills, moderators, effect size, educational technology

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