Cited by 29EFL/ESL Teaching and LearningStudent Assessment and FeedbackEnglish Language Learning and Teaching

University Students' Writing Feedback Literacy in the AI Era: The Interplay of Generative AI Acceptance, Writing Anxiety and Writing Self‐Efficacy in Chinese EMI Educational Contexts

Zhou, Changshuang, Wang, Yongliang·2026·European Journal of Education

Abstract

ABSTRACT As artificial intelligence (AI) tools reshape second language (L2) writing, how technological and psychological factors jointly shape English‐medium instruction (EMI) students' writing feedback literacy remains underexplored. Using an online questionnaire with 500 Chinese EMI university students, this study employed structural equation modelling (SEM) to examine how generative AI acceptance, writing anxiety and writing self‐efficacy shape students' writing feedback literacy. The results showed that (1) generative AI acceptance positively and significantly predicts students' writing feedback literacy and writing self‐efficacy, and negatively predicts writing anxiety; (2) writing self‐efficacy positively mediated the relationship between generative AI acceptance and writing feedback literacy, while writing anxiety mediated the relationship by reducing negative emotions; and (3) generative AI acceptance improves writing feedback literacy by raising students' self‐efficacy and lowering their writing anxiety. This study broadens understanding of writing feedback literacy in the AI era by clarifying the psychological mechanism linking generative AI acceptance to writing feedback literacy in EMI writing, and offers pedagogical implications for integrating AI‐based support to improve EMI students' emotions and feedback engagement.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/ejed.70478

Cites

80 of 80 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?

  • Self-regulation in GenAI-supported learning is embedded in a broader psychological system: learners regulate more effectively when they trust the tool appropriately, feel capable of using it, and are less emotionally overwhelmed by the task.

    “These studies suggest that self-regulation in GenAI-supported learning is embedded in a broader psychological system: learners regulate more effectively when they trust the tool appropriately, feel capable of using it, and are less emotionally overwhelmed by the task.”
  • Reflection journals, dialogic feedback routines, and tasks that require explanation of revision choices are especially promising because they turn AI use into an object of reflection rather than a hidden background process.

    “Reflection journals, dialogic feedback routines, and tasks that require explanation of revision choices are especially promising because they turn AI use into an object of reflection rather than a hidden background process (Zhan & Yan, 2025; D. Zhang et al., 2025; C. Zhou & Wang, 2026).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zhou, C., & Wang, Y.
Affiliations
  • Macao Polytechnic University (MO)
  • North China University of Water Resources and Electric Power (CN)
Corresponding author
Wang, Yongliang
Venue
European Journal of Education
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2026-01-22
Volume
61
Issue
1
ISSN
  • 0141-8211 (ISSN-L)
  • 1465-3435
OpenAlex
W7125493106
Cited by
29
References
80
Citations by year
2026: 29
FWCI
582.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
European Journal of Education (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › English Language Learning and Teaching
Keywords
writing anxiety, writing self-efficacy, English-medium instruction, second language writing, Chinese university students, mediating effect

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