Skip to content
Review Open access

Sure of themselves, not yet beholden: Motivation, trust, and generative AI reliance in higher education.

Sep 2026 · Acta Psychologica · Vol 270, pp. 107880 · 0 citations · 66 references
Medicine

TL;DR

It is found that AI-induced self-efficacy bears no direct association with reliance; it is related to reliance only in conjunction with trust, the belief standing closest to delegation, and two approaches based on different analytical assumptions thus converge.

Abstract

As generative artificial intelligence (AI) becomes embedded in higher education, a troubling pattern has surfaced. Some students increasingly delegate thinking, judgment, and task completion to AI, and such reliance can quietly erode the very capacities-independent reasoning, learner autonomy, and critical engagement-that universities exist to cultivate. A common assumption is that reliance simply tracks perceived competence, with students who feel more sure of themselves in working with AI inevitably coming to rely on it. The present evidence suggests otherwise. Drawing on survey data from 518 Chinese university students and combining Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) with fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA), we find that AI-induced self-efficacy bears no direct association with reliance; it is related to reliance only in conjunction with trust, the belief standing closest to delegation. Escape and instrumental motivation were positively associated with self-efficacy, whereas social motivation was positively associated with trust. Instrumental motivation was negatively associated with trust after self-efficacy was held constant, a pattern consistent with more functional scrutiny among task-focused users. Contrary to expectation, the configurational analysis did not identify multiple pathways to high reliance: it recovered a single configuration combining social motivation and trust, and no stable configuration without trust. Two approaches based on different analytical assumptions thus converge: self-efficacy and trust are not interchangeable pro-AI dispositions. Universities should therefore move beyond promoting efficient AI use and instead calibrate students' trust and protect learner agency, since making students feel more capable with AI appears unlikely to change how much they delegate.

Read PDF

Similar papers

Review Open access Sep 2026

From Confidence to Commitment: Self-Perceived Competence and the Motivational Pathways to Intellectual Engagement with AI Learning Tools

Artificial intelligence (AI) tools are becoming part of how students think, not only what they use. Whether a learner engages with such a tool or delegates to it is a decision about how their own cognitive resources are deployed, which places that decision within the realm of study of human intelligence. Investment acc...

Fahad Alsudairi, A. Asiri, Mohammed Khojah et al. · 1 citation
#generative ai Review Open access Sep 2026

Helpful or harmful? generative AI dependence, self-reported critical thinking disposition, and self-perceived employability among business students

The results suggest that GenAI use may support students' perceived learning and career readiness when it functions as a reflective augmentation tool involving verification, comparison, and independent judgement, while higher dependence is associated with weaker perceived learning and employability-related outcomes.

S. A. Shojaei, Firas Armosh, Raymond Lihe et al. · 0 citations
Conference Open access Oct 2026

Balancing Support and Deskilling

Context: Generative artificial intelligence (AI) offers accessible task support, but the implications for independent learning remain uncertain. This paper examines perceived support, possible cognitive offloading, and self-regulated learning in vocational education and related higher education settings. Approach: A st...

Christopher Klupak, Elmar Dammann · 0 citations
Review Open access 2026

Embracing AI in Higher Education: What Drives Students’ Intention to Use Artificial Intelligence?

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is increasingly embedded in university learning, but access to AI does not necessarily translate into students’ intention to use it for academic purposes. This study examined whether performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, and facilitating conditions are associated with...

Nuraina Dania Mohd Nor, Noorizan Mohamad Mozie, Ahmad Rais Mohamad Mokhtar et al. · 0 citations
#generative ai Review Open access Sep 2026

Guarded adoption of generative AI in higher education: high-achieving students, successful-student identity, and epistemic agency in a single-university mixed-methods survey

This mixed-methods survey of students at one Australian university examined whether successful-student identity and student-reported academic achievement were associated with different patterns of generative AI engagement, interpreting this pattern as guarded adoption.

Jason Zagami · 0 citations
Review Open access Sep 2026

Comparing Human Ability with Generative AI: Self-Evaluation, Appraisal, and Adaptive Professional Intelligence Among Journalism and Communication Students

Generative artificial intelligence (AI) is reshaping how students evaluate their abilities, occupational prospects, and the continuing value of professional education. This study examined how ability-based comparison with AI is associated with perceived professional value among journalism and communication students and...

Juan Wang, Zi-Chen Liu, Jia-Ying Huang · 0 citations

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.