Truace
Subscribe
70/100

Moderate evidence

Cite
More
Export CSVExport JSONEmailLinkedInX

Review of 17 studies finds AI-aided inquiry learning boosts students' higher-order thinking

Study title: Artificial intelligence-enhanced inquiry-based learning and higher-order thinking skills: a meta-analysis

Evidence type
Systematic review or meta-analysis
Sample
n = 2,052
Sources
1 sourcePeer-reviewed
Published
2 min read
Truvace record
TRV-2026-2710cite or check it

Study title: Artificial intelligence-enhanced inquiry-based learning and higher-order thinking skills: a meta-analysis

A meta-analysis pooling 17 studies and 2,052 participants found that inquiry-based learning supported by artificial intelligence improved higher-order thinking skills, with a pooled effect of g = 0.696 (95% CI 0.607 to 0.785).

Read the study abstract

This meta-analysis synthesizes empirical evidence from 17 studies (N = 2,052) examining the effectiveness of artificial intelligence-enhanced inquiry-based learning on higher-order thinking skills (HOTS). A random-effects model revealed a medium-to-large positive effect (g = 0.696, 95% CI [0.607, 0.785], p < 0.001). Subgroup analyses showed that generative AI technologies, particularly ChatGPT (g = 0.754), outperformed traditional intelligent tutoring systems (g = 0.614), and problem-based learning demonstrated…

The gain

A meta-analysis of 17 studies with 2,052 students found AI-enhanced inquiry-based learning improved higher-order thinking skills, with a medium-to-large pooled effect (g = 0.696).

In brief

Generative AI tools did better than older intelligent tutoring systems: ChatGPT-based interventions reached g = 0.754 against g = 0.614 for tutoring systems. Problem-based learning showed the largest effect, at g = 0.812.

Longer interventions were associated with larger effects in a meta-regression. Risk-of-bias ratings classed 59% of the studies as low risk, and the authors report that sensitivity analyses held up and publication bias was minimal.

Main points

  1. The analysis pooled 17 studies covering 2,052 participants using a random-effects model.
  2. The overall effect on higher-order thinking skills was g = 0.696 (95% CI 0.607 to 0.785, p < 0.001).
  3. Generative AI, particularly ChatGPT, produced g = 0.754, compared with g = 0.614 for traditional intelligent tutoring systems.
  4. Problem-based learning had the highest effect among the approaches compared, at g = 0.812.
  5. Intervention duration was a significant predictor of effect size in the meta-regression.
  6. Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 rated 59% of included studies as low risk.

What the review found when it combined the studies

These are the review’s own pooled results, copied from its abstract. Truvace did not recalculate them.

  • Higher-order thinking skills with AI-enhanced inquiry-based learning

    Hedges' g 0.696 (95% CI 0.607 to 0.785)

    17 studies · 2,052 people

    The review’s own words
    A random-effects model revealed a medium-to-large positive effect (g = 0.696, 95% CI [0.607, 0.785], p < 0.001).

Code checks every number above against the review’s text before it is shown. The short labels are an AI model’s reading of that text, so the review’s own sentence sits under each one. A pooled figure is only as strong as the studies behind it. How Truvace uses pooled results

The full story

The review synthesised empirical studies on AI-enhanced inquiry-based learning and its effect on higher-order thinking skills, using a random-effects model across 17 studies and 2,052 participants. The pooled result was a medium-to-large positive effect.

Subgroup analyses compared technologies and teaching approaches. Generative AI tools outperformed traditional intelligent tutoring systems, and ChatGPT specifically reached g = 0.754. Problem-based learning produced the largest effect at g = 0.812.

Meta-regression pointed to intervention duration as a significant predictor of effect size. For quality, Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 classed 59% of the studies as low risk, and sensitivity analyses and publication-bias checks supported the findings.

Sources

1 on file
  1. Learning: Research and Practicedoi:10.1080/23735082.2026.2672411
    Peer-reviewed2026-05-22

Talk it over

Four questions to start onWho gets this benefit, and who was left out of the study or story?

Start with a question

Review of 17 studies finds AI-aided inquiry learning boosts students' higher-order thinkinghttps://truvace.com/item/artificial-intelligence-enhanced-inquiry-based-learning-and-higher-order-thinkin

  1. Who gets this benefit, and who was left out of the study or story?

    The gain A meta-analysis of 17 studies with 2,052 students found AI-enhanced inquiry-based learning improved higher-order thinking skills, with a medium-to-large pooled effect (g = 0.696).

    Answer in the thread

  2. How do we know? What can this kind of evidence show, and what can’t it?

    The evidence This rests on a systematic review or meta-analysis with a sample of 2,052, from Learning: Research and Practice.

    Answer in the thread

  3. What does it leave open? What else would you want to know before acting on it?

    The record’s own caveat Only 59% of the included studies were rated low risk of bias under Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0, so the remainder carry greater risk of bias.

    Answer in the thread

  4. Have you seen AI used this way where you study, work or live? Did it go the same way?

    Answer in the thread

The questions are the same on every record. The details under them are taken from this record as written.

What readers say

More from Education