aceModerate evidence
Published recordEducationGood Space
More
Generative AI in higher education: a meta-analysis of intellectual and social–emotional outcomes
- Truvace record
- TRV-2026-2783raw data (JSON)
- Version
- v1Published
- First published
- Evidence type
- Systematic review or meta-analysis
- Sources
- 1 sourcePeer-reviewed
- sha256
- e151f018ae27…check it
Background Generative AI has rapidly entered higher education, yet evidence on its effects across learning domains remains fragmented. This study synthesized experimental evidence on whether generative AI improves intellectual outcomes and social emotional outcomes among higher education students. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted on 33 experimental and quasi-experimental studies involving 3,394 participants. The included studies were published between 2021 and 2024, and the literature…
The gain
A meta-analysis of 33 experimental studies with 3,394 university students found generative AI raised intellectual outcomes (Hedges' g = 1.096) and social-emotional outcomes (g = 0.301) compared with control conditions.
What this doesn’t fix
The authors say the evidence base is heterogeneous and methodologically uneven, publication bias was detected for intellectual outcomes, and those results were sensitive to individual studies.
Sources
1 on file- Frontiers in Psychologydoi:10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1848745
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.
Social-emotional outcomes of higher education students using generative AI
Hedges' g 0.301 (95% CI 0.048 to 0.553)
12 studies · 3,394 people · search to January 26, 2026
The review’s own words
a smaller but significant positive effect on social emotional outcomes (Hedges’ g = 0.301, 95% CI 0.048 to 0.553, p = 0.020)
Intellectual outcomes of higher education students using generative AI
Hedges' g 1.096 (95% CI 0.087 to 2.104)
21 studies · 3,394 people · search to January 26, 2026
The review’s own words
Generative AI demonstrated a significant positive effect on intellectual outcomes (Hedges’ g = 1.096, 95% CI 0.087 to 2.104, p = 0.033)
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
Cite this record
v1Truvace Impact Record TRV-2026-2783, v1: “Generative AI in higher education: a meta-analysis of intellectual and social–emotional outcomes.” Truvace, 2026-11-12. /record/TRV-2026-2783 (accessed on the day you copy it). sha256 e151f018ae27a16f…
Change history
1 versionEvery change made to this record since it was first published, and why. Nothing has changed since it went up.
Certified into the record
Check this record hasn’t been altered
How to check it yourself, without trusting this page
Download any version from /api/record/TRV-2026-2783 and hash its canonical field yourself, for example with shasum -a 256. You should get its content_hash. Each version’s text also ends with prev:and the hash of the version before it (version 1 points to 64 zeros). If anyone had changed a single character of any version after it was saved, those hashes wouldn’t line up.