aceModerate evidence
Published recordEducationGood Space
More
The effect of chatbots on learning: a meta-analysis of empirical research
- Truvace record
- TRV-2026-2804raw data (JSON)
- Version
- v1Published
- First published
- Evidence type
- Systematic review or meta-analysis
- Sources
- 1 sourcePeer-reviewed
- sha256
- 457fb69b6b28…check it
This meta-analysis aimed to comprehensively review empirical studies on the effect of chatbots on learning and quantitatively synthesize their findings to produce an overall effect size. Searching several databases yielded 28 eligible reports with 31 individual effect sizes. The results revealed a significant and medium effect (g = .48) of chatbots on learning. Further analyses indicated four significant moderators: the type of instruction in the comparison group, experimental duration, chatbot type, and chatbot…
The gain
A meta-analysis of 28 empirical reports (31 effect sizes) found chatbots had a medium positive effect on learning (g = .48), with the largest effects in single-session use and for chatbots handling frequently asked questions.
What this doesn’t fix
The effect varied significantly by comparison condition, duration, chatbot type and task, and the highest effects came from one-session experiments, so the overall figure does not apply equally across settings.
Sources
1 on file- Journal of Research on Technology in Educationdoi:10.1080/15391523.2023.2255698
Cite this record
v1Truvace Impact Record TRV-2026-2804, v1: “The effect of chatbots on learning: a meta-analysis of empirical research.” Truvace, 2026-11-12. /record/TRV-2026-2804 (accessed on the day you copy it). sha256 457fb69b6b286c19…
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-2026-2804 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.