The exact text we saved

This is the version exactly as it was saved, character for character. The SHA-256 hash below is a 64-character code worked out from that text. Run the same text through SHA-256 and you get the same code; change a single letter and the code comes out completely different. Each version also stores the previous version’s hash, which chains them together so no version can be swapped out quietly.

TRUVACE RECORD VERSION
record: TRV-2026-2828
version: 1
kind: certified
reason: Certified into the record
timestamp: 2026-11-12T17:31:28.196015Z
status: published
lens: g_space
sector: education
headline: Emotional Artificial Intelligence in Education: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
dek: Abstract Research on emotional artificial intelligence (emotional AI) in education—AI that detects learners’ emotions and/or provides emotional support and AI that produces affective learning outcomes but does not directly provide emotional support—has grown rapidly, yet quantitative syntheses are scarce. We meta-analyzed empirical studies reporting outcomes in knowledge, skills, affect, perception, and behavior. A meta‑analysis was conducted based on 172 articles on empirical research published between 2000 and…
gain_title: A meta-analysis of 54 controlled studies found AI that paired cognitive help with emotional support raised students' knowledge scores by g = 0.88, versus g = 0.52 for AI offering cognitive help alone.
problem_title: (none)
trace_subject: (none)
gain_reading: A meta-analysis of 54 controlled studies found AI that paired cognitive help with emotional support raised students' knowledge scores by g = 0.88, versus g = 0.52 for AI offering cognitive help alone.
gain_evidence: Integrated cognitive and emotional support showed a large effect on knowledge acquisition ( g = 0.88, 95% CI [0.36, 1.40]) | Integrated support was found to be more effective for knowledge acquisition than cognitive-only support
problem_reading: (none)
problem_evidence: (none)
quick_read: A systematic review and meta-analysis in Educational Psychology Review screened 13,879 records and covered 172 empirical articles from 2000 to 2025. Of these, 54 controlled or quasi-experimental studies in 49 articles were pooled. AI that combined learning help with emotional support produced a large knowledge gain (g = 0.88), against a medium gain (g = 0.52) for AI offering only learning help.

The pooled studies covered 1,684 participants in the integrated-support group of studies and 4,400 in the cognitive-only group. Cognitive-only AI also improved skills (g = 0.44), affect (g = 0.48) and perception (g = 0.85), while integrated support did less well on perception (g = 0.18, confidence interval crossing zero).

Evidence on emotional support alone is thin: only two studies qualified and they were not pooled. For affect, a test showed funnel-plot asymmetry, and a fixed-effects correction cut the pooled effect from 0.48 to 0.20, so some results may be overstated.
limitation: Only two studies tested emotional-only support, and several outcomes pooled very few studies. For affect, a fixed-effects trim-and-fill correction lowered the pooled effect from 0.48 to 0.20, indicating possible publication bias.
tag: Evidence-backed gain
key_points: The meta-analysis pooled 54 experimental studies from 49 articles, drawn from 172 empirical articles published between 2000 and 2025. | Integrated cognitive and emotional AI support gave g = 0.88 on knowledge acquisition (95% CI 0.36 to 1.40, 10 studies); cognitive-only support gave g = 0.52 (12 studies). | Cognitive-only AI raised skills by g = 0.44, affect by g = 0.48 across 31 studies, and perception by g = 0.85. | Integrated support showed only g = 0.18 on perception, with a confidence interval from -0.41 to 0.77. | Individual studies sometimes found harm: a chatbot with empathic messages lowered primary pupils' maths confidence (g = -0.17), and students felt more anxious with a pedagogical agent than with a human teacher (g = -0.28). | Most studies were in tertiary education (66.3% of 172) and humanities and social science (52.9%); about 39% had fewer than 50 participants. | Only two studies tested emotional-only support, so no pooled effect was calculated.
rundown: The authors searched Scopus, Web of Science, PsycINFO and ERIC on 3 August 2025 and screened 13,879 records. Two researchers reviewed each article independently (Cohen's kappa 0.91 for selection). Studies had to use a controlled or quasi-experimental design comparing AI support with no AI support. Random-effects models pooled Hedges' g.

Of the 54 studies, 17 tested integrated support, 35 tested cognitive-only support and 2 tested emotional-only support. Four extreme outliers from two articles were excluded, including language-skill effects above g = 4. Among randomized trials, 17 of 22 were low risk of bias and 5 had some concerns; among non-randomized studies, 12 of 28 were moderate risk. No study was rated high risk.

Individual results varied widely. A teaching robot gave secondary maths students a large boost in confidence, satisfaction and attention (g = 2.06), and a chatbot in a museum game kept primary pupils engaged longer (g = 1.24). But an interactive agent led secondary students to spend more time gaming the system (g = -1.85).

The authors read results through control-value theory: cognitive support raises students' sense of control, while emotional support steadies achievement emotions. They call for more rigorous experiments to isolate the unique contribution of AI emotional support.
sources:
- peer_reviewed | Educational Psychology Review | https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-025-10086-4 | 2025-11-15
prev: 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

SHA-256 hash

89cd33c83d6a80c1572c59aa8d7b6fbb8c2846d37ad4acda104e87639967b45d

Previous version’s hash

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000