Demystifying the mist: Why do individuals hesitate to accept <scp>AI</scp> educational services?

Rapid advances in AI technology are fuelling the proliferation of AI applications across industries, including educational services. With the allure of intelligent tutoring, individuals now face the choice of their educational approach-either parental engagement or utilizing AI educational services. This research employs an experimental design approach to examine individuals' decision-making processes involving AI educational services. Across five studies, we observe that, relative to AI educational services, parental engagement induces less guilt, receives a higher valuation and increases individuals' willingness to recommend it to others. We attribute these preferences to a perceived parental responsibility. Intrinsic attribution and conformity promote individuals' WOM. This research is the first to uncover the impact of educational approaches on individuals' guilt and downstream behaviours in the AI-in-Education field, shedding light on attribution as its underlying mechanism and offering actionable strategies to enhance individuals' WOM. The findings offer novel insights to AI-human interaction psychological research and hold practical implications for AI-in-Education industry practitioners.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
British Journal of Psychology
Published
2025-11-10
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.70040
Primary Topic
AI in Service Interactions
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Demystifying the mist: Why do individuals hesitate to accept AI educational services?

Stephanie Q. Liu, Wei Lu, Yin Shi, Zhi Lü et al.
British Journal of Psychology
AI in Service Interactions
article

Demystifying the mist: Why do individuals hesitate to accept AI educational services?

Stephanie Q. Liu, Wei Lu, Yin Shi, Zhi Lü, Aiping Shao
article en

Abstract

Rapid advances in AI technology are fuelling the proliferation of AI applications across industries, including educational services. With the allure of intelligent tutoring, individuals now face the choice of their educational approach-either parental engagement or utilizing AI educational services. This research employs an experimental design approach to examine individuals' decision-making processes involving AI educational services. Across five studies, we observe that, relative to AI educational services, parental engagement induces less guilt, receives a higher valuation and increases individuals' willingness to recommend it to others. We attribute these preferences to a perceived parental responsibility. Intrinsic attribution and conformity promote individuals' WOM. This research is the first to uncover the impact of educational approaches on individuals' guilt and downstream behaviours in the AI-in-Education field, shedding light on attribution as its underlying mechanism and offering actionable strategies to enhance individuals' WOM. The findings offer novel insights to AI-human interaction psychological research and hold practical implications for AI-in-Education industry practitioners.

British Journal of Psychology
Beihua University (CN), Shanghai Jiao Tong University (CN), Beijing Normal University (CN), The Ohio State University (US), Texas A&M University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 82%
AI in Service Interactions
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Demystifying the mist: Why do individuals hesitate to accept <scp>AI</scp> educational services? — Stephanie Q. Liu, Wei Lu, et al. · British Journal of Psychology (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS