Abstract:The increasing integration of artificial intelligence (AI) in higher education has raised important questions regarding students' transparency in reporting AI-assisted work. This study investigates the psychological mechanisms underlying university students' willingness to disclose AI use by applying the Cognition--Affect--Conation (CAC) framework. A sequential explanatory mixed-methods design was employed. In the quantitative phase, survey data were collected from 546 university students and analysed using structural equation modelling to examine the relationships among cognitive perceptions, affective responses, and disclosure intention. In the qualitative phase, semi-structured interviews with 22 students were conducted to further interpret the quantitative findings. The results indicate that psychological safety significantly increases students' willingness to disclose AI use and is positively shaped by perceived fairness, perceived teacher support, and perceived organisational support. Conversely, evaluation apprehension reduces disclosure intention and psychological safety, and is strengthened by perceived stigma, perceived uncertainty, and privacy concern. Qualitative findings further reveal that institutional clarity and supportive instructional practices encourage openness, whereas policy ambiguity and fear of negative evaluation often lead students to adopt cautious or strategic disclosure practices. Overall, the study highlights the dual role of enabling and inhibitory psychological mechanisms in shaping AI-use disclosure and underscores the importance of supportive institutional environments and clear guidance for promoting responsible AI transparency in higher education.
Abstract:This study investigates students' AI use concealment intention in higher education by integrating the cognition-affect-conation (CAC) framework with a dual-method approach combining structural equation modelling (SEM) and fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA). Drawing on data from 1346 university students, the findings reveal two opposing mechanisms shaping concealment intention. The enabling pathway shows that perceived stigma, perceived risk, and perceived policy uncertainty increase fear of negative evaluation, which in turn promotes concealment. In contrast, the inhibitory pathway demonstrates that AI self-efficacy, perceived fairness, and perceived social support enhance psychological safety, thereby reducing concealment intention. SEM results confirm the hypothesised relationships and mediation effects, while fsQCA identifies multiple configurational pathways, highlighting equifinality and the central role of fear of negative evaluation across conditions. The study contributes to the literature by conceptualising concealment as a distinct behavioural outcome and by providing a nuanced explanation that integrates both net-effect and configurational perspectives. Practical implications emphasise the need for clear institutional policies, destigmatisation of appropriate AI use, and the cultivation of supportive learning environments to promote transparency.
Abstract:The growing use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) in academic writing has raised increasing concerns regarding transparency and academic integrity in higher education. This study examines the psychological factors influencing English for Academic Purposes (EAP) students' intention to disclose their use of AI tools. Drawing on the cognition-affect-conation framework, the study proposes a model integrating both enabling and inhibiting factors shaping disclosure intention. A sequential explanatory mixed-methods design was employed. Quantitative data from 324 EAP students at an English-medium instruction university in China were analysed using structural equation modelling, followed by semi-structured interviews with 15 students to further interpret the findings. The quantitative results indicate that psychological safety positively predicts AI disclosure intention, whereas fear of negative evaluation negatively predicts it. The qualitative findings further reveal that supportive teacher practices and clear guidance foster psychological safety, while policy ambiguity and reputational concerns intensify fear of negative evaluation and discourage disclosure. These findings highlight the importance of clear institutional policies and supportive pedagogical environments in promoting transparent AI use.
Abstract:This study examines users' behavioural intention to use OpenClaw through the Cognition--Affect--Conation (CAC) framework. The research investigates how cognitive perceptions of the system influence affective responses and subsequently shape behavioural intention. Enabling factors include perceived personalisation, perceived intelligence, and relative advantage, while inhibiting factors include privacy concern, algorithmic opacity, and perceived risk. Survey data from 436 OpenClaw users were analysed using structural equation modelling. The results show that positive perceptions strengthen users' attitudes toward OpenClaw, which increase behavioural intention, whereas negative perceptions increase distrust and reduce intention to use the system. The study provides insights into the psychological mechanisms influencing the adoption of autonomous AI agents.
Abstract:This article explores the phenomenon of confirmation bias in generative AI chatbots, a relatively underexamined aspect of AI-human interaction. Drawing on cognitive psychology and computational linguistics, it examines how confirmation bias, commonly understood as the tendency to seek information that aligns with existing beliefs, can be replicated and amplified by the design and functioning of large language models. The article analyzes the mechanisms by which confirmation bias may manifest in chatbot interactions, assesses the ethical and practical risks associated with such bias, and proposes a range of mitigation strategies. These include technical interventions, interface redesign, and policy measures aimed at promoting balanced AI-generated discourse. The article concludes by outlining future research directions, emphasizing the need for interdisciplinary collaboration and empirical evaluation to better understand and address confirmation bias in generative AI systems.