ArticleFrontiers in sports and active living2026
Associations between generative AI use frequency, technology acceptance, attitudes toward AI, and reported learning preference patterns among students in physical education classes.
Article in Frontiers in sports and active living, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Physical education combines embodied practice with cognitive learning, yet generative artificial intelligence is increasingly used as an academic support tool. This cross-sectional study investigated associations between self-reported generative AI use frequency, reported VARK learning preference patterns, attitudes toward AI, and Technology Acceptance Model beliefs among undergraduate students in PE classes. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted with 1,084 full-time PE undergraduates (age 19-28 years). Participants completed PE-adapted instruments assessing reported learning preferences patterns using the VARK framework, technology acceptance beliefs based on the Technology Acceptance Model, attitudes toward generative AI, and self-reported generative AI use frequency. The TAM and VARK instruments were adapted to PE-relevant academic and movement-related tasks. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, reliability testing, ANOVA, and multiple regression models. Results: Students reported moderate acceptance of generative AI and positive attitudes toward its academic use. Kinesthetic learning remained the dominant preference, consistent with the movement-based nature of PE. However, higher self-reported AI usage frequency was associated with higher visual and reading-writing scores and lower kinesthetic scores ( Conclusions: In this cross-sectional sample, self-reported generative AI use was associated with differences in reported learning preference patterns and with stronger technology acceptance beliefs among higher education physical education students. While kinesthetic scores remained highest overall, more frequent AI use was associated with higher visual and reading-writing scores and lower kinesthetic scores. These findings are associative, not causal, and do not show changes in stable learning preference patterns. Future research should examine whether pedagogically grounded AI integration can support diverse learners, particularly students who report stronger kinesthetic preferences.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.