Environment and Social Psychology

The end of English language learning: GenAI as a tool for counter productivity

Sar-Ana Misuari Abdurasul

College of Humanities, Social Sciences and Communication, Basilan State College, Isabela City, Basilan, 7300, Philippines

DOI: https://doi.org/10.59429/esp.v10i2.3163

Keywords: cognitive dependency; counterproductivity; English language learning; GenAI

---

Abstract

The emergence of GenAI marks a transformative phase in technology, characterized by its ability to create content, simulate human-like responses, and adapt to various contexts. This innovation, fueled by advances in machine learning and natural language processing, has significantly impacted English education. However, there is a need to explore the impacts of GenAI in English language learning among students. This paper was conducted to determine how do GenAI promotes counterproductive learning behaviors among college students. College students (n=15) were purposively selected based on their responses to a preliminary open-ended questionnaire. Individual narratives were gathered through one-on-one interviews using semi-structured interview questions. The findings indicated that college students frequently encountered overly technical, vague, or contextually inappropriate language in AI-generated responses, which caused confusion and hindered comprehension. Inaccuracies, such as vague or irrelevant information, further undermined trust in AI tools, compelling learners to rely on their own interpretations or external resources. This further caused students to experience frustration due to unmet expectations, as AI-generated content was often broad, complex, or misaligned with their learning needs. The time-consuming nature of clarifying vague or technical content added to their dissatisfaction, especially for those with limited time or additional responsibilities. Further, reliance on AI features, such as instant grammar corrections or translations, diminished learners’ motivation to engage actively with materials, causing a passive learning approach. This overdependence hindered the development of critical thinking and independent learning skills, particularly in tasks requiring creativity and deeper cognitive effort.

---

References

[1]. 1.Etcoy, D. M., Joverto, A. K., & Paligutan, M. J. A. (2023). ESL Pedagogy in Philippine Colleges: Issues and Reforms through 21st Century Teaching Perspective. Diversitas Journal, 8(4), 2796-2812.

[2]. 2.Santos, A., Fernandez, V.,&Ilustre, R. A. M. I. L. (2022). English language proficiency in the Philippines: An overview. International Journal of English Language Studies, 4(3), 46-51.

[3]. 3.Suzuki, N. (2022). A return to English for global competitiveness: Monolingualizing the bilingual nation in the postcolonial Philippines. People and Culture in Oceania, 37, 51-61.

[4]. 4.Anh, L. T. Q. (2024). AI Chatbots in English Language Learning: A Critical Review. Journal of Knowledge Learning and Science Technology ISSN: 2959-6386 (online), 3(2), 185-195.

[5]. 5.Ulfa, K. (2023). THE TRANSFORMATIVE POWER OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (AI) TO ELEVATE ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNING. Majalah Ilmiah METHODA, 13(3), 307-313.

[6]. 6.Umar, U. (2024). Advancements in English Language Teaching: Harnessing the Power of Artificial Intelligence. Foreign Language Instruction Probe, 3(1), 29-42.

[7]. 7.Ebadi, S.,&Amini, A. (2024). Examining the roles of social presence and human-likeness on Iranian EFL learners’ motivation using artificial intelligence technology: A case of CSIEC chatbot. Interactive Learning Environments, 32(2), 655-673.

[8]. 8.Huang, A. Y., Lu, O. H.,&Yang, S. J. (2023). Effects of artificial Intelligence–Enabled personalized recommendations on learners’ learning engagement, motivation, and outcomes in a flipped classroom. Computers&Education, 194, 104684.

[9]. 9.Viktorivna, K. L., Oleksandrovych, V. A., Oleksandrivna, K. I., & Nadia Oleksandrivna, K. (2022). Artificial Intelligence in Language Learning: What Are We Afraid Of. Arab World English Journal.

[10]. 10.Nagender, Y., & Patil, K. H. (2017). Whatsapp auto responder using natural language processing and AI. Int. J. Comput. Eng. Technol, 8(5), 15-22.

[11]. 11.Sun, Q., Kuzborska, I.,&Soden, B. (2022). Learning to construct authorial voice through citations: A longitudinal case study of L2 postgraduate novice writers. System, 106, 102765.

[12]. 12.Wu, B., Yu, X.,&Gu, X. (2020). Effectiveness of immersive virtual reality using head‐mounted displays on learning performance: A meta‐analysis. British journal of educational technology, 51(6), 1991-2005.

[13]. 13.Escalante, J., Pack, A.,&Barrett, A. (2023). AI-generated feedback on writing: insights into efficacy and ENL student preference. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1), 57.

[14]. 14.Kohnke, L. (2024). Exploring EAP students' perceptions of GenAI and traditional grammar-checking tools for language learning. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 7, 100279.

[15]. 15.Liu, M., Zhang, L. J., & Biebricher, C. (2023). Investigating students’ cognitive processes in AI-assisted digital multimodal composing and traditional writing. Computers&Education, 211, 104977.

[16]. 16.Godwin-Jones, R. (2019). In a world of SMART technology, why learn another language?. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 22(2), 4-13.

[17]. 17.Barrot, J. S. (2023). Using automated written corrective feedback in the writing classrooms: Effects on L2 writing accuracy. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 36(4), 584-607.

[18]. 18.Ingley, S. J.,&Pack, A. (2023). Leveraging AI tools to develop the writer rather than the writing. Trends in Ecology&Evolution, 38(9), 785-787.

[19]. 19.Yan, D. (2023). Impact of ChatGPT on learners in a L2 writing practicum: An exploratory investigation. Education and Information Technologies, 28(11), 13943-13967.

[20]. 20.Özdere, M. (2023). The Integration of Artificial Intelligence in English Education: Opportunities and Challenges. Language Education and Technology, 3(2).

[21]. 21.Artha, B., Sari, N. P., Sari, U. T., Hadi, A. S., Asri, C. P.,&Seta, E. P. M. (2024). Artificial Intelligence and English Learning: A Narrative Review. EDUJ: English Education Journal, 2(2), 44-49.

[22]. 22.Kruse, O., Rapp, C., Anson, C. M., Benetos, K., Cotos, E., Devitt, A.,&Shibani, A. (2023). Digital writing technologies in higher education: theory, research, and practice (p. 526). Springer Nature.

[23]. 23.Wang, C. (2024). Exploring Students’ Generative AI-Assisted Writing Processes: Perceptions and Experiences from Native and Nonnative English Speakers. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 1-22.

[24]. 24.Bai, L., & Hu, G. (2017). In the face of fallible AWE feedback: How do students respond?. Educational Psychology, 37(1), 67-81.

[25]. 25.Fu, Q. K., Zou, D., Xie, H.,&Cheng, G. (2024). A review of AWE feedback: Types, learning outcomes, and implications. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 37(1-2), 179-221.

[26]. 26.Wang, T.,&Xue, B. (2024). The Role of GenAI in EFL: Impact on Learning Motivation and Outcome.

[27]. 27.Cope, B., Kalantzis, M., & Searsmith, D. (2021). Artificial intelligence for education: Knowledge and its assessment in AI-enabled learning ecologies. Educational philosophy and theory, 53(12), 1229-1245.

[28]. 28.Lameras, P.,&Arnab, S. (2021). Power to the teachers: an exploratory review on artificial intelligence in education. Information, 13(1), 14.

[29]. 29.Srinivasan, V. (2022). AI&learning: A preferred future. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 3, 100062.

[30]. 30.Hauske, S., & Bendel, O. (2024). How Can GenAI Foster Well-being in Self-regulated Learning?. In Proceedings of the AAAI Symposium Series, 3(1), 354-361.

[31]. 31.Dowling, M.,&Lucey, B. (2023). ChatGPT for (finance) research: The Bananarama conjecture. Finance Research Letters, 53, 103662.

[32]. 32.Hsu, T. C., Chang, C., Wu, L. K.,&Looi, C. K. (2022). Effects of a pair programming educational robot-based approach on students’ interdisciplinary learning of computational thinking and language learning. Frontiers in psychology, 13, 888215.

[33]. 33.Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS quarterly, 319-340.

[34]. 34.Al-Adwan, A. S., Li, N., Al-Adwan, A., Abbasi, G. A., Albelbisi, N. A.,&Habibi, A. (2023). Extending the technology acceptance model (TAM) to Predict University Students’ intentions to use metaverse-based learning platforms. Education and Information Technologies, 28(11), 15381-15413.

[35]. 35.Holden, H.,&Rada, R. (2011). Understanding the influence of perceived usability and technology self-efficacy on teachers’ technology acceptance. Journal of research on technology in education, 43(4), 343-367.

[36]. 36.Fitria, T. N. (2021). Grammarly as AI-powered English writing assistant: Students’ alternative for writing English. Metathesis: Journal of English Language, Literature, and Teaching, 5(1), 65-78.

[37]. 37.Liu, M., Zhang, L. J., & Biebricher, C. (2023). Investigating students’ cognitive processes in AI-assisted digital multimodal composing and traditional writing. Computers&Education, 211, 104977.

[38]. 38.Glahn, K. (2024). Using ChatGPT to teach English for academic purposes: Perspectives from the classroom. Journal of Education, Innovation and Communication, 5(2), 63-75.

[39]. 39.Kohnke, L., Moorhouse, B. L., & Zou, D. (2023). ChatGPT for language teaching and learning. Relc Journal, 54(2), 537-550.

[40]. 40.Fitria, T. N. (2021). Grammarly as AI-powered English writing assistant: Students’ alternative for writing English. Metathesis: Journal of English Language, Literature, and Teaching, 5(1), 65-78.

[41]. 41.Gayed, J. M., Carlon, M. K. J., Oriola, A. M.,&Cross, J. S. (2022). Exploring an AI-based writing Assistant's impact on English language learners. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 3, 100055.

[42]. 42.Triantafilydis, A., Leftheriotis, K., Kotsovoulou, M., Cirstea, T., & Vranopoulos, G. (2024). INTRODUCING AI IN FLIPPED CLASSROOM. A PRELIMINARY STUDY. In EDULEARN24 Proceedings (pp. 8828-8835). IATED.

[43]. 43.Kim, J., Yu, S., Detrick, R.,&Li, N. (2024). Exploring students’ perspectives on Generative AI-assisted academic writing. Education and Information Technologies, 1-36.

[44]. 44.Roe, J., & Perkins, M. (2024). Generative AI in Self-Directed Learning: A Scoping Review. arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.07677.

[45]. 45.Zhang, X., Zhang, P., Shen, Y., Liu, M., Wang, Q., Gašević, D.,&Fan, Y. (2024). A Systematic Literature Review of Empirical Research on Applying Generative Artificial Intelligence in Education. Frontiers of Digital Education, 1(3), 223-245.

[46]. 46.Ji, Z., Lee, N., Frieske, R., Yu, T., Su, D., Xu, Y., ...&Fung, P. (2023). Survey of hallucination in natural language generation. ACM Computing Surveys, 55(12), 1-38.

[47]. 47.Hu, Y., Goktas, Y., Yellamati, D. D., & De Tassigny, C. (2024, January). The Use and Misuse of Pre-Trained Generative Large Language Models in Reliability Engineering. In 2024 Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium (RAMS) (pp. 1-7). IEEE.

[48]. 48.Joshi, I., Budhiraja, R., Dev, H., Kadia, J., Ataullah, M. O., Mitra, S., ...&Kumar, D. (2024, March). ChatGPT in the Classroom: An Analysis of Its Strengths and Weaknesses for Solving Undergraduate Computer Science Questions. In Proceedings of the 55th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 1 (pp. 625-631).

[49]. 49.Plevris, V., Papazafeiropoulos, G.,&Jiménez Rios, A. (2023). Chatbots put to the test in math and logic problems: a comparison and assessment of ChatGPT-3.5, ChatGPT-4, and Google bard. AI, 4(4), 949-969.

[50]. 50.Belda-Medina, J., & Kokošková, V. (2023). Integrating chatbots in education: insights from the Chatbot-Human Interaction Satisfaction Model (CHISM). International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1), 62.

[51]. 51.Bhardwaj, S.,&McKenzie, R. (2024). A case study on the usage of generative artificial intelligence tools at a university in Thailand and its ethical implications. In RSU International Research Conference, Bangkok.

[52]. 52.Srirak, S. & Thapthiang, N. (2024). Applications of Genai In English Language Teaching and Learning: The Need For Practical Guidelines. Journal of Roi Kaensarn Academi, 9(11), 1805-1817.

[53]. 53.Stevens, L.,&Wrenn, C. (2013). Exploratory (qualitative) research. Concise encyclopedia of church and religious organization marketing, 53.

[54]. 54.Hunter, D., McCallum, J.,&Howes, D. (2019). Defining exploratory-descriptive qualitative (EDQ) research and considering its application to healthcare. Journal of Nursing and Health Care, 4(1).

[55]. 55.Singh, A. (2021). An introduction to experimental and exploratory research. Available at SSRN 3789360.

[56]. 56.Swedberg, R. (2020). Exploratory research. The production of knowledge: Enhancing progress in social science, 2(1), 17-41.

[57]. 57.Akhtar, F., Khan, H.,&Rasheed, M. (2019). The power of positive psychological capital: An Exploratory study. Arabian J Bus Manag Review, 9(387), 2.

[58]. 58.Chavez, J. V., Anuddin, F. O., Mansul, H. H., Hawari, N. A., Irilis, F. B., Umaron, A. A., ...&Albani, S. E. (2024). Analyzing impacts of campus journalism on student’s grammar consciousness and confidence in writing engagements. Environment and Social Psychology, 9(7).

[59]. 59.Mbaka, N., & Isiramen, O. M. (2021). The changing role of an exploratory research in modern organisation. GPH-International Journal of Business Management, 4(12), 27-36.

[60]. 60.Colì, E., Paciello, M., Lamponi, E., Calella, R.,&Falcone, R. (2023). Adolescents and trust in online social interactions: A qualitative exploratory study. Children, 10(8), 1408.

[61]. 61.Chavez, J. V.,&Del Prado, R. T. (2023). Discourse analysis on same-sex relationship through the lens of religious and social belief systems. Environment and Social Psychology, 9(1).

[62]. 62.Happell, B., Bennetts, W., Platania‐Phung, C., & Tohotoa, J. (2016). Exploring the Scope of Consumer Participation in Mental Health Nursing Education: Perspectives From Nurses and Consumers. Perspectives in psychiatric care, 52(3).

[63]. 63.Asika, N. (2004). Research methodology: A process approach. Mukugamu & Brothers Enterprises, Lagos.

[64]. 64.Jumalon, R. L., Chavez, J. V., Kairan, M. J., Abbas, K. D. A., Radjuni, A. J., Kadil, H. L. S., ...&Albani, S. E. (2024). Analysis on the implementation of inclusive classroom: Perception on compliances and obstructions of selected public-school teachers. Environment and Social Psychology, 9(9).

[65]. 65.Bernard, H. R. (2017). Research methods in anthropology: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Rowman&Littlefield.

[66]. 66.Chavez, J. V., Adalia, H. G.,&Alberto, J. P. (2023). Parental support strategies and motivation in aiding their children learn the English language. Forum for Linguistic Studies, 5(2), 1541-1541.

[67]. 67.Rai, N.,&Thapa, B. (2015). A study on purposive sampling method in research. Kathmandu: Kathmandu School of Law, 5(1), 8-15.

[68]. 68.Emmel, N. (2013). Sampling and choosing cases in qualitative research: A realist approach.

[69]. 69.Inoferio, H. V., Espartero, M., Asiri, M., Damin, M.,&Chavez, J. V. (2024). Coping with math anxiety and lack of confidence through AI-assisted Learning. Environment and Social Psychology, 9(5).

[70]. 70.Campbell, S., Greenwood, M., Prior, S., Shearer, T., Walkem, K., Young, S., ...&Walker, K. (2020). Purposive sampling: complex or simple? Research case examples. Journal of research in Nursing, 25(8), 652-661.

[71]. 71.Barratt, M. J., Ferris, J. A.,&Lenton, S. (2015). Hidden populations, online purposive sampling, and external validity: Taking off the blindfold. Field methods, 27(1), 3-21.

[72]. 72.Adams, W. C. (2015). Conducting semi‐structured interviews. Handbook of practical program evaluation, 492-505.

[73]. 73.Alshenqeeti, H. (2014). Interviewing as a data collection method: A critical review. English linguistics research, 3(1), 39-45.

[74]. 74.Bariball, K. L.,&While, A. (1994). Collecting data using a semi-structured interview: a discussion paper. Journal of Advanced Nursing-Institutional Subscription, 19(2), 328-335.

[75]. 75.Kallio, A. A. (2015). Factional stories: Creating a methodological space for collaborative reflection and inquiry in music education research. Research Studies in Music Education, 37(1), 3-20.

[76]. 76.Gani, A., Imtiaz, N., Rathakrishnan, M.,&Krishnasamy, H. N. (2020). A pilot test for establishing validity and reliability of qualitative interview in the blended learning English proficiency course. Journal of critical reviews, 7(05), 140-143.

[77]. 77.Naz, N., Gulab, F.,&Aslam, M. (2022). Development of qualitative semi-structured interview guide for case study research. Competitive Social Science Research Journal, 3(2), 42-52.

[78]. 78.Pope, C., & Mays, N. (Eds.). (2020). Qualitative research in health care (pp. 111-133). Oxford, UK:: Wiley-Blackwell.

[79]. 79.Monday, T. U. (2020). Impacts of interview as research instrument of data collection in social sciences. Journal of Digital Art&Humanities, 1(1), 15-24.

[80]. 80.Hoyle, R. H., Harris, M. J.,&Judd, C. M. (2002). Research Methods in Social Relations. London: Thomson Learning. Inc. UK.

[81]. 81.Galleta, A. (2013). Mastering the semi-structured interview and beyond: From research design to analysis and publication. New York University.

[82]. 82.Hardon, A., Hodgkin, C., & Fresle, D. (2004). How to investigate the use of medicines by consumers. In How to investigate the use of medicines by consumers (pp. 89-89).

[83]. 83.McGehee, N. G. (2012). Interview techniques. In Handbook of research methods in tourism. Edward Elgar Publishing.

[84]. 84.Rubin, H. J.,&Rubin, I. S. (2011). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data. Sage.

[85]. 85.Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage.

[86]. 86.Elhami, A., & Khoshnevisan, B. (2022). Conducting an Interview in Qualitative Research: The Modus Operandi. Mextesol Journal, 46(1), 1-7.

[87]. 87.Luo, L., & Wildemuth, B. M. (2009). Semistructured interviews. Applications of social research methods to questions in information and library science, 232.

[88]. 88.Chavez, J. V., & Ceneciro, C. C. (2023). Discourse analysis on same-sex relationship through the lens of religious and social belief systems. Environment and Social Psychology, 9(1).

[89]. 89.Kallio, A. A. (2015). Factional stories: Creating a methodological space for collaborative reflection and inquiry in music education research. Research Studies in Music Education, 37(1), 3-20.

[90]. 90.Barrett, D.,&Twycross, A. (2018). Data collection in qualitative research. Evidence-based nursing, 21(3), 63-64.

[91]. 91.Sands, R. G., Bourjolly, J.,&Roer-Strier, D. (2007). Crossing cultural barriers in research interviewing. Qualitative Social Work, 6(3), 353-372.

[92]. 92.Miller, L. M.,&Carpenter, C. L. (2009). Altruistic leadership strategies in coaching: A case study of Jim Tressel of the Ohio State University. Strategies, 22(4), 9-12.

[93]. 93.Seidman, I. (2006). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education and the social sciences. Teachers College.

[94]. 94.Joffe, H. (2011). Thematic analysis. Qualitative research methods in mental health and psychotherapy: A guide for students and practitioners, 209-223.

[95]. 95.Braun, V.,&Clarke, V. (2012). Thematic analysis. American Psychological Association. APA Handbook of Research Methods in Psychology, 2, 57-71.

[96]. 96.Finlay, L. (2021). Thematic analysis: the ‘good’, the ‘bad’ and the ‘ugly’. European Journal for Qualitative Research in Psychotherapy, 11, 103-116.

[97]. 97.Chavez, J. V. (2022). Narratives of bilingual parents on the real-life use of English language: Materials for English language teaching curriculum. Arab World English Journals, 13(3).

[98]. 98.Terry, G., Hayfield, N., Clarke, V.,&Braun, V. (2020). Thematic analysis. The SAGE handbook of qualitative research in psychology, 2(17-37), 25.

[99]. 99.Langridge, D. (2004). Introduction to research methods and data analysis in psychology. Harlow: Pearson.

[100]. 100.Terry, G., Hayfield, N., Clarke, V.,&Braun, V. (2017). Thematic analysis. The SAGE handbook of qualitative research in psychology, 2(17-37), 25.

[101]. 101.Braun, V.,&Clarke, V. (2021). Can I use TA? Should I use TA? Should I not use TA? Comparing reflexive thematic analysis and other pattern‐based qualitative analytic approaches. Counselling and psychotherapy research, 21(1), 37-47.

[102]. 102.Shaw, R. (2010). Embedding reflexivity within experiential qualitative psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 7(3), 233-243.

[103]. 103.Jebreen, I. (2012). Using inductive approach as research strategy in requirements engineering. International Journal of Computer and Information Technology, 1(2), 162-173.

[104]. 104.Braun and clarke (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 3(2), 77-101.

[105]. 105.Guest, G., MacQueen, K. M.,&Namey, E. E. (2012). Introduction to applied thematic analysis. Applied thematic analysis, 3(20), 1-21.

[106]. 106.Cooper, G. (2023). Examining science education in ChatGPT: An exploratory study of generative artificial intelligence. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 32(3), 444-452.

[107]. 107.Johri, A., Katz, A. S., Qadir, J.,&Hingle, A. (2023). Generative artificial intelligence and engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education, 112(3).

[108]. 108.Xu, Z., Wijekumar, K., Ramirez, G., Hu, X.,&Irey, R. (2019). The effectiveness of intelligent tutoring systems on K‐12 students' reading comprehension: A meta‐analysis. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(6), 3119-3137

[109]. 109.Kim, J. (2019). Exploring students’ perspectives on Generative AI-assisted academic writing. Education and Information Technologies, 1-36.

[110]. 110.Noviyanti, S. D. (2020). Artificial intelligence (AI)-Based pronunciation checker: an alternative for independent learning in pandemic situation. Journal of English Language Teaching in Foreign Language Context, 5(2), 162.

[111]. 111.Pokrivcakoya, S. (2019). Preparing teachers for the application of AI-powered technologies in foreign language education. Journal of Language and Cultural Education, 7(3), 135-153.

[112]. 112.Berg, J. M., Raj, M.,&Seamans, R. (2023). Capturing value from artificial intelligence. Academy of Management Discoveries, 9(4), 424-428.

[113]. 113.Chan, C. (2024). Unveiling students’ experiences and perceptions of Artificial Intelligence usage in higher education. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice.

[114]. 114.Akbar, K., Nyika, F. D., & Mbonye, V. (2024). Revolutionizing Creative Education: The Role of Generative AI in Enhancing Innovation and Learning in Higher Education. In Impacts of Generative AI on Creativity in Higher Education (pp. 307-330). IGI Global.

[115]. 115.Law, L. (2024). Application of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) in language teaching and learning: A scoping literature review. Computers and Education Open, 100174.

[116]. 116.Hu, Y. (2022). The Use and Misuse of Pre-Trained Generative Large Language Models in Reliability Engineering.

[117]. 117.Raman, R., Mandal, S.,&Das, P., et al. (2023). University students as early adopters of ChatGPT: Innovation Diffusion Study [Preprint version 1]. Research Square.

[118]. 118.Du&Yang, 2024. Exploring EFL learners’ need satisfaction, need frustration, and their motivational change in a blended English learning environment. International Journal of Applied Linguistics.

[119]. 119.Novak, E., McDaniel, K., Daday, J., & Soyturk, I. (2022). Frustration in technology‐rich learning environments: A scale for assessing student frustration with e‐textbooks. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(2), 408-431.

[120]. 120.Liu et al (2013). A selective meta-analysis on the relative incidence of discrete affective states during learning with technology. Journal of educational psychology, 105(4), 1082.

[121]. 121.Riemer, V. (2024). Time-dependent relations between emotion regulation, frustration, and metacognitive strategy use in technology-mediated learning. Cognition and Emotion, 1-10.

[122]. 122.Richey, J. E., Andres-Bray, J. M. L., Mogessie, M., Scruggs, R., Andres, J. M., Star, J. R., ...&McLaren, B. M. (2019). More confusion and frustration, better learning: The impact of erroneous examples. Computers&Education, 139, 173-190.

[123]. 123.Bannert, M. (2002). Managing cognitive load—recent trends in cognitive load theory. Learning and instruction, 12(1), 139-146.

[124]. 124.D’mello and Graesser, 2012. Dynamics of affective states during complex learning. Learning and Instruction, 22(2), 145-157.

[125]. 125.D’Mello, S. (2013). A selective meta-analysis on the relative incidence of discrete affective states during learning with technology. Journal of educational psychology, 105(4), 1082.

[126]. 126.Riemer, V.,&Schrader, C. (2019). Mental model development in multimedia learning: Interrelated effects of emotions and self-monitoring. Frontiers in psychology, 10, 899.

[127]. 127.Spann, C. A., Shute, V. J., Rahimi, S.,&D'Mello, S. K. (2019). The productive role of cognitive reappraisal in regulating affect during game-based learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 100, 358-369.

[128]. 128.Del mundo et al 2024. Discourse analysis on experience-based position of science, mathematics, and Tech-Voc educators on generative AI and academic integrity. Environment and Social Psychology, 9(8).

[129]. 129.Ng, B. (2016). Towards Lifelong Learning: Identifying Learner Profiles on Procrastination and Self-Regulation. New Waves-Educational Research and Development Journal, 19(1), 41-54.