International Journal of Education and Management Engineering (IJEME)
IJEME Vol. 16, No. 4, 8 Aug. 2026
Cover page and Table of Contents: PDF (size: 969KB)
The Impact of AI-Powered Digital Assistants on Student Emotions, Engagement, and Academic Performance: A PLS-SEM Analysis in Higher Education
PDF (969KB), PP.106-127
Views: 0 Downloads: 0
Author(s)
Index Terms
Higher education ecosystems, AI-powered digital assistants, academic performance, AI/machine learning, student engagement
Abstract
This study investigates the impact of AI-powered digital assistants on students’ feelings, engagement, and academic success within higher education environments. The study aims to investigate post-adoption behaviour, emphasizing how service experiences, functional attributes, information quality, and ease of interaction influence emotional and behavioural results. A structured survey was used to gather data from 431 respondents in higher education at Exploits university, Malawi, and the study utilized a quantitative approach. Measurement scales were adapted from validated studies in the AI adoption and educational technology literature and contextualized for the higher education setting. Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM) version 4.1.1.8 was utilized to examine the connections between variables. Common method bias was assessed using the full collinearity approach, and all VIF values were below the recommended threshold, indicating that common method bias was not a significant concern. The results indicate that Service experience leads to Positive emotions (β = 0.205, p = 0.002) and Student engagement (β = 0.242, p < 0.001), validating H1a and H1b. Quality of information → Positive feelings (β = 0.161, p = 0.005), backing H3a, whereas Functional characteristics → Student involvement (β = 0.409, p < 0.001), supporting H4b. Positive emotions → Student involvement (β = 0.190, p < 0.001) and Academic achievement (β = 0.460, p < 0.001), and Student involvement → Academic achievement (β = 0.310, p < 0.001), confirming H5–H7. Contextualization × Positive emotions → Academic performance was noteworthy (β = 0.063, p = 0.038), reinforcing H8a. Nonetheless, H2a, H2b, H3b, H4a, and H8b received no support (p > 0.05). The research advances theoretical understanding by broadening AI adoption literature to include emotional and behavioural effects, while also enhancing practical implications by highlighting service quality and system efficiency. Suggestions emphasize the importance of focusing on contextual, high-quality AI resources to enhance student engagement, emotional well-being, and educational achievement. The results demonstrate that service experience is the most influential antecedent of both emotional and behavioural outcomes, whereas the effects of functional features and information quality vary across the examined relationships.
Cite This Paper
Dennis Franscico Chandiona, “The Impact of AI-Powered Digital Assistants on Student Emotions, Engagement, and Academic Performance: A PLS-SEM Analysis in Higher Education”, International Journal of Education and Management Engineering (IJEME), Vol.16, No.4, pp. 106-127, 2026. DOI:10.5815/ijeme.2026.04.08
Reference
[1]Al-Abdullatif, A. M., & Alsubaie, M. A. (2024). ChatGPT in learning: Assessing students’ use intentions through the lens of perceived value and the influence of AI literacy. Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 14, Article 845. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14090845
[2]Lo, N., Wong, A., & Chan, S. (2025). The impact of generative AI on essay revisions and student engagement. Computers and Education Open, Vol. 9, Article 100249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2025.100249
[3]Amorim, I. P., Guerreiro, J., Eloy, S., & Loureiro, S. M. C. (2022). How augmented reality media richness influences consumer behaviour. International Journal of Consumer Studies, Vol. 46(2), pp. 385–398. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12790
[4]Crompton, H., & Burke, D. (2023). Artificial intelligence in higher education: The state of the field. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, Vol. 20, Article 22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00392-8
[5]Cheung, M. L., Leung, W. K., Cheah, J.-H., & Ting, H. (2022). Exploring the effectiveness of emotional and rational user-generated contents in digital tourism platforms. Journal of Vacation Marketing, Vol. 28(2), pp. 152–170. https://doi.org/10.1177/13567667211030675
[6]Dabbous, A., & Barakat, K. A. (2023). The impact of digitalization on entrepreneurial activity and sustainable competitiveness. Technology in Society, Vol. 73, Article 102224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2023.102224
[7]Dwivedi, Y. K., Kshetri, N., Hughes, L., Slade, E. L., Jeyaraj, A., & Kar, A. K. (2023). Opinion paper: “So what if ChatGPT wrote it?” Multidisciplinary perspectives on opportunities, challenges and implications of generative conversational AI for research, practice and policy. International Journal of Information Management, Vol. 71, Article 102642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102642
[8]Fan, H., Han, B., Gao, W., & Li, W. (2022). How AI chatbots have reshaped the frontline interface in China: Examining the role of sales-service ambidexterity and the personalization-privacy paradox. International Journal of Emerging Markets, Vol. 17(4), pp. 967–986. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOEM-04-2021-0532
[9]Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18(1), pp. 39–50. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312
[10]Ge, D. (2025). Resilience and online learning emotional engagement among college students in the digital age: A perspective based on self-regulated learning theory. BMC Psychology, Vol. 13, Article 631. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-025-02631-1
[11]Ma, D., Akram, H., & Chen, H. (2024). Artificial intelligence in higher education: A cross-cultural examination of students’ behavioral intentions and attitudes. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, Vol. 25(3), pp. 134–157. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v25i3.7703
[12]Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2024). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM) (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
[13]Thomander, S. D., & Krosnick, J. A. (2024). Question and questionnaire design. In The Cambridge handbook of research methods and statistics for the social and behavioral sciences. Cambridge University Press.
[14]Hsu, C.-L. (2023). Enhancing brand love, student engagement, brand experience, and repurchase intention: Focusing on the role of gamification in mobile apps. Decision Support Systems, Vol. 174, Article 114020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2023.114020
[15]Jerrim, J. (2022). The power of positive emotions? The link between young people’s positive and negative affect and performance in high-stakes examinations. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, Vol. 29(3), pp. 310–331. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2022.2054941
[16]Masry-Herzallah, A., & Watted, A. (2024). Technological self-efficacy and mindfulness ability: Key drivers for effective online learning in higher education beyond the COVID-19 era. Contemporary Educational Technology, Vol. 16, Article e505. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/14336
[17]Katz, E., Blumler, J. G., & Gurevitch, M. (1974). Utilization of mass communication by the individual. In J. G. Blumler & E. Katz (Eds.), The uses of mass communications: Current perspectives on gratifications research (pp. 19–32). Sage Publications.
[18]Falebita, O. S., & Kok, P. J. (2024). Artificial intelligence tools usage: A structural equation modeling of undergraduates’ technological readiness, self-efficacy and attitudes. Journal of STEM Education Research, Vol. 8, pp. 257–282. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41979-024-00132-1
[19]Williams, A. (2025). Integrating artificial intelligence into higher education assessment. Intersection, Vol. 6, pp. 128–154. https://doi.org/10.61669/001c.131915
[20]Huang, F., Wang, Y., & Zhang, H. (2024). Modelling generative AI acceptance, perceived teachers' enthusiasm and self-efficacy to English as a foreign language learners’ well-being in the digital era. European Journal of Education, Vol. 59, Article e12770. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12770
[21]Yao, N., & Wang, Q. (2024). Factors influencing pre-service special education teachers’ intention toward AI in education: Digital literacy, teacher self-efficacy, perceived ease of use, and perceived usefulness. Heliyon, 10, Article e34894. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e34894
[22]Loyola-Carrillo, P., Vega-Muñoz, A., Salazar-Sepúlveda, G., Gil-Marín, M., & Adsuar-Sala, J. (2025). Studying engagement in educational settings: A mapping review on high-impact academic engagement research. Frontiers in Psychology, 16, Article 1519509. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1519509
[23]Marikyan, D. (2022). Handbook of research on student engagement. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7
[24]Jeilani, A., & Abubakar, S. (2025). Perceived institutional support and its effects on student perceptions of AI learning in higher education: The role of mediating perceived learning outcomes and moderating technology self-efficacy. Frontiers in Education, 10, Article 1548900. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1548900
[25]Chen, D., Liu, W., & Liu, X. (2024). What drives college students to use AI for L2 learning? Modeling the roles of self-efficacy, anxiety, and attitude based on an extended technology acceptance model. Acta Psychologica, Article 104442. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2024.104442
[26]Mou, Y., & Meng, X. (2024). Alexa, it is creeping over me – Exploring the impact of privacy concerns on consumer resistance to intelligent voice assistants. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 36(2), pp. 261–292. https://doi.org/10.1108/APJML-10-2022-0869
[27]Chan, H. W. H., & Lo, N. P. K. (2025). A study on human rights impact with the advancement of artificial intelligence. Journal of Posthumanism, 5(2), Article 490. https://doi.org/10.63332/joph.v5i2.490
[28]Sova, R., Tudor, C., Tartavulea, C. V., & Dieaconescu, R. I. (2024). Artificial intelligence tool adoption in higher education: A structural equation modeling approach to understanding impact factors among economics students. Electronics, 13, Article 3632. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics13183632
[29]Adelana, O. P., Ayanwale, M. A., & Sanusi, I. T. (2024). Exploring pre-service biology teachers’ intention to teach genetics using an AI intelligent tutoring-based system. Cogent Education, 11, pp. 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2024.2310976
[30]Ayanwale, M. A., Frimpong, E. K., Opesemowo, O. A. G., & Sanusi, I. T. (2024). Exploring factors that support pre-service teachers’ engagement in learning artificial intelligence. Journal of STEM Education Research, 8, pp. 199–229. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41979-024-00121-4
[31]Wang, S., Wang, F., Zhu, Z., Wang, J., Tran, T., & Du, Z. (2024). Artificial intelligence in education: A systematic literature review. Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 252, Article 124167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2024.124167
[32]De Oliveira, J. M. (2024). Enhancing multimodal literacy through community service learning in higher education. Frontiers in Education, Vol. 9, Article 1448805. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1448805
[33]Kim, B.-J., Kim, M.-J., & Lee, J. (2024). Examining the impact of work overload on cybersecurity behavior: Highlighting self-efficacy in the realm of artificial intelligence. Current Psychology, Vol. 43, pp. 17146–17162. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-024-05692-4
[34]Sajja, R., Sermet, Y., Cikmaz, M., Cwiertny, D., & Demir, I. (2024). Artificial intelligence-enabled intelligent assistant for personalized and adaptive learning in higher education. Information, Vol. 15(10), Article 596. https://doi.org/10.3390/info15100596
[35]Shah, T. R., Kautish, P., & Mehmood, K. (2023). Influence of robots service quality on students’ acceptance in restaurants. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 35(12), pp. 3117–3137. https://doi.org/10.1108/APJML-09-2022-0780
[36]Das, S. R., & Madhusudan, J. V. (2024). Perceptions of higher education students towards ChatGPT usage. International Journal of Technology in Education, Vol. 7, pp. 86–106. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijte.5832024
[37]Uzir, M. U. H., Al Halbusi, H., Thurasamy, R., Hock, R. L. T., Aljaberi, M. A., Hasan, N., & Hamid, M. (2021). The effects of service quality, perceived value and trust in home delivery service personnel on student satisfaction: Evidence from a developing country. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 63, Article 102721. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102721
[38]Toros, E., Asiksoy, G., & Sürücü, L. (2024). Refreshment students’ perceived usefulness and attitudes towards using technology: A moderated mediation model. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Vol. 11, Article 333. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02839-3
[39]Fošner, A. (2024). University students’ attitudes and perceptions towards AI tools: Implications for sustainable educational practices. Sustainability, Vol. 16, Article 8668. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16198668
[40]Chiu, T. K. F. (2024). Future research recommendations for transforming higher education with generative AI. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 6, Article 100197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100197
[41]Xie, J., Cho, K. W., Wei, T., Xu, J., & Fan, M. (2025). The effects of academic emotions on learning outcomes: A three-level meta-analysis of research conducted between 2000 and 2024. Learning and Motivation, Vol. 90, Article 102109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lmot.2025.102109
[42]Almufarreh, A. (2024). Determinants of students' satisfaction with AI tools in education: A PLS-SEM-ANN approach. Sustainability, Vol. 16(13), Article 5354. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16135354
[43]Zhao, Z., An, Q., & Liu, J. (2025). Exploring AI tool adoption in higher education: Evidence from a PLS-SEM model integrating multimodal literacy, self-efficacy, and university support. Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 16, Article 1619391. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1619391
[44]Adiguzel, T., Kaya, M. H., & Cansu, F. K. (2023). Revolutionizing education with AI: Exploring the transformative potential of ChatGPT. Contemporary Educational Technology, Vol. 15, Article eP429. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/13152
[45]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, Vol. 28, pp. 15381–15413. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11816-3
[46]Denecke, K., Glauser, R., & Reichenpfader, D. (2023). Assessing the potential and risks of AI-based tools in higher education: Results from an e-survey and SWOT analysis. Trends in Higher Education, Vol. 2, pp. 667–688. https://doi.org/10.3390/higheredu2040039
[47]Deng, X., & Yu, Z. (2023). A meta-analysis and systematic review of the effect of chatbot technology use in sustainable education. Sustainability, Vol. 15, Article 2940. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15042940
[48]Fan, L., & Cui, F. (2024). Mindfulness, self-efficacy, and self-regulation as predictors of psychological well-being in EFL learners. Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 15, Article 1332002. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1332002
[49]Farhi, F., Jeljeli, R., Aburezeq, I., Dweikat, F. F., Al-Shami, S. A., & Slamene, R. (2023). Analyzing students’ views, concerns, and perceived ethics about ChatGPT usage. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 5, Article 100180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100180
[50]Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). International Journal of Research & Method in Education, Vol. 38(2), pp. 220–221. https://doi.org/10.1080/1743727X.2015.1005806
[51]Li, X., Gao, Z., & Liao, H. (2024). An empirical investigation of college students’ acceptance of translation technologies. PLOS ONE, Vol. 19(1), Article e0297297. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0297297
[52]Liang, J.-C., Hwang, G.-J., Chen, M.-R. A., & Darmawansah, D. (2023). Roles and research foci of artificial intelligence in language education: An integrated bibliographic analysis and systematic review approach. Interactive Learning Environments, Vol. 31, pp. 4270–4296. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.1958348
[53]Liwanag, M. F., & Galicia, L. S. (2023). Technological self-efficacy, learning motivation, and self-directed learning of selected senior high school students in a blended learning environment. Technium Social Sciences Journal, Vol. 44(1), pp. 534–559. https://doi.org/10.47577/tssj.v44i1.8980
[54]Lu, Y., Yang, Y., Zhao, Q., Zhang, C., & Li, T. J.-J. (2024). AI assistance for UX: A literature review through human-centered AI. arXiv [Preprint]. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2402.06089
[55]Zhai, X., Chu, X., Chai, C. S., Jong, M. S. Y., Istenic, A., Spector, M., et al. (2021). A review of artificial intelligence (AI) in education from 2010 to 2020. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, Vol. 37(6), pp. 1466–1485. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12611
[56]Zhao, G., Wang, Q., Wu, L., & Dong, Y. (2022). Exploring the structural relationship between university support, students’ technostress, and burnout in technology-enhanced learning. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, Vol. 31, pp. 463–473. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-021-00588-4