View in EDS PDF Full Text

Human and AI-generated feedback in higher education: A systematic review of effectiveness and student perceptions.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Human and AI-generated feedback in higher education: A systematic review of effectiveness and student perceptions.
Authors: Guardia-Paniura, Candy Haydee1, Cueva-Luza, Timoteo2, Cruz-Carpio, Favio Mauricio3, Ito-Díaz, Raúl Reynaldo4, Apaza-Paco, David Victor5, Rosas-Rojas, Nilda6, Mamani-Mamani, Benedicta4, Terrero-Pérez, Ángel7, Faria Yaedú, Renato Yassutaka7, Peralta-Mamani, Mariela7,8 marielaperalta@alumni.usp.br
Source: Contemporary Educational Technology. Jan2026, Vol. 18 Issue 1, p1-18. 18p.
Subject Terms: *Higher education, *Psychological feedback, *Psychology of students, ChatGPT
Abstract: This study aims to compare the feedback provided by human professors and ChatGPT on university students' work and to report on students' perceptions of both types of feedback. A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Databases research included Web of Science, Scopus, EBSCO, ACM Digital Library, and IEEE Xplore, with additional gray literature sources, until October 2024. Inclusion criteria were cross-sectional studies evaluating university students' work, comparing feedback from ChatGPT with human professors. Data extraction was performed using a standardized form, and risk of bias was assessed with the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tool. A narrative synthesis of the results was made. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42024566691. This review included 8 studies with 461 students. ChatGPT feedback was detailed and rapid, while human feedback was valued for its personalization and emotional support. Students appreciated the detailed and immediate nature of ChatGPT feedback but noted its lack of emotional nuance and context-specific guidance. Human feedback was preferred for addressing individual learning needs and providing affective support. A combination of both types of feedback to maximize benefits. ChatGPT can assist human teachers by providing detailed and timely feedback to university students. However, human supervision is essential to ensure feedback is nuanced and contextually appropriate. A hybrid approach can optimize the learning experience in higher education. Further research is necessary to explore AI applications in educational settings and understand their impact on learning outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Contemporary Educational Technology is the property of Bastas Publications and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Education Research Complete
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
Text:
  Availability: 0
Header DbId: ehh
DbLabel: Education Research Complete
An: 192710712
AccessLevel: 6
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Human and AI-generated feedback in higher education: A systematic review of effectiveness and student perceptions.
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Guardia-Paniura%2C+Candy+Haydee%22">Guardia-Paniura, Candy Haydee</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Cueva-Luza%2C+Timoteo%22">Cueva-Luza, Timoteo</searchLink><relatesTo>2</relatesTo><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Cruz-Carpio%2C+Favio+Mauricio%22">Cruz-Carpio, Favio Mauricio</searchLink><relatesTo>3</relatesTo><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Ito-Díaz%2C+Raúl+Reynaldo%22">Ito-Díaz, Raúl Reynaldo</searchLink><relatesTo>4</relatesTo><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Apaza-Paco%2C+David+Victor%22">Apaza-Paco, David Victor</searchLink><relatesTo>5</relatesTo><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Rosas-Rojas%2C+Nilda%22">Rosas-Rojas, Nilda</searchLink><relatesTo>6</relatesTo><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Mamani-Mamani%2C+Benedicta%22">Mamani-Mamani, Benedicta</searchLink><relatesTo>4</relatesTo><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Terrero-Pérez%2C+Ángel%22">Terrero-Pérez, Ángel</searchLink><relatesTo>7</relatesTo><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Faria+Yaedú%2C+Renato+Yassutaka%22">Faria Yaedú, Renato Yassutaka</searchLink><relatesTo>7</relatesTo><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Peralta-Mamani%2C+Mariela%22">Peralta-Mamani, Mariela</searchLink><relatesTo>7,8</relatesTo><i> marielaperalta@alumni.usp.br</i>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22Contemporary+Educational+Technology%22">Contemporary Educational Technology</searchLink>. Jan2026, Vol. 18 Issue 1, p1-18. 18p.
– Name: Subject
  Label: Subject Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: *<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Higher+education%22">Higher education</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Psychological+feedback%22">Psychological feedback</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Psychology+of+students%22">Psychology of students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22ChatGPT%22">ChatGPT</searchLink>
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: This study aims to compare the feedback provided by human professors and ChatGPT on university students' work and to report on students' perceptions of both types of feedback. A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Databases research included Web of Science, Scopus, EBSCO, ACM Digital Library, and IEEE Xplore, with additional gray literature sources, until October 2024. Inclusion criteria were cross-sectional studies evaluating university students' work, comparing feedback from ChatGPT with human professors. Data extraction was performed using a standardized form, and risk of bias was assessed with the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tool. A narrative synthesis of the results was made. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42024566691. This review included 8 studies with 461 students. ChatGPT feedback was detailed and rapid, while human feedback was valued for its personalization and emotional support. Students appreciated the detailed and immediate nature of ChatGPT feedback but noted its lack of emotional nuance and context-specific guidance. Human feedback was preferred for addressing individual learning needs and providing affective support. A combination of both types of feedback to maximize benefits. ChatGPT can assist human teachers by providing detailed and timely feedback to university students. However, human supervision is essential to ensure feedback is nuanced and contextually appropriate. A hybrid approach can optimize the learning experience in higher education. Further research is necessary to explore AI applications in educational settings and understand their impact on learning outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
– Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright
  Label:
  Group: Ab
  Data: <i>Copyright of Contemporary Educational Technology is the property of Bastas Publications and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=ehh&AN=192710712
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.30935/cedtech/17863
    Languages:
      – Code: eng
        Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 18
        StartPage: 1
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Higher education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Psychological feedback
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Psychology of students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: ChatGPT
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Human and AI-generated feedback in higher education: A systematic review of effectiveness and student perceptions.
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Guardia-Paniura, Candy Haydee
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Cueva-Luza, Timoteo
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Cruz-Carpio, Favio Mauricio
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Ito-Díaz, Raúl Reynaldo
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Apaza-Paco, David Victor
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Rosas-Rojas, Nilda
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Mamani-Mamani, Benedicta
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Terrero-Pérez, Ángel
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Faria Yaedú, Renato Yassutaka
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Peralta-Mamani, Mariela
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Text: Jan2026
              Type: published
              Y: 2026
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1309517X
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 18
            – Type: issue
              Value: 1
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Contemporary Educational Technology
              Type: main
ResultId 1