Science for Education Today, 2026, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 321–339
© Samoylova A. V., Krezhevskikh O. V., Bulatova O. V., 2026
UDC: 
378.1+37.03+004.8+316.77

Specifics of integrating artificial intelligence into teaching and learning: Evaluating the development of cognitive flexibility among university students majoring in various fields

Samoylova A. V. 1 (Tyumen, Russian Federation), Krezhevskikh O. V. 2 (Tyumen, Russian Federation), Bulatova O. V. 1 (Tyumen, Russian Federation)
1 Tyumen State University
2 Federal State Autonomous Educational Institution of Higher Education "Tyumen State University"
Full text (Open Access) — Downloaded 1
Abstract: 

Introduction. This article explores the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into the educational process at a university. The article aims to identify attitudes toward AI (technophobia/technophilia) based on cognitive flexibility of university students majoring in different fields.
Materials and Methods. The methodological basis of the study was the concept of personality development, emphasizing the individual’s active involvement in their own transformation and development, as well as their engagement with the external environment (E. F. Zeer, A. N. Leontiev, et al.). Changes in the external environment are reflected in the transformation of personality structure. The digital environment plays a key role, determining the direction, content, and nature of personality development, especially among students. Empirical methods included psychological assessment techniques and methods of mathematical statistics. The sample included 146 full-time students majoring in various fields of study.
Results. The results show that students majoring in various fields use generative AI models in learning. A comparative analysis revealed that students majoring in Education have the highest degree of technophobia toward AI technologies, specifically the belief that digital technologies will replace humans. Students majoring in Psychological sciences demonstrate cognitive adaptability and perceive difficult situations as controllable. Students majoring in Information Technologies have a more positive attitude toward digital technologies. A correlation was found between technophobia/technophilia and cognitive flexibility among students of different majors.
Conclusions. The authors concluded that attitudes towards AI (technophobia/technophilia) depend on cognitive flexibility; a positive attitude towards AI integration demonstrates cognitive adaptability, while cognitive rigidity is combined with fear and anxiety.

Keywords: 

Generative artificial intelligence; Attitudes toward artificial intelligence; Cognitive flexibility; University student; Higher education.

For citation:
Samoylova A. V., Krezhevskikh O. V., Bulatova O. V. Specifics of integrating artificial intelligence into teaching and learning: Evaluating the development of cognitive flexibility among university students majoring in various fields. Science for Education Today, 2026, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 321–339. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15293/2658-6762.2602.14
References: 
  1. Chan C. A comprehensive AI policy education framework for university teaching and learning. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 2023, vol. 20 (1). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00408-3
  2. Khasawneh O. Y. Technophobia without boarders: The influence of technophobia and emotional intelligence on technology acceptance and the moderating influence of organizational climate. Computers in Human Behavior, 2018, vol. 88, pp. 210-218. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.07.007
  3. Trenerry B., Chng S., Wang Y., Suhaila Z. S., Lim S. S., Lu H. Y., Oh P. H. Preparing workplaces for digital transformation: An integrative review and framework of multi-level factors. Frontiers in Psychology, 2021, vol. 12, pp. 620766. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.620766
  4. Djokic I., Milicevic N., Djokic N., Malcic B., Kalaš B. Students perceptions of the use of Artificial Intelligence in Educational Service. Amfiteatru Economic, 2024, vol. 26 (65). DOI: https://doi.org/10.24818/EA/2024/65/294
  5. Alekseev S. A. Attitude of student youth to the development and application of artificial intelligence technology. Sustainable Development Management, 2023, no. 4, pp. 73-77. (In Russian) URL: https://elibrary.ru/CAQHQJ  DOI: https://doi.org/10.55421/2499992X_2023_4_73 
  6. Buyakova K. I., Dmitriev Y. A., Ivanova A. S., Feshchenko A. V., Yakovleva K. I. Students’ and teachers’ attitudes towards the use of tools with generative artificial intelligence at the university. Education and Science, 2024, vol. 26 (7), pp. 160–193. (In Russian) URL: https://elibrary.ru/BSEUWY  DOI: https://doi.org/10.17853/1994-5639-2024-7-160-193 
  7. Saenko A. Y. The relationship of technophobia and technophilia with intrasubjective factors in representatives of different age groups. Scientific Result. Pedagogy and Psychology of Education, 2024, vol. 10 (3), pp. 144-160. (In Russian) URL: https://www.elibrary.ru/CKBLWO DOI: https://doi.org/10.18413/2313-8971-2024-10-3-1-0 
  8. Soldatova G. U., Nestik T. A. Internet users’ attitudes towards the internet: technophobes and technophiles. Bulletin of Moscow State Regional University. Series: Psychological Sciences, 2016, no. 1, pp. 54-61. (In Russian) URL: https://www.elibrary.ru/VXKNTN DOI: https://doi.org/10.18384/2310-7235-2016-1-54-61 
  9. Subero-Navarro Á., Pelegrín-Borondo J., Reinares-Lara E., Olarte-Pascual C. Proposal for modeling social robot acceptance by retail customers: CAN model+ technophobia. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 2022, vol. 64, pp. 102813. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102813 

10.Lund B. D., Mannuru N. R., Agbaji D. AI anxiety and fear: A look at perspectives of information science students and professionals towards artificial intelligence. Journal of Information Science. 2024, pp. 01655515241282001. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/01655515241282001 

11.Wang G., Obrenovic B., Gu X., Godinic D. Fear of the new technology: Investigating the factors that influence individual attitudes toward generative Artificial Intelligence (AI). Current Psychology, 2025, vol. 44 (9), pp. 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-025-07357-2

12.Gerli P., Clement J., Esposito G., Mora L., Crutzen N. The hidden power of emotions: How psychological factors influence skill development in smart technology adoption. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 2022, vol. 180, pp. 121721. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121721

13.Adesuyi F. E. Correlation between integration of artificial-intelligence tools and technophobia on learning outcomes among undergraduate students in university of Offa, Kwara State, Nigeria. Federal University Gusau Faculty of Education Journal, 2025, vol. 5 (5), pp. 108-114. DOI: https://doi.org/10.64348/zije.2025164

14.Nestik T. A. Attitudes toward new technologies and individual values of Russians. Institute of Psychology of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Organizational Psychology and Labor Psychology, 2020, vol. 4 (4), pp. 54-82. (In Russian). URL: https://elibrary.ru/KOPTXC DOI: https://doi.org/10.38098/ipran.opwp.2020.17.4.003 

15.Osiceanu M. E. Psychological implications of modern technologies: “technofobia” versus “technophilia”. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2015, vol. 180, pp. 1137-1144. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.02.229.

16.Getenet S., Cantle R., Redmond P., Albion P. Students' digital technology attitude, literacy and self-efficacy and their effect on online learning engagement. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 2024, vol. 21 (1). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00437-y

17.Wang J., Zhou C., Song Q., Xu F. The relationship between teacher support and positive emotions in Chinese higher vocational students: Multiple mediating effects of procrastination behavior and interpersonal assistance. Frontiers in Psychology, 2023, vol. 14, pp. 1201864. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1201864

18.Chai T., Sha C. Prevention of AI learning anxiety: The chain mediation role of technophilia and AI self-efficacy under the context of teacher support. Acta Psychologica, 2025, vol. 261, pp. 105979. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2025.105979

19.Osavolyuk E. Y., Kurginyan S. S. Person's cognitive flexibility: Theory, measurement, and practice. Psychology. Journal of the Higher School of Economics, 2018, vol. 15 (1), pp. 128-144. (In Russian) URL: https://elibrary.ru/YWYOOT DOI: https://doi.org/10.17323/1813-8918-2018-1-128-144 

20.Karakuş İ. University students’ cognitive flexibility and critical thinking dispositions. Frontiers in Psychology, 2024, vol. 15, pp. 1420272. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1420272

21.Nakhostin-Khayyat M., Borjali M., Zeinali M., Fardi D., Montazeri A. The relationship between self-regulation, cognitive flexibility, and resilience among students: A structural equation modeling. BMC Psychology, 2024, vol. 12 (1), pp. 337. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-024-01843-1

22.Karaoglan Yilmaz F. G., Yilmaz R. Exploring the role of self-regulated learnings skills, cognitive flexibility, and metacognitive awareness on generative artificial intelligence attitude. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 2025, vol. 62 (2), pp. 1-14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2025.2484613

23.Zeer E. F., Tserkovnikova N. G., Tretyakova V. S. Digital generation in the context of predicting the professional future. Education and Science, 2021, vol. 23 (6), pp. 153-184. (In Russian) URL: https://www.elibrary.ru/NDPSAT DOI: https://doi.org/10.17853/1994-5639-2021-6-153-184 

24.Dorokhov E. A., Gusev A. N. Adaptation of technophobia and technophilia questionnaires into Russian. Bulletin of Moscow University. Series 14. Psychology, 2023, vol. 46 (4), pp. 272-305. (In Russian) DOI: https://doi.org/10.11621/LPJ-23-48

25.Kurginyan S. S., Osavolyuk E. Yu. The cognitive flexibility inventory (cfi): Adaptation for Russian-speaking sampling. Psychological Journal, 2018, vol. 39 (2), pp. 105-119. (In Russian) URL: https://elibrary.ru/TEUMEF DOI: https://doi.org/10.7868/S0205959218020101  

26.Frolova E. V., Rogach O. V., Kuznetsov Y. V. Information and educational environment of the university: Priorities and development deficits. Education and Science, 2025, vol. 27 (6), pp. 9-28. (In Russian) URL: https://elibrary.ru/MOPYYX DOI: https://doi.org/10.17853/1994-5639-2025-6-9-28 

Date of the publication 30.04.2026