When AI Scaffolding Becomes Substitution: Retained Cognitive Responsibility and Dependence Risk in ESL/EFL Higher Education

Artificial intelligence (AI) offers university ESL/EFL learners immediate feedback and practice, but assistance may also displace the work needed for independent learning. Existing research seldom distinguishes perceived autonomy, regulation during AI use, and unassisted capability. This systematic review aimed to identify how AI supports self-regulation and autonomy, when assistance risks becoming cognitive substitution, the factors associated with that transition, and its theoretical and instructional implications. A Scopus search covering January 2023 to August 2026 yielded 232 records; staged screening and full-text assessment produced 25 empirical journal articles. Methodological appraisal rated five studies as high confidence, 13 as moderate, and seven as low. Findings were synthesised across self-regulated learning phases and an autonomy–dependence continuum. AI supported feedback, rehearsal, and revision, with clearer evidence of active regulation in guided workflows requiring initial learner effort, evaluation of suggestions, and reflection. Dependence risks included premature consultation, substantial task delegation, and uncritical acceptance of output, although lasting loss of unaided capability was rarely tested. Patterns varied by learner proficiency, task demands, pedagogy, tool features, and context, but formal evidence of moderation was limited. Existing frameworks explained adoption, motivation, or mediated support without adequately connecting AI use to later independent performance. The resulting provisional Retained Cognitive Responsibility framework proposes that AI acts as a scaffold when learners retain responsibility for planning, evaluation, and learning. Instruction should make these decisions visible while future studies should test their effects through behavioural evidence and delayed unaided assessments.

Artificial intelligence; Self-regulated learning; Learner autonomy; Scaffolding; Dependence risk

1. Abdelhalim, S. M., & Almaneea, M. O. (2026). GenAI-supported collaborative project-based language learning: Effects on EFL undergraduates’ achievement and autonomy. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 11, Article 50. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-026-00430-8 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Abdullah, A. M. A., Nasim, S. M., & Alqahtani, M. A. (2026). The role of Grammarly in Saudi EFL writing: Students’ perceptions of its effectiveness, efficiency, and overreliance. FWU Journal of Social Sciences, 20(1), 133–148. https://doi.org/10.51709/19951272/Spring2026/10 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Al-Atrash, A., Hamdan, M., & Dweikat, K. (2026a). Exploring EFL students’ perspectives on ChatGPT-assisted autonomous practices in enhancing self-directed learning at Palestinian universities. Cogent Education, 13(1), Article 2689737. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2026.2689737 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Al-Atrash, A., Hamdan, M., & Dweikat, K. (2026b). Qualitative insights into EFL students’ use of ChatGPT-assisted autonomous learning for enhancing self-directed learning in Palestinian higher education. Discover Global Society, 4, Article 16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44282-026-00350-5 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Aljohani, N. J. (2025). Enhancing writing accuracy and empowering students: The transformative influence of ChatGPT’s informative feedback on students’ writing. Forum for Linguistic Studies, 7(7), 1109–1128. https://doi.org/10.30564/fls.v7i7.9849 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Alqahtani, N., Alshammari, K. K., Jamshed, M., & Karim, M. R. (2026). From pedagogy to research: Exploring ChatGPT’s transformative role in Saudi EFL educational innovation and scientific research. World Journal of English Language, 16(4), 234–245. https://doi.org/10.5430/WJEL.V16N4P234 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Al Zakwani, M., & Binu, P. M. (2025). Exploring student insights on ChatGPT as a resource for learning English and its influence on learner independence. Forum for Linguistic Studies, 7(2), 813–824. https://doi.org/10.30564/fls.v7i2.7955 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Chen, J., & Alibakhshi, G. (2026). AI-powered applications’ effects on English language learners’ cognitive, metacognitive, and resource management strategies, and language achievement. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 42(1), Article e70171. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcal.70171 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Chuanpipatpong, A. (2025). Thai EFL university students’ writing in the digital age: Error analysis revisited. PASAA, 70, 308–339. https://doi.org/10.58837/chula.pasa.70.10 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “wy” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Giang, N. T., Loc, N., & Tuyen, T. (2025). Using AI-powered tools for enhancing speaking skills of EFL learners. North American Journal of Psychology, 27(4), 1015–1016. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Hai, N. T. M., Ho, P. V. P., & Huong, N. T. (2026). Generative AI in online English learning: A qualitative case study of non-English-major students in a Vietnamese blended-learning environment. CALL-EJ, 27(2), 134–153. https://doi.org/10.54855/callej.262727 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Hong, Q. N., Pluye, P., Fàbregues, S., Bartlett, G., Boardman, F., Cargo, M., Dagenais, P., Gagnon, M.-P., Griffiths, F., Nicolau, B., O’Cathain, A., Rousseau, M.-C., & Vedel, I. (2018). Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT), version 2018: User guide. McGill University. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Hwang, E., Im, H., & Son, H. (2025). The effects of AI feedback learning activities in English writing on university students’ English achievement and writing motivation. English Teaching, 80(5), 95–117. https://doi.org/10.15858/engtea.80.5.202512.95 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Khan, R., Qamar, M. T., Ansari, M. S., & Yasmeen, J. (2025). Enhancing or impairing? Exploring Indian EFL learners’ academic writing narratives with ChatGPT. Cogent Education, 12(1), Article 2514329. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2025.2514329 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Lai, Z. C.-C. (2025). The impact of AI-assisted blended learning on writing efficacy and resilience. International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching, 15(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJCALLT.377174 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Li, L., & Kim, M. (2024). It is like a friend to me: Critical usage of automated feedback systems by self-regulating English learners in higher education. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 40(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.8821 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. MohammedAli, E. A., Veettil, R. P., Al-Zaabi, M. A., Sharafudeen, M., & Qureshi, T. (2025). Exploring Omani EFL learners’ perceptions of AI tools. Digital Technologies Research and Applications, 4(3), 206–216. https://doi.org/10.54963/dtra.v4i3.1922 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Mubarak, R. (2026). AI-powered translation apps and their impact on English language learning in Saudi Arabia. Arab World English Journal, 2026(Special Issue 3), 346–360. https://doi.org/10.24093/awej/AI3.22 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Mujeeb, N., Lodhi, M. A., Ali, A., Mashwani, W. K., Mostafa, S. M., & Ahmadini, A. A. H. (2026). Beyond red ink: AI feedback and ESL academic writing development in higher education. Language Testing in Asia, 16, Article 24. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-026-00442-8 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Nhan, L. K., Hoa, N. T. M., & Quang, L. V. N. (2025). Leveraging AI for writing instruction in EFL classrooms: Opportunities and challenges. Educational Process: International Journal, 15, Article e2025158. https://doi.org/10.22521/edupij.2025.15.158 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., … Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Rababah, L. M., Al-Namarneh, S. I. M. S., Rababah, H. A., & Ismail, I. A. (2026). From self-learners to system-dependents: The negative effects of AI on EFL autonomy in Jordan. Digital Technologies Research and Applications, 5(2), 238–250. https://doi.org/10.54963/dtra.v5i2.2081 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Tanharat, N., & Phootirat, P. (2025). Integrating generative AI in EFL academic writing: Thai English-major students’ purposes, perceptions, and experiences with ChatGPT. rEFLections, 32(3), 1891–1916. https://doi.org/10.61508/refl.v32i3.285982 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Tomchakovskyi, O., Tomchakovska, Y., Strochenko, L., Shvelidze, L., & Yeryomenko, S. (2026). Multimodal AI tools as mediators of linguistic development in EL academic writing. Arab World English Journal, 2026(Special Issue 3), 390–403. https://doi.org/1024093/awej/A3.25 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Tran, H., Crosthwaite, P., & Pham, Q. H. P. (2025). Studnts’ self-determination in using machine translation and generative AI tools for English for acadeicpurposes. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 78, Article 101578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jea.2025.101578 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Vo, T. L., & Ho, T. M. P. (2026). A quasi-experimenta study on enhancing EFL learners’ grammar precision in writing skills under supported-ChatGPT approach at a university in a remote region of Vietnam. Arab World English Journal, 2026(Special Issue 3), 361–375. https://doi.org/10.24093/awej/A3.23 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Zheng, C., & Wang, Y. (2026). Generative AI in EFL contexts: Q-methodological analysis of cognitive dissonance patterns and self-regulation strategies among Chinese tertiary learners. Acta Psychologica, 264, Article 106531. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2026.106531Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64–70. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Impact of Health Crisis on the Evolution of the Use of Scientific Knowledge Sharing Tools by Academics: A Comparative Study Within the Faculty of Sciences of Tunis
• Availability and Accessibility of Computers and ICT Resources in Teaching and Learning Chemistry in Secondary Schools in Nyamira County, Kenya
• Building and Applying the Reckless Thinking Scale among Students of the Faculties of Education for Humanities and Pure Sciences
• Evaluating the Usability of the 3Fs Flipped Model to Enhance Student Engagement: A Case Study at INTI International College Penang
• Enhancing Attendance Authenticity in Higher Education Using A QR Code and GPS-Based Smart Attendance System