AI-Assisted Writing: How Gemini Reduces Cognitive Load among ESL Learners

Authors

Farahidatul Akmar Bt Awaludin

Academy of Language Studies, Universiti Teknologi MARA Perak Branch, Tapah Campus (Malaysia)

Azurawati Bt Zaidi

Academy of Language Studies, Universiti Teknologi MARA Perak Branch, Tapah Campus (Malaysia)

Nurul Farhani Bt Che Ghani

Academy of Language Studies, Universiti Teknologi MARA Perak Branch, Tapah Campus (Malaysia)

Wan Faridatul Akma Bt Wan Mohd Rashdi

Academy of Language Studies, Universiti Teknologi MARA Perak Branch, Seri Iskandar Campus (Malaysia)

Article Information

DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS.2026.100600705

Subject Category: Social science

Volume/Issue: 10/6 | Page No: 10034-10054

Publication Timeline

Submitted: 2026-06-12

Accepted: 2026-06-17

Published: 2026-07-03

Abstract

Writing in a second language imposes a heavy dual-task burden, causing extraneous cognitive overload that hinders higher-order composition goals. This study investigated the efficacy of Gemini in reducing intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load among English as a Second Language (ESL) learners. Data were collected through a quantitative survey design using a 10-section questionnaire administered to 135 respondents across different genders and academic disciplines (science and technology, and social sciences). The results show that Gemini significantly reduces the unnecessary cognitive load, especially in terms of translation (M = 4.16) and linguistic support. Moreover, the tool improves relevant loads by increasing student engagement (M = 4.01) and stimulating critical thinking through the evaluation of different perspectives. Similar cognitive benefits were observed for all demographic characteristics. Ultimately, Gemini works as a “cognitive partner” that takes learners from localised error monitoring to the overall rhetorical techniques. This study promotes the incorporation of AI-assisted scaffolding into ESL curriculum to shift writing teaching from basic mechanical accuracy to critical assessment and creative synthesis.

Keywords

Gemini AI, ESL Writing, Cognitive Load Theory, Generative AI

Downloads

References

1. Ahmad, N., Alias, F.A., Hamat, M., & Mohamed, S.A. (2024) Reliability Analysis: Application of Cronbach’s Alpha in Research Instruments. SIG: e-L earning@CS, 114-119. https://appspenang.uitm.edu.my/sigcs/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Akhoon, N. A., Khan, M. Y., & Bhat, T. A. (2024). Comparing Google Gemini and Gemini in academic writing: Accuracy in research-based questions. AI & Society, 39(2), 145-158. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-023-01812-3 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Azmi, K., & Fithriani, R., (2025). Students’ Perceptions of Gemini AI Effectiveness in Academic Writing, Journal of Language Teaching and Learning, Linguistics and Literature IDEAS, Vol. 13, No. 1. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.24256/ideas.v13i1.6278 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Barrot, J. S. (2024). Experimental study on Google Gemini in improving EFL academic writing: Organization, coherence, and revision. Journal of Second Language Writing, 63, Article 101045. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2024.101045 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Clark, C., & Kimmons, R. (2023). Cognitive load theory. In EdTech Books. edtechbooks.org Retrieved from : https://edtechbooks.org/encyclopedia/cognitive_load_theory [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Derakhshan, A. Tracking the Effects of Gemini as a GenAI Tool on L2 Learners’ Writing Proficiency and Anxiety: Latent Growth Curve Modeling Approach. Asia-Pacific Edu Res (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-025-01042-5 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Fang, Y., Tang, Y., Sun, Y., Liu, J., Wang, Z., Zhao, X., Liu, B., Zhang, W., Liu, K., Zhang, W., & Chen, K. (2026). MindCopilot: Towards Formalizing and Evaluating Granular Human-LLM Co-Writing. arXiv preprint arXiv:2605.23535v1 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Gupta, S. (2024). Adoption and impacts of generative artificial intelligence: Theoretical underpinnings and research agenda. International Journal of Information Management Data Insights. Volume 4, Issue 1. Retrieved from : https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667096824000211 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. He, L. (2024) The Application of SPSS Correlation Analysis in the Study of Precision Teaching of English in Universities. Applied Mathematics and Nonlinear Science, 9(1), 1-13. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/amns-2024-1371 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Kawinkoonlasate, P. (2025). A comparative study of Google Gemini and Gemini in enhancing English language learning for EFL learners: A case study of the English research writing course. Pedagogical Research, 10(4), em0251. https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/17670 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Khairuddin,Z, Rahmat, N.H., Noor, M.M., & Khairuddin,Z. (2021) The Use of Rhetorical Strategies in Argumentative Essays. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, 29(S3), 263-285). https://doi.org/10.47836/pjssh.29.S3.14 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Kosmyna, N., Hauptmann, E., Yuan, Y. T., Situ, J., Liao, X.-H., Beresnitzky, A. V., Braunstein, I., & Maes, P. (2025). Your Brain on Gemini: Accumulation of Cognitive Debt when Using an AI Assistant for Essay Writing Task. MIT Media Lab. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Miguez Gordillo, M. A., (2026). The use of Gemini IA to enhance the English language speaking skill. Multidisciplinary Journal Epistemology of the Sciences. Volume 3, Issue 2. Retrieved from : https://www.researchgate.net/publication/404069600_The_use_of_Gemini_IA_to_enhance_the_english_language_speaking_skillEl_uso_de_Gemini_AI_para_mejorar_la_destreza_del_habla_inglesa [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Park, J., & Gupta, S. (2024). Multimodal AI in academic writing support: Vocabulary acquisition and content relevance. AI & Education Review, 25(1), 67-85. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Pratiwi, W. R., Arifin, A. H., Sultan, Z., Acfira, L. G., & Andriyansah. (2024). The domino effect of artificial intelligence on students' scientific writing quality. Multidisciplinary Reviews, 7(2). https://doi.org/-10.31893/multirev.2024036 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Rahmat,N.H. (2021) An Investigative Study of Cognitive and Metacognitive Paraphrasing Strategies in ESL Writing. International Journal of Academic Research in Business & Social Sciences, 11(3), 76-87. http://dx.doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v11-i3/8919 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Raoofi,S. Miri,A., Gharibi,J. & Malaki, B. (2017) Assessing and Validating a Writing Strategy Scale for Undergraduate Students. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, Vol 8(3), pp 624-633. Retrieved from http://www.academypublication.com/issues2/jltr/vol08/03/23.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem-solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/0364-0213(88)90023-7 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Sweller, J., (2024). Cognitive load theory and individual differences. ScienceDirect. Volume 110. Retrieved from : https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2024.102423 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Vetter, T.R. (2017) Descriptive Statistics: Reporting the Answers to the 5 Basic Questions of Who, What, Why, When, Where, and a Sixth, So What? Anesth Analg, 12595), 1797-1802. https://doi.org/10.1213/ane.0000000000002471 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Yao, G., & Fan, L. (2025). Cognitive load scale for AI-assisted L2 writing: scale development and validation. Frontiers in Psychology, 16, 1666974. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1666974 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Youssef,E., Medhat,M., Abdellatif,S., & Al Malek,M. (2024) Examining the effect of Gemini usage on students’ academic learning and achievement: A survey-based study in Ajman,UAE. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 7(Dec 2024), 100316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100316 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Ziegenfuss, J. Y., Casey A. E., Jennifer M. D., Meghan M. J., Thomas E. K., and Marna C. (2021) Impact of Demographic Survey Questions on Response Rate and Measurement: A Randomized Experiment. Survey Practice 14 (1), https://doi.org/10.29115/SP-2021-0010. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

Metrics

Views & Downloads

Similar Articles