Effects of Traditional and AI-Assisted Writing Feedback on L2 Writing Self-Efficacy
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.63313/ESW.9130Keywords:
L2 Writing, Writing Feedback, Writing Self-Efficacy, AI-Assisted Feedback, Mediating MechanismsAbstract
Writing self-efficacy is a pivotal motivational construct that exerts profound influence on second language (L2) learners’ writing engagement, persistence, and long-term academic performance. Writing feedback, as a core pedagogical intervention, serves as a primary external source shaping learners’ self-efficacy beliefs. Over the past decades, feedback practices in L2 writing have evolved from conventional teacher-centered modes to multi-agent models incorporating peer, self, and artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted feedback. This study systematically reviews theoretical frameworks, empirical findings, mediating mechanisms, and moderating factors concerning how traditional and AI-assisted feedback influence L2 writing self-efficacy. Drawing on a comprehensive analysis of domestic and international research, the review demonstrates that teacher feedback strengthens both cognitive and affective dimensions of self-efficacy, peer feedback fosters vicarious learning and emotional comfort, self-feedback enhances regulatory confidence, and AI-assisted feedback uniquely boosts learners’ beliefs through immediacy, personalization, and affective interaction. Mediators including flow experience, writing anxiety, and academic buoyancy are identified, alongside moderators such as learner proficiency, feedback frequency, and feedback specificity. The review further discusses critical research gaps regarding long-term effect sustainability, the complexity of AI feedback mechanisms, contextual diversity, and methodological limitations. Directions for future research are proposed to advance the field’s understanding of feedback efficacy and inform evidence-based L2 writing pedagogy.
References
[1] Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215.
[2] Bandura, A. (1997). Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. W. H. Freeman.
[3] Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2008). The relative effectiveness of different types of direct written corrective feedback. System, 37(2), 322–329.
[4] Bruning, R. H., Dempsey, M., Kauffman, D. F., McKim, C., & Zumbrunn, S. (2013). Examining dimensions of self-efficacy for writing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(1), 25–38.
[5] Chen, M., & Lv, M. C. (2024). College English writing teaching in the context of ChatGPT. Foreign Language Research, 1, 161–168.
[6] Cui, Y., Schunn, C. D., Gai, X., Jiang, Y., & Wang, Z. (2022). Effects of trained peer vs. teacher feedback on EFL students’ writing performance. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 878147.
[7] Dong, Z. H., Nan, C., & Liu, Y. Y. (2019). A comparative study of teacher and peer feedback on English writing self-efficacy. Journal of Hubei Normal University, 39(2), 127–133.
[8] Gu, S. M., & Li, L. P. (2018). English writing strategies and self-efficacy. Technology Enhanced Foreign Language Education, 2, 25–31.
[9] Jin, H. Y., Yu, M. J., Zhang, Z. H., & Li, Y. (2024). Generative AI-assisted academic writing. Open Education Research, 4, 79–90.
[10] Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. (2004). Dynamic assessment of L2 development. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1, 49–72.
[11] Li, H. (2014). Construction of EFL writing self-efficacy scale. Journal of Beijing International Studies University, 12, 70–76.
[12] Lund, B. D., & GPT, T. (2023). ChatGPT and student writing. Library and Information Science, 3, 26–29.
[13] Martin, J. A., & Marsh, H. W. (2008). Academic buoyancy. Journal of School Psychology, 46(1), 53–83.
[14] Mesurado, M., Mateo, J., & Richaud, M. (2015). Interest, proficiency, and writing skill. Journal of Psychology, 149(3), 281–299.
[15] Pajares, F., & Valiante, G. (1999). Writing self-beliefs in middle school. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 24(4), 390–405.
[16] Pekrun, R. (2006). Control-value theory of achievement emotions. Educational Psychology Review, 18(4), 315–341
[17] .Ruegg, R. (2018). Peer and teacher feedback effects. The Language Learning Journal, 46(2), 87–102.
[18] Shell, D. F., Murphy, C. C., & Bruning, R. H. (1989). Self-efficacy and writing achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(1), 91–100.
[19] Sun, T., Wang, C., Lambert, R. G., & Liu, L. (2021). L2 writing self-efficacy and achievement. Journal of Second Language Writing, 53, 1–14.
[20] Tang, F., & Xu, J. F. (2011). College English writing self-efficacy. Foreign Language World, 6, 22–29.
[21] Teng, L. S., & Zhang, J. (2024). Motivation beliefs and self-efficacy. Journal of Xi’an International Studies University, 3, 38–44.
[22] Teng, L. S., Sun, P. P., & Xu, L. (2018). Conceptualizing writing self-efficacy. TESOL Quarterly, 52(4), 911–942.
[23] Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction. Language Learning, 46(2), 191–215.
[24] Woodrow, L. (2011). College English writing affect. System, 39(4), 510–522.Wu, Y. H. (2013). Peer feedback and self-efficacy. Shandong Foreign Language Teaching, 6, 68–72.
[25] Xu, J., & Wang, Y. (2023). Academic buoyancy and self-regulated learning. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1–14.
[26] Xu, J. F., & Zhao, N. S. (2025). Learners’ flow experience in continuation writing. Foreign Language Journal, 3, 30–39.
[27] Yan, D. (2023). ChatGPT in L2 writing practicum. Education and Information Technologies, 28, 13943–13967.
[28] Zhou, R. (2025). Multi-subject evaluation and junior high school writing self-efficacy. Journal of Luoyang Normal University.
[29] Zimmerman, B. J., & Bandura, A. (1994). Self-regulation and writing attainment. American Educational Research Journal, 31(4), 845–862.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 by author(s) and Erytis Publishing Limited.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
