Communications in Humanities Research ISSN: 2753-7072
Home> Volumes> Volume CHR Vol.77> Article
Research Article

The Human-AI Interaction of AI Translation in Cross-Cultural Classrooms Based on the Theory of Interactive Media Effect

Yongjun XuHKUSPACE* Ziye WangMacau University of Science and Technology Luo SangXiamen University Xinai LiKing’s College London Zihan LingYali High School

* Corresponding author: [email protected]

Abstract

This study examines how Chinese international students engage with AI translation tools in English-medium instruction (EMI) classrooms, focusing on their impact on learning processes and cross-cultural understanding. Drawing on the Human–AI Interaction Theory of Interactive Media Effects (HAII-TIME), the research integrates the “cues route” (interface design, algorithmic attributes, prior experience, and cognitive heuristics) and the “action route” (interaction, agency, social exchange, and mutual augmentation) to analyze human–AI collaboration in academic contexts. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with 23 students, the majority of whom were enrolled in EMI programs in the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, and Hong Kong SAR. Thematic analysis points out that AI translation preserves comprehension, eases anxiety, and fosters student engagement, yet its limitations in cultural adaptation and pragmatic nuances often necessitate compensatory strategies like cross-platform comparison and iterative prompting. Findings highlight the reciprocal interaction of cues and actions. The study substantiates and extends the HAII-TIME framework's explanatory efficacy. Underlines the necessity of transparency and cultural adaptability in tool design, and suggests practical strategies for embedding AI translation in cross-cultural education, while warning against the potential hazards of overreliance. Underlines the necessity of transparency and cultural adaptability in tool design, and suggests practical strategies for embedding AI translation in cross-cultural education, while warning against the potential hazards of overreliance.

Keywords: AI Translation; Cross-Cultural Communication; Human-Machine Interaction; HAII-TIME Theory; Media Affordances.
Published: October 23, 2025
DOI: 10.54254/2753-7064/2025.BJ28267
Volume: CHR Vol.77
pp. 149-163
Download PDF

References

  1. Yang, W., Popov, O., & Biemans, H. J. A. (2024). Chinese international students’ perceptions of affordances and challenges in intercultural learning environments. Computers & Education, 206, 105384.
  2. Kwok, C. F., & Wang, S. (2025). Exploring the impact of study abroad on intercultural competence and language awareness: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of International and Intercultural Communication. Advance online publication.
  3. Cronjé, J. C. (2011). Using Hofstede’s cultural dimensions to interpret cross-cultural blended teaching and learning. Computers & Education, 56(3), 596–603.
  4. Erenchinova, E., & Chumanova, N. (2019). Translation as a form of cross-cultural communication. In Proceedings of the International Conference "Topical Problems of Philology and Didactics" (pp. 117–121). Atlantis Press.
  5. Köksal, O., & Yürük, N. (2020). The role of translator in intercultural communication. International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 12(1), 327–338.
  6. Li, M., & Tian, Y. (2024). Understanding Chinese students’ perceptions of AI translation tools in cross-cultural academic communication. Education and Information Technologies, 29, 14589–14605.
  7. Xu, J. (2024). Exploring the function of English translation in cross-cultural communication. Journal of Education, Humanities and Social Sciences, 43, 134–139.
  8. Xu, P., Sun, M., & Liu, Q. (2025a). Chinese students’ perceptions of affordances and challenges of AI-assisted feedback in EAP writing. Education and Information Technologies. https: //doi.org/10.1007/s10639-025-13457-0
  9. Zhai, C., Wibowo, S., & Li, L. D. (2024). Evaluating the AI dialogue system's intercultural, humorous, and empathetic dimensions in English language learning: A case study. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 7, 100262.
  10. Sundar, S. S. (2015). Theoretical framework: The cue-reactance model. In S. S. Sundar (Ed.), The handbook of the psychology of communication technology (pp. 47–71). Wiley
  11. Sundar, S. S. (2020). Rise of machine agency: A framework for studying the psychology of human–AI interaction (HAII). Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 25(1), 74–88. https: //doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmz026
  12. Xu, P., Yang, Z., & An, Y. (2025b). ChatGPT’s ability to translate implicature: An analysis of failures in AI translation based on pragmatic inference. Modern Linguistics, 13(6), 213–221.
  13. Zhang, X., & Liu, W. (2024). Exploring the impact of multimodal translation on learner agency in bilingual classrooms. Modern Linguistics, 12(5), 99–110.
  14. Scherr, J., & Yu, L. (2025). AI affordances in education: How perceived agency and interactivity shape student engagement. Scientific Reports, 15, Article 10290.
  15. Wiboolyasarin, W., Wiboolyasarin, K., Tiranant, P., Jinowat, N., & Boonyakitanont, P. (2025). AI-driven chatbots in second language education: A systematic review of their efficacy and pedagogical implications. Ampersand, 14, 100224.
  16. Bhutoria, A. (2022). Personalized education and artificial intelligence in the United States, China, and India: A systematic review using a human-in-the-loop model. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 3, 100068.
  17. Guan, L., Lee, J. C. K., Zhang, Y., & Gu, M. M. (2025). Investigating the tripartite interaction among teachers, students, and generative AI in EFL education: A mixed-methods study. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 8, 100384.
  18. Chiu, T. K., Xia, Q., Zhou, X., Chai, C. S., & Cheng, M. (2023). Systematic literature review on opportunities, challenges, and future research recommendations of artificial intelligence in education. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 4, 100118.
  19. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https: //doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.
  20. Homans, G. C. (1958). Social behavior as exchange. American journal of sociology, 63(6), 597-606.
  21. Blau, P. (2017). Exchange and power in social life. Routledge.