The Effectiveness of AI-Supported Scientific Research Methodology Workshops in Developing Moral Intelligence and Systems Thinking and Their Impact on the Quality of Research Proposals among Graduate Students at the College of Strategic Defense, Al-Rajma

Abstract

This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of applied workshops supported by artificial intelligence tools in developing systems thinking and moral intelligence, and to determine the impact of this on the quality of research proposals among graduate students. To achieve this goal, the study adopted a mixed-methods approach following an explanatory sequential design. In the first quantitative phase, a one-group quasi-experimental design (pre-post) was applied, followed by a second qualitative phase using an exploratory interpretive design. The study sample consisted of 6 graduate students in the Department of Psychological and Educational Counseling, who underwent a training program consisting of 16 sessions, each lasting 3 hours. For data collection, the following instruments were used: a moral intelligence scale, a systems thinking scale, and a methodological evaluation card for research proposals (for the quantitative phase), in addition to self-reflection report questions (for the qualitative phase), after verifying their psychometric properties. The quantitative results showed the effectiveness of the workshops in developing systems thinking, revealing statistically significant differences in favor of the post-test with a very large effect size (d = 4.03) across all its dimensions. As for the level of moral intelligence, despite the increase in its mean score (from 40 to 45.8), it did not reach statistical significance; this is attributed to the small sample size and the high level of pre-test performance rather than an absence of effect. This interpretation was confirmed through content analysis of the research proposals, which showed a statistically significant improvement in the ethical dimension (t = 4.11, p = 0.009, with a very large effect size), and consensus among the sample members that the acquired ethical practices improved the quality of their research output. The final research proposal averages also significantly exceeded the theoretical benchmark in the total score and its indicators (methodological, ethical, and technical) with very large effect sizes, while the "systemic indicators" dimension did not reach statistical significance despite its large effect size — indicating a "transfer gap" between the mental acquisition of the skill and its procedural translation into the structure of the proposal. The qualitative results derived from the reflective reports supported the quantitative findings, revealing four main themes: reduction of cognitive load, transformation of moral intelligence into a neutral, stigma-free linguistic practice, the development of thinking from linear causality to networked (systemic) vision, and a shift in the student's research identity from a transmitter of information to a producer of knowledge.