Beware of metacognitive laziness: Effects of generative artificial intelligence on learning motivation, processes, and performance

IF 6.7 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Yizhou Fan, Luzhen Tang, Huixiao Le, Kejie Shen, Shufang Tan, Yueying Zhao, Yuan Shen, Xinyu Li, Dragan Gašević
{"title":"Beware of metacognitive laziness: Effects of generative artificial intelligence on learning motivation, processes, and performance","authors":"Yizhou Fan,&nbsp;Luzhen Tang,&nbsp;Huixiao Le,&nbsp;Kejie Shen,&nbsp;Shufang Tan,&nbsp;Yueying Zhao,&nbsp;Yuan Shen,&nbsp;Xinyu Li,&nbsp;Dragan Gašević","doi":"10.1111/bjet.13544","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <section>\n \n \n <p>With the continuous development of technological and educational innovation, learners nowadays can obtain a variety of supports from agents such as teachers, peers, education technologies, and recently, generative artificial intelligence such as ChatGPT. In particular, there has been a surge of academic interest in human-AI collaboration and hybrid intelligence in learning. The concept of hybrid intelligence is still at a nascent stage, and how learners can benefit from a symbiotic relationship with various agents such as AI, human experts and intelligent learning systems is still unknown. The emerging concept of hybrid intelligence also lacks deep insights and understanding of the mechanisms and consequences of hybrid human-AI learning based on strong empirical research. In order to address this gap, we conducted a randomised experimental study and compared learners' motivations, self-regulated learning processes and learning performances on a writing task among different groups who had support from different agents, that is, ChatGPT (also referred to as the AI group), chat with a human expert, writing analytics tools, and no extra tool. A total of 117 university students were recruited, and their multi-channel learning, performance and motivation data were collected and analysed. The results revealed that: (1) learners who received different learning support showed no difference in post-task intrinsic motivation; (2) there were significant differences in the frequency and sequences of the self-regulated learning processes among groups; (3) ChatGPT group outperformed in the essay score improvement but their knowledge gain and transfer were not significantly different. Our research found that in the absence of differences in motivation, learners with different supports still exhibited different self-regulated learning processes, ultimately leading to differentiated performance. What is particularly noteworthy is that AI technologies such as ChatGPT may promote learners' dependence on technology and potentially trigger “metacognitive laziness”. In conclusion, understanding and leveraging the respective strengths and weaknesses of different agents in learning is critical in the field of future hybrid intelligence.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <div>\n \n <div>\n \n <h3>Practitioner notes</h3>\n <p>What is already known about this topic\n\n </p><ul>\n \n <li>Hybrid intelligence, combining human and machine intelligence, aims to augment human capabilities rather than replace them, creating opportunities for more effective lifelong learning and collaboration.</li>\n \n <li>Generative AI, such as ChatGPT, has shown potential in enhancing learning by providing immediate feedback, overcoming language barriers and facilitating personalised educational experiences.</li>\n \n <li>The effectiveness of AI in educational contexts varies, with some studies highlighting its benefits in improving academic performance and motivation, while others note limitations in its ability to replace human teachers entirely.</li>\n </ul>\n <p>What this paper adds\n\n </p><ul>\n \n <li>We conducted a randomised experimental study in the lab setting and compared learners' motivations, self-regulated learning processes and learning performances among different agent groups (AI, human expert and checklist tools).</li>\n \n <li>We found that AI technologies such as ChatGPT may promote learners' dependence on technology and potentially trigger metacognitive \"laziness\", which can potentially hinder their ability to self-regulate and engage deeply in learning.</li>\n \n <li>We also found that ChatGPT can significantly improve short-term task performance, but it may not boost intrinsic motivation and knowledge gain and transfer.</li>\n </ul>\n <p>Implications for practice and/or policy\n\n </p><ul>\n \n <li>When using AI in learning, learners should focus on deepening their understanding of knowledge and actively engage in metacognitive processes such as evaluation, monitoring, and orientation, rather than blindly following ChatGPT's feedback solely to complete tasks efficiently.</li>\n \n <li>When using AI in teaching, teachers should think about which tasks are suitable for learners to complete with the assistance of AI, pay attention to stimulating learners' intrinsic motivations, and develop scaffolding to assist learners in active learning.</li>\n \n <li>Researcher should design multi-task and cross-context studies in the future to deepen our understanding of how learners could ethically and effectively learn, regulate, collaborate and evolve with AI.</li>\n </ul>\n </div>\n </div>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48315,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Educational Technology","volume":"56 2","pages":"489-530"},"PeriodicalIF":6.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Educational Technology","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjet.13544","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

With the continuous development of technological and educational innovation, learners nowadays can obtain a variety of supports from agents such as teachers, peers, education technologies, and recently, generative artificial intelligence such as ChatGPT. In particular, there has been a surge of academic interest in human-AI collaboration and hybrid intelligence in learning. The concept of hybrid intelligence is still at a nascent stage, and how learners can benefit from a symbiotic relationship with various agents such as AI, human experts and intelligent learning systems is still unknown. The emerging concept of hybrid intelligence also lacks deep insights and understanding of the mechanisms and consequences of hybrid human-AI learning based on strong empirical research. In order to address this gap, we conducted a randomised experimental study and compared learners' motivations, self-regulated learning processes and learning performances on a writing task among different groups who had support from different agents, that is, ChatGPT (also referred to as the AI group), chat with a human expert, writing analytics tools, and no extra tool. A total of 117 university students were recruited, and their multi-channel learning, performance and motivation data were collected and analysed. The results revealed that: (1) learners who received different learning support showed no difference in post-task intrinsic motivation; (2) there were significant differences in the frequency and sequences of the self-regulated learning processes among groups; (3) ChatGPT group outperformed in the essay score improvement but their knowledge gain and transfer were not significantly different. Our research found that in the absence of differences in motivation, learners with different supports still exhibited different self-regulated learning processes, ultimately leading to differentiated performance. What is particularly noteworthy is that AI technologies such as ChatGPT may promote learners' dependence on technology and potentially trigger “metacognitive laziness”. In conclusion, understanding and leveraging the respective strengths and weaknesses of different agents in learning is critical in the field of future hybrid intelligence.

Practitioner notes

What is already known about this topic

  • Hybrid intelligence, combining human and machine intelligence, aims to augment human capabilities rather than replace them, creating opportunities for more effective lifelong learning and collaboration.
  • Generative AI, such as ChatGPT, has shown potential in enhancing learning by providing immediate feedback, overcoming language barriers and facilitating personalised educational experiences.
  • The effectiveness of AI in educational contexts varies, with some studies highlighting its benefits in improving academic performance and motivation, while others note limitations in its ability to replace human teachers entirely.

What this paper adds

  • We conducted a randomised experimental study in the lab setting and compared learners' motivations, self-regulated learning processes and learning performances among different agent groups (AI, human expert and checklist tools).
  • We found that AI technologies such as ChatGPT may promote learners' dependence on technology and potentially trigger metacognitive "laziness", which can potentially hinder their ability to self-regulate and engage deeply in learning.
  • We also found that ChatGPT can significantly improve short-term task performance, but it may not boost intrinsic motivation and knowledge gain and transfer.

Implications for practice and/or policy

  • When using AI in learning, learners should focus on deepening their understanding of knowledge and actively engage in metacognitive processes such as evaluation, monitoring, and orientation, rather than blindly following ChatGPT's feedback solely to complete tasks efficiently.
  • When using AI in teaching, teachers should think about which tasks are suitable for learners to complete with the assistance of AI, pay attention to stimulating learners' intrinsic motivations, and develop scaffolding to assist learners in active learning.
  • Researcher should design multi-task and cross-context studies in the future to deepen our understanding of how learners could ethically and effectively learn, regulate, collaborate and evolve with AI.
谨防元认知懒惰:生成式人工智能对学习动机、过程和成绩的影响
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
British Journal of Educational Technology
British Journal of Educational Technology EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
15.60
自引率
4.50%
发文量
111
期刊介绍: BJET is a primary source for academics and professionals in the fields of digital educational and training technology throughout the world. The Journal is published by Wiley on behalf of The British Educational Research Association (BERA). It publishes theoretical perspectives, methodological developments and high quality empirical research that demonstrate whether and how applications of instructional/educational technology systems, networks, tools and resources lead to improvements in formal and non-formal education at all levels, from early years through to higher, technical and vocational education, professional development and corporate training.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信