比较 ChatGPT 与专家对心理素养评估情景的反应

M. A. Machin, Tanya M. Machin, Natalie Gasson
{"title":"比较 ChatGPT 与专家对心理素养评估情景的反应","authors":"M. A. Machin, Tanya M. Machin, Natalie Gasson","doi":"10.1177/14757257241241592","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Progress in understanding students’ development of psychological literacy is critical. However, generative AI represents an emerging threat to higher education which may dramatically impact on student learning and how this learning transfers to their practice. This research investigated whether ChatGPT responded in ways that demonstrated psychological literacy and whether it matched the responses of subject matter experts (SMEs) on a measure of psychological literacy. We tasked ChatGPT with providing responses to 13 psychology research methods scenarios as well as to rate each of the five response options that were already developed for each scenario by the research team. ChatGPT responded in ways that would typically be regarded as displaying a high level of psychological literacy. The response options which were previously rated by two groups of SMEs were then compared with ratings provided by ChatGPT. The Pearson's correlations were very high ( r's  = .73 and .80, respectively), as were the Spearman's rhos (rho's = .81 and .82, respectively). Kendall's tau were also quite high (tau's = .67 and .68, respectively). We conclude that ChatGPT may generate responses that match SME psychological literacy in research methods, which could also generalise across multiple domains of psychological literacy.","PeriodicalId":345415,"journal":{"name":"Psychology Learning & Teaching","volume":"52 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing ChatGPT With Experts’ Responses to Scenarios that Assess Psychological Literacy\",\"authors\":\"M. A. Machin, Tanya M. Machin, Natalie Gasson\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14757257241241592\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Progress in understanding students’ development of psychological literacy is critical. However, generative AI represents an emerging threat to higher education which may dramatically impact on student learning and how this learning transfers to their practice. This research investigated whether ChatGPT responded in ways that demonstrated psychological literacy and whether it matched the responses of subject matter experts (SMEs) on a measure of psychological literacy. We tasked ChatGPT with providing responses to 13 psychology research methods scenarios as well as to rate each of the five response options that were already developed for each scenario by the research team. ChatGPT responded in ways that would typically be regarded as displaying a high level of psychological literacy. The response options which were previously rated by two groups of SMEs were then compared with ratings provided by ChatGPT. The Pearson's correlations were very high ( r's  = .73 and .80, respectively), as were the Spearman's rhos (rho's = .81 and .82, respectively). Kendall's tau were also quite high (tau's = .67 and .68, respectively). We conclude that ChatGPT may generate responses that match SME psychological literacy in research methods, which could also generalise across multiple domains of psychological literacy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":345415,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychology Learning & Teaching\",\"volume\":\"52 5\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychology Learning & Teaching\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/14757257241241592\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychology Learning & Teaching","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14757257241241592","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在了解学生的心理素养发展方面取得进展至关重要。然而,生成式人工智能对高等教育构成了新的威胁,可能会极大地影响学生的学习以及如何将这种学习转化为实践。本研究调查了 ChatGPT 的反应方式是否体现了心理素养,以及是否与主题专家(SMEs)在心理素养测量中的反应相匹配。我们要求 ChatGPT 对 13 个心理学研究方法情景做出回应,并对研究团队为每个情景开发的五个回应选项进行评分。ChatGPT 的回答方式通常被视为具有较高的心理学素养。然后,将之前由两组中小型企业评定的回答选项与 ChatGPT 提供的评定结果进行比较。皮尔逊相关系数非常高(r's 分别为 0.73 和 0.80),斯皮尔曼相关系数也很高(rho's 分别为 0.81 和 0.82)。Kendall's tau 也相当高(tau's = .67 和 .68)。我们的结论是,ChatGPT 可能会产生与中小学心理素养中的研究方法相匹配的回答,这也可以在心理素养的多个领域得到推广。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparing ChatGPT With Experts’ Responses to Scenarios that Assess Psychological Literacy
Progress in understanding students’ development of psychological literacy is critical. However, generative AI represents an emerging threat to higher education which may dramatically impact on student learning and how this learning transfers to their practice. This research investigated whether ChatGPT responded in ways that demonstrated psychological literacy and whether it matched the responses of subject matter experts (SMEs) on a measure of psychological literacy. We tasked ChatGPT with providing responses to 13 psychology research methods scenarios as well as to rate each of the five response options that were already developed for each scenario by the research team. ChatGPT responded in ways that would typically be regarded as displaying a high level of psychological literacy. The response options which were previously rated by two groups of SMEs were then compared with ratings provided by ChatGPT. The Pearson's correlations were very high ( r's  = .73 and .80, respectively), as were the Spearman's rhos (rho's = .81 and .82, respectively). Kendall's tau were also quite high (tau's = .67 and .68, respectively). We conclude that ChatGPT may generate responses that match SME psychological literacy in research methods, which could also generalise across multiple domains of psychological literacy.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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