批判性思维对大学生在解决问题时对生成式人工智能依赖行为的影响

IF 8.1 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Chenyu Hou, Gaoxia Zhu, Vidya Sudarshan
{"title":"批判性思维对大学生在解决问题时对生成式人工智能依赖行为的影响","authors":"Chenyu Hou,&nbsp;Gaoxia Zhu,&nbsp;Vidya Sudarshan","doi":"10.1111/bjet.13613","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <p>There is a heightened concern over undergraduate students being over-reliant on Generative AI and using it recklessly. Reliance behaviours describe the frequencies and ways that people use AI tools for tasks such as problem-solving, influenced by individual factors such as trust and AI literacy. One way to conceptualise reliance is that reliance behaviours are affected by the extent to which learners consciously evaluate the relative performance of AI and humans, suggesting the potential impacts of critical thinking on reliance. This study, thus, empirically investigates the relationship between critical thinking and reliance behaviours. Critical thinking includes disposition and skills. However, limited empirical studies have investigated how critical thinking influences learners' reliance behaviours when solving problems with Generative AI. Hence, the current study conducted path analyses to investigate how critical thinking is associated with reliance behaviours and how it mediates the effect of individual factors on reliance behaviours. We collected 808 survey responses on critical thinking disposition and skills, reliance behaviours (a self-developed and validated scale, including reflective use, cautious use, thoughtless use, and collaborative use), trust towards AI, and AI literacy from undergraduates after a problem-solving task with Generative AI. The results indicate that (1) critical thinking is positively associated with the collaborative, reflective, and cautious use of Generative AI, suggesting that these three types of use of Generative AI could be considered desirable behaviours in human–AI problem-solving; (2) trust positively predicts thoughtless use; (3) critical thinking can offset the influence of trust on collaborative, reflective and cautious use; and (4) critical thinking can amplify the influence of AI literacy on reflective, cautious and collaborative use. This study contributes new insights into understanding the role of critical thinking in fostering desirable reliance behaviours, including reflective, cautious and collaborative use, and provides implications for future interventions when applying Generative AI for problem-solving.</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>Generative AI tools can potentially enhance problem-based learning (PBL) by supporting brainstorming and solution refinement.</li>\n \n <li>Reliance behaviours in human-AI collaboration are influenced by factors such as trust in AI and AI literacy.</li>\n \n <li>Strategy-graded reliance emphasizes the reasoning process leading to reliance behaviours, focusing on thoughtful engagement with AI tools, and this cognitive process can be captured by critical thinking.</li>\n </ul>\n <p>What this paper adds?\n\n </p><ul>\n \n <li>Critical thinking is positively associated with the reflective, collaborative, and cautious use of Generative AI.</li>\n \n <li>Critical thinking mediates the effects of trust and AI literacy on reliance behaviours, amplifying reflective, cautious and collaborative use while mitigating the thoughtless use of Generative AI.</li>\n \n <li>The study introduces a nuanced understanding of reliance behaviours by applying a strategy-graded framework, emphasising cognitive engagement rather than a purely outcome-based understanding of reliance behaviours.</li>\n </ul>\n <p>Implications for practice and/or policy\n\n </p><ul>\n \n <li>Educational interventions could consider critical thinking when integrating AI tools in problem-solving contexts.</li>\n \n <li>Students' trust in AI needs to be balanced with critical thinking skills to reduce overreliance and enhance thoughtful engagement with AI tools.</li>\n </ul>\n </div>\n </div>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48315,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Educational Technology","volume":"56 5","pages":"1919-1941"},"PeriodicalIF":8.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://bera-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/bjet.13613","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The role of critical thinking on undergraduates' reliance behaviours on generative AI in problem-solving\",\"authors\":\"Chenyu Hou,&nbsp;Gaoxia Zhu,&nbsp;Vidya Sudarshan\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/bjet.13613\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <p>There is a heightened concern over undergraduate students being over-reliant on Generative AI and using it recklessly. Reliance behaviours describe the frequencies and ways that people use AI tools for tasks such as problem-solving, influenced by individual factors such as trust and AI literacy. One way to conceptualise reliance is that reliance behaviours are affected by the extent to which learners consciously evaluate the relative performance of AI and humans, suggesting the potential impacts of critical thinking on reliance. This study, thus, empirically investigates the relationship between critical thinking and reliance behaviours. Critical thinking includes disposition and skills. However, limited empirical studies have investigated how critical thinking influences learners' reliance behaviours when solving problems with Generative AI. Hence, the current study conducted path analyses to investigate how critical thinking is associated with reliance behaviours and how it mediates the effect of individual factors on reliance behaviours. We collected 808 survey responses on critical thinking disposition and skills, reliance behaviours (a self-developed and validated scale, including reflective use, cautious use, thoughtless use, and collaborative use), trust towards AI, and AI literacy from undergraduates after a problem-solving task with Generative AI. The results indicate that (1) critical thinking is positively associated with the collaborative, reflective, and cautious use of Generative AI, suggesting that these three types of use of Generative AI could be considered desirable behaviours in human–AI problem-solving; (2) trust positively predicts thoughtless use; (3) critical thinking can offset the influence of trust on collaborative, reflective and cautious use; and (4) critical thinking can amplify the influence of AI literacy on reflective, cautious and collaborative use. This study contributes new insights into understanding the role of critical thinking in fostering desirable reliance behaviours, including reflective, cautious and collaborative use, and provides implications for future interventions when applying Generative AI for problem-solving.</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>Generative AI tools can potentially enhance problem-based learning (PBL) by supporting brainstorming and solution refinement.</li>\\n \\n <li>Reliance behaviours in human-AI collaboration are influenced by factors such as trust in AI and AI literacy.</li>\\n \\n <li>Strategy-graded reliance emphasizes the reasoning process leading to reliance behaviours, focusing on thoughtful engagement with AI tools, and this cognitive process can be captured by critical thinking.</li>\\n </ul>\\n <p>What this paper adds?\\n\\n </p><ul>\\n \\n <li>Critical thinking is positively associated with the reflective, collaborative, and cautious use of Generative AI.</li>\\n \\n <li>Critical thinking mediates the effects of trust and AI literacy on reliance behaviours, amplifying reflective, cautious and collaborative use while mitigating the thoughtless use of Generative AI.</li>\\n \\n <li>The study introduces a nuanced understanding of reliance behaviours by applying a strategy-graded framework, emphasising cognitive engagement rather than a purely outcome-based understanding of reliance behaviours.</li>\\n </ul>\\n <p>Implications for practice and/or policy\\n\\n </p><ul>\\n \\n <li>Educational interventions could consider critical thinking when integrating AI tools in problem-solving contexts.</li>\\n \\n <li>Students' trust in AI needs to be balanced with critical thinking skills to reduce overreliance and enhance thoughtful engagement with AI tools.</li>\\n </ul>\\n </div>\\n </div>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48315,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British Journal of Educational Technology\",\"volume\":\"56 5\",\"pages\":\"1919-1941\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://bera-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/bjet.13613\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British Journal of Educational Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://bera-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjet.13613\",\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Educational Technology","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://bera-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjet.13613","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

摘要

大学生过度依赖生成式人工智能,并且不顾后果地使用它,这引起了人们的高度关注。信赖行为描述了人们使用人工智能工具完成诸如解决问题等任务的频率和方式,受到信任和人工智能素养等个人因素的影响。将依赖概念化的一种方法是,依赖行为受到学习者有意识地评估人工智能和人类相对表现的程度的影响,这表明批判性思维对依赖的潜在影响。因此,本研究对批判性思维和依赖行为之间的关系进行了实证研究。批判性思维包括性格和技能。然而,有限的实证研究调查了批判性思维如何影响学习者在使用生成式人工智能解决问题时的依赖行为。因此,本研究通过路径分析来探讨批判性思维与依赖行为之间的关系,以及批判性思维如何中介个体因素对依赖行为的影响。我们收集了808份关于批判性思维倾向和技能、依赖行为(一个自我开发和验证的量表,包括反思使用、谨慎使用、轻率使用和协作使用)、对人工智能的信任以及大学生在使用生成式人工智能解决问题后的人工智能素养的调查回复。结果表明:(1)批判性思维与生成式人工智能的协作、反思和谨慎使用呈正相关,这表明这三种类型的生成式人工智能使用可以被认为是人类-人工智能解决问题的理想行为;(2)信任正向预测粗心使用;(3)批判性思维可以抵消信任对协作使用、反思使用和谨慎使用的影响;(4)批判性思维可以放大人工智能素养对反思、谨慎和协作使用的影响。这项研究为理解批判性思维在培养理想的依赖行为(包括反思、谨慎和协作使用)中的作用提供了新的见解,并为应用生成式人工智能解决问题时的未来干预提供了启示。关于这个主题我们已经知道了什么?生成式人工智能工具可以通过支持头脑风暴和解决方案改进来潜在地增强基于问题的学习(PBL)。人类与人工智能协作中的依赖行为受到对人工智能的信任和人工智能素养等因素的影响。战略分级依赖强调导致依赖行为的推理过程,专注于与人工智能工具的深思熟虑的接触,这种认知过程可以通过批判性思维来捕捉。这篇文章补充了什么?批判性思维与生成式人工智能的反思、协作和谨慎使用呈正相关。批判性思维调节信任和人工智能素养对依赖行为的影响,放大反思、谨慎和协作使用,同时减轻生成式人工智能的轻率使用。该研究通过应用策略分级框架引入了对依赖行为的细致理解,强调认知参与,而不是纯粹基于结果的对依赖行为的理解。在将人工智能工具整合到解决问题的环境中,教育干预可以考虑批判性思维。学生对人工智能的信任需要与批判性思维技能相平衡,以减少过度依赖,增强对人工智能工具的深思熟虑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

The role of critical thinking on undergraduates' reliance behaviours on generative AI in problem-solving

The role of critical thinking on undergraduates' reliance behaviours on generative AI in problem-solving

The role of critical thinking on undergraduates' reliance behaviours on generative AI in problem-solving

The role of critical thinking on undergraduates' reliance behaviours on generative AI in problem-solving

The role of critical thinking on undergraduates' reliance behaviours on generative AI in problem-solving

There is a heightened concern over undergraduate students being over-reliant on Generative AI and using it recklessly. Reliance behaviours describe the frequencies and ways that people use AI tools for tasks such as problem-solving, influenced by individual factors such as trust and AI literacy. One way to conceptualise reliance is that reliance behaviours are affected by the extent to which learners consciously evaluate the relative performance of AI and humans, suggesting the potential impacts of critical thinking on reliance. This study, thus, empirically investigates the relationship between critical thinking and reliance behaviours. Critical thinking includes disposition and skills. However, limited empirical studies have investigated how critical thinking influences learners' reliance behaviours when solving problems with Generative AI. Hence, the current study conducted path analyses to investigate how critical thinking is associated with reliance behaviours and how it mediates the effect of individual factors on reliance behaviours. We collected 808 survey responses on critical thinking disposition and skills, reliance behaviours (a self-developed and validated scale, including reflective use, cautious use, thoughtless use, and collaborative use), trust towards AI, and AI literacy from undergraduates after a problem-solving task with Generative AI. The results indicate that (1) critical thinking is positively associated with the collaborative, reflective, and cautious use of Generative AI, suggesting that these three types of use of Generative AI could be considered desirable behaviours in human–AI problem-solving; (2) trust positively predicts thoughtless use; (3) critical thinking can offset the influence of trust on collaborative, reflective and cautious use; and (4) critical thinking can amplify the influence of AI literacy on reflective, cautious and collaborative use. This study contributes new insights into understanding the role of critical thinking in fostering desirable reliance behaviours, including reflective, cautious and collaborative use, and provides implications for future interventions when applying Generative AI for problem-solving.

Practitioner notes

What is already known about this topic?

  • Generative AI tools can potentially enhance problem-based learning (PBL) by supporting brainstorming and solution refinement.
  • Reliance behaviours in human-AI collaboration are influenced by factors such as trust in AI and AI literacy.
  • Strategy-graded reliance emphasizes the reasoning process leading to reliance behaviours, focusing on thoughtful engagement with AI tools, and this cognitive process can be captured by critical thinking.

What this paper adds?

  • Critical thinking is positively associated with the reflective, collaborative, and cautious use of Generative AI.
  • Critical thinking mediates the effects of trust and AI literacy on reliance behaviours, amplifying reflective, cautious and collaborative use while mitigating the thoughtless use of Generative AI.
  • The study introduces a nuanced understanding of reliance behaviours by applying a strategy-graded framework, emphasising cognitive engagement rather than a purely outcome-based understanding of reliance behaviours.

Implications for practice and/or policy

  • Educational interventions could consider critical thinking when integrating AI tools in problem-solving contexts.
  • Students' trust in AI needs to be balanced with critical thinking skills to reduce overreliance and enhance thoughtful engagement with AI tools.
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
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信