Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
The goal of this randomized controlled lab experiment is to examine if using generated artificial intelligence (AI) technology will affect people's academic performance and cognitive abilities in the context of analytical writing among college students. The main questions it aims to answer are:
Participants will be randomly assigned to either a control group, which is writing without AI assistance, or an experimental group, which is writing with the assistance of ChatGPT. Researchers will compare the two groups to see if ChatGPT affects students' writing performance and cognitive effort.
For each participant, the lab experiment will last for no more than 1.5 hours. An eye-tracker will monitor the participant's gaze activities and pupil size. A functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) will monitor the participant's brain activities in the frontal lobe. During the experiment, participants will be asked to:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention arm | Experimental | In the intervention arm, participants are instructed to use ChatGPT for assistance to complete an analytical writing task. |
|
| Control arm | No Intervention | In the control arm, participants are instructed to complete an analytical writing task independently without access to any technology assistance. |
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GPT Support | Behavioral | The computer interface used for the essay writing task follows a split-screen design. The writing instructions and text input field are administered on a survey platform, placed on the left half of the screen. ChatGPT is placed on the right half of the screen for technology assistance. |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Writing Performance | The essay writing task is derived from the Analytical Writing section in the Graduate Record Examinations (GRE), which is a worldwide and standardized computer-based exam developed by the Educational Testing Service (ETS). The participants' essays will be scored on a scale from 0 to 6 by an automatic and validated third-party scoring tool that is also developed by ETS. | 1.5 hours |
| Cognitive Effort Measured by Pupil Size | Cognitive effort is quantified by monitoring changes in pupil size. To achieve this, pupil diameters are recorded throughout the writing task using a near-infrared eye tracker, specifically the Tobii Pro Fusion model. At the start of the experiment, individual baseline pupil diameters are measured during a 30-second relaxation task. | 1.5 hours |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Self-Perception of Writing Performance | This is a one-item scale: Using the same grading rubric from before, what score do you think your essay should get (0 being the lowest and 6 being the highest)? The score ranges from 0 to 6. A higher score indicates higher self-perceived writing performance. The variable is treated as a continuous variable. | 1.5 hours |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Till Bärnighausen | Heidelberg Institute of Global Health | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Core Facility for Neuroscience of Self-Regulation, Heidelberg University | Heidelberg | Germany |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 40646586 | Derived | Chen Y, Wang Y, Wustenberg T, Kizilcec RF, Fan Y, Li Y, Lu B, Yuan M, Zhang J, Zhang Z, Geldsetzer P, Chen S, Barnighausen T. Effects of generative artificial intelligence on cognitive effort and task performance: study protocol for a randomized controlled experiment among college students. Trials. 2025 Jul 11;26(1):244. doi: 10.1186/s13063-025-08950-3. |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D000092862 | Psychological Well-Being |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D010549 | Personal Satisfaction |
| D001519 | Behavior |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
|
| Self-Perception of Cognitive Effort | This is a one-item Likert scale adapted from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration-task load index (NASA-TLX; Hart, 2006; Hart & Staveland, 1988): On a scale of 1 to 7, rate how hard you have to work to accomplish your level of performance. The Likert score ranges from 1 to 7 (1 being "very low" and 7 being "very high"). A higher score indicates higher self-perceived cognitive effort. The variable is treated as a continuous variable. References:
| 1.5 hours |
| Cognitive Effort Measured by Cortical Hemodynamic Activity in the Frontal Lobe | Cognitive Effort is quantified by monitoring changes in the cortical hemodynamic activity in the frontal lobe. To achieve this, the brain activity is recorded throughout the writing task using a functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS), specifically the NIRSport2 model. | 1.5 hours |
| Self-Perception of Stress | This is a one-item Likert sub-scale adapted from the Primary Appraisal Secondary Appraisal scale (PASA; Gaab, 2009; Pollak et al., 2020): On a scale of 1 to 7, how much would you agree or disagree with the following statement on perceived stress: The analytical writing assignment was stressful to me. The Likert score ranges from 1 to 7 (1 being "strongly disagree" and 7 being "strongly agree"). A higher score indicates higher self-perceived stress. The variable is treated as a continuous variable. References:
| 1.5 hours |
| Self-Perception of Challenge | This is a one-item Likert sub-scale adapted from the Primary Appraisal Secondary Appraisal scale (PASA; Gaab, 2009; Pollak et al., 2020): On a scale of 1 to 7, how much would you agree or disagree with the following statement on perceived challenge: I find the analytical writing assignment a challenge. The Likert score ranges from 1 to 7 (1 being "strongly disagree" and 7 being "strongly agree"). A higher score indicates higher self-perceived challenge. The variable is treated as a continuous variable. References:
| 1.5 hours |
| Self-Efficacy in Writing | This is a sixteen-item Likert scale that measures three dimensions of writing self-efficacy: ideation, convention and self-regulation (Bruning et al., 2013). The Likert score ranges from 1 to 7 (1 being "strongly disagree" and 7 being "strongly agree"). A higher score indicates higher self-efficacy. The three dimensions will be treated separately, each as a continuous variable. Reference: 1. Bruning, R., Dempsey, M., Kauffman, D. F., McKim, C., & Zumbrunn, S. (2013). Examining dimensions of self-efficacy for writing. Journal of educational psychology, 105(1), 25. | 1.5 hours |
| Situational Interest in Analytical Writing | This is a four-item Likert scale adapted from the situational interest scale (Hulleman et al., 2010). This scale measures participants' situational interest in analytical writing: On a scale of 1 to 7, how much would you agree or disagree with the following statements on your interest in the analytical writing assignment that you just completed?
The Likert score ranges from 1 to 7 (1 being "strongly disagree" and 7 being "strongly agree"). A higher score indicates higher situational interest. The variable is treated as a continuous variable. Reference: 1. Hulleman, C. S., Godes, O., Hendricks, B. L., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2010). Enhancing interest and performance with a utility value intervention. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(4), 880. | 1.5 hours |
| Behavioral Intention in Using ChatGPT | This is a two-item Likert scale that measures participants' behavioral intention in using ChatGPT in the future for essay writing tasks (Albayati, 2024): On a scale of 1 to 7, how much would you agree or disagree with the following statements on using ChatGPT in essay writing assignments?
The Likert score ranges from 1 to 7 (1 being "strongly disagree" and 7 being "strongly agree"). A higher score indicates higher behavioral intention in using ChatGPT. The variable is treated as a continuous variable. Reference: 1. Albayati, H. (2024). Investigating undergraduate students' perceptions and awareness of using ChatGPT as a regular assistance tool: A user acceptance perspective study. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 6, 100203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100203 | 1.5 hours |