People increasingly reason with large language models (LLMs), yet complementary capabilities do not guarantee outperforming both components. In a between-subjects study, participants (N=535) solved a 40-item battery of matrix reasoning, mental rotation, syllogisms, and letter-string analogies, unaided or with GPT-5.6-Luna, Claude Opus 4.8, Gemini 3.6 Flash, or Kimi K3. Each assisted trial required consultation with the model. Each model answered every item alone 100 times under matched elicitation. The assisted-unaided accuracy difference increased with item-level LLM competence. Deference varied across tasks and increased with competence within tasks. Post-advice confidence distinguished correct from incorrect answers less strongly than unaided confidence. In a reference comparison, about half the increase in LLM accuracy carried through to assisted accuracy. How much of that accuracy gain reached participants differed across the models. These findings motivate evaluating LLMs in interaction with humans and designing support for selective deference that preserves independent reasoning.
Robin Welsch, Michelle Rausch, Pascal Knierim et al.· 0 citations
The extent to which interactions with GAI enhance learning effectiveness and possible moderators, what challenges learners face when interacting with GAI systems, and which interventions support successful learner-GAI interaction are examined.
Generative artificial intelligence (genAI) systems are increasingly integral to epistemic processes such as hypothesis generation, explanation construction, and decision-making. Although they reliably enhance performance, emerging evidence reveals a metacognitive dilemma: as external generative capacity increases, internal monitoring, calibration, and cognitive engagement may decline. This reflects a redistribution of cognitive control within distributed human-AI systems that cannot be explained by automation bias or reliance on algorithms alone. We propose the AIRIS (AI-Augmented Inquiry and Regulation in Hybrid Systems) framework to analyze this dilemma and specify where regulatory intervention can counteract it. AIRIS is a multi-level control allocation architecture specifying the conditions under which epistemic agency can be preserved in hybrid generative systems. Drawing on distributed cognition, cognitive load theory, multimedia learning, and self-regulated learning, it identifies seven interacting mechanisms through which hybrid cognition may become destabilized, from delegation and calibration drift to motivational-affective drift. Five regulatory operators (Anticipate, Interrogate, Reflect, Integrate, and Synthesize) target internal generative engagement at points of emerging instability. The architecture does not itself improve learning; it specifies what must remain in place for genAI-supported work to sustain understanding, whether through instructional design, teacher guidance, or learners'own regulation. We derive testable propositions concerning the seven mechanisms and the five operators, reframing AI augmentation as a problem of control allocation in distributed generative systems. Beyond theory, AIRIS offers a research agenda, a design framework for genAI-integrated learning environments, and a conceptual toolkit for the governance of hybrid human-AI cognition.
Jochen Kuhn, P. Gerjets, Ulrich Trautwein et al.· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.
