Markus Huff

Anna Bodonhelyi, Augustin Curinier, Babette Bühler et al.

Detecting mind wandering is crucial in online education, and it occurs 30% of the time, as it directly impacts learners' retention, comprehension, and overall success in self-directed learning environments. Integrating automated detection algorithms enables the deployment of targeted interventions within adaptive learning environments, paving the way for more responsive and personalized educational systems. However, progress is hampered by a lack of coherent frameworks for identifying mind wandering in online environments. This work presents a comprehensive systematic review and benchmark of mind wandering detection across 14 datasets covering EEG, facial video, eye tracking, and physiological signals in educational settings, motivated by the challenges in achieving reliable detection and the inconsistency of results across studies caused by variations in models, preprocessing approaches, and evaluation metrics. We implemented a generalizable preprocessing and feature extraction pipeline tailored to each modality, ensuring fair comparison across diverse experimental paradigms. 13 traditional machine learning and neural network models, including federated learning approaches, were evaluated on each dataset. In a novel ablation study, we explored mind wandering detection from post-probe data, motivated by findings that learners often re-engage with material after mind wandering episodes through re-reading or re-watching. Results highlight the potential and limitations of different modalities and classifiers for mind wandering detection, and point to new opportunities for supporting online learning. All code and preprocessing scripts are made openly available to support reproducibility and future research.

Markus Huff, Elanur Ulakçı

Large language models (LLMs), such as ChatGPT, have shown remarkable abilities in natural language processing, opening new avenues in psychological research. This study explores whether LLMs can predict human memory performance in tasks involving garden-path sentences and contextual information. In the first part, we used ChatGPT to rate the relatedness and memorability of garden-path sentences preceded by either fitting or unfitting contexts. In the second part, human participants read the same sentences, rated their relatedness, and completed a surprise memory test. The results demonstrated that ChatGPT's relatedness ratings closely matched those of the human participants, and its memorability ratings effectively predicted human memory performance. Both LLM and human data revealed that higher relatedness in the unfitting context condition was associated with better memory performance, aligning with probabilistic frameworks of context-dependent learning. These findings suggest that LLMs, despite lacking human-like memory mechanisms, can model aspects of human cognition and serve as valuable tools in psychological research. We propose the field of machine psychology to explore this interplay between human cognition and artificial intelligence, offering a bidirectional approach where LLMs can both benefit from and contribute to our understanding of human cognitive processes.

Line Abele, Gerrit Anders, Tolgahan Aydın et al.

The accelerating growth of photographic collections has outpaced manual cataloguing, motivating the use of vision language models (VLMs) to automate metadata generation. This study examines whether Al-generated catalogue descriptions can approximate human-written quality and how generative Al might integrate into cataloguing workflows in archival and museum collections. A VLM (InternVL2) generated catalogue descriptions for photographic prints on labelled cardboard mounts with archaeological content, evaluated by archive and archaeology experts and non-experts in a human-centered, experimental framework. Participants classified descriptions as AI-generated or expert-written, rated quality, and reported willingness to use and trust in AI tools. Classification performance was above chance level, with both groups underestimating their ability to detect Al-generated descriptions. OCR errors and hallucinations limited perceived quality, yet descriptions rated higher in accuracy and usefulness were harder to classify, suggesting that human review is necessary to ensure the accuracy and quality of catalogue descriptions generated by the out-of-the-box model, particularly in specialized domains like archaeological cataloguing. Experts showed lower willingness to adopt AI tools, emphasizing concerns on preservation responsibility over technical performance. These findings advocate for a collaborative approach where AI supports draft generation but remains subordinate to human verification, ensuring alignment with curatorial values (e.g., provenance, transparency). The successful integration of this approach depends not only on technical advancements, such as domain-specific fine-tuning, but even more on establishing trust among professionals, which could both be fostered through a transparent and explainable AI pipeline.

Markus Huff, Elanur Ulakçı

Large language models (LLMs) increasingly mimic human cognition in various language-based tasks. However, their capacity for metacognition - particularly in predicting memory performance - remains unexplored. Here, we introduce a cross-agent prediction model to assess whether ChatGPT-based LLMs align with human judgments of learning (JOL), a metacognitive measure where individuals predict their own future memory performance. We tested humans and LLMs on pairs of sentences, one of which was a garden-path sentence - a sentence that initially misleads the reader toward an incorrect interpretation before requiring reanalysis. By manipulating contextual fit (fitting vs. unfitting sentences), we probed how intrinsic cues (i.e., relatedness) affect both LLM and human JOL. Our results revealed that while human JOL reliably predicted actual memory performance, none of the tested LLMs (GPT-3.5-turbo, GPT-4-turbo, and GPT-4o) demonstrated comparable predictive accuracy. This discrepancy emerged regardless of whether sentences appeared in fitting or unfitting contexts. These findings indicate that, despite LLMs' demonstrated capacity to model human cognition at the object-level, they struggle at the meta-level, failing to capture the variability in individual memory predictions. By identifying this shortcoming, our study underscores the need for further refinements in LLMs' self-monitoring abilities, which could enhance their utility in educational settings, personalized learning, and human-AI interactions. Strengthening LLMs' metacognitive performance may reduce the reliance on human oversight, paving the way for more autonomous and seamless integration of AI into tasks requiring deeper cognitive awareness.

Lydia Uhler, Verena Jordan, Jürgen Buder et al.

Generative artificial intelligences, particularly large language models (LLMs), play an increasingly prominent role in human decision-making contexts, necessitating transparency about their capabilities. While prior studies have shown addition biases in humans (Adams et al., 2021) and OpenAI's GPT-3 (Winter et al., 2023), this study extends the research by comparing human and GPT-4 problem-solving across both spatial and linguistic tasks, with variations in solution efficiency and valence of task instruction. Four preregistered experiments with 588 participants from the U.S. and 680 GPT-4 iterations revealed a stronger tendency towards additive transformations in GPT-4 than in humans. Human participants were less likely to use additive strategies when subtraction was relatively more efficient than when addition and subtraction were equally efficient. GPT-4 exhibited the opposite behavior, with a strong addition bias when subtraction was more efficient. In terms of valence of task instruction, GPT-4's use of additive strategies increased when instructed to "improve" (positive) rather than "edit" (neutral). These findings demonstrate that biases in human problem-solving are amplified in GPT-4, and that LLM behavior differs from human efficiency-based strategies. This highlights the limitations of LLMs and the need for caution when using them in real-world applications.