Y. K. Jain

Yoshee Jain, John Hollander, Amber He et al.

Reading comprehension is a key for individual success, yet the assessment of question difficulty remains challenging due to the extensive human annotation and large-scale testing required by traditional methods such as linguistic analysis and Item Response Theory (IRT). While these robust approaches provide valuable insights, their scalability is limited. There is potential for Large Language Models (LLMs) to automate question difficulty estimation; however, this area remains underexplored. Our study investigates the effectiveness of LLMs, specifically OpenAI's GPT-4o and o1, in estimating the difficulty of reading comprehension questions using the Study Aid and Reading Assessment (SARA) dataset. We evaluated both the accuracy of the models in answering comprehension questions and their ability to classify difficulty levels as defined by IRT. The results indicate that, while the models yield difficulty estimates that align meaningfully with derived IRT parameters, there are notable differences in their sensitivity to extreme item characteristics. These findings suggest that LLMs can serve as the scalable method for automated difficulty assessment, particularly in dynamic interactions between learners and Adaptive Instructional Systems (AIS), bridging the gap between traditional psychometric techniques and modern AIS for reading comprehension and paving the way for more adaptive and personalized educational assessments.

Koustuv Saha, Yoshee Jain, Munmun De Choudhury

The ubiquity and widespread use of digital and online technologies have transformed mental health support, with online mental health communities (OMHCs) providing safe spaces for peer support. More recently, generative AI and large language models (LLMs) have introduced new possibilities for scalable, around-the-clock mental health assistance that could potentially augment and supplement the capabilities of OMHCs. Although genAI shows promise in delivering immediate and personalized responses, their effectiveness in replicating the nuanced, experience-based support of human peers remains an open question. In this study, we harnessed 24,114 posts and 138,758 online community (OC) responses from 55 OMHCs on Reddit. We prompted several state-of-the-art LLMs (GPT-4-Turbo, Llama-3, and Mistral-7B) with these posts, and compared their (AI) responses to human-written (OC) responses based on a variety of linguistic measures across psycholinguistics and lexico-semantics. Our findings revealed that AI responses are more verbose, readable, and analytically structured, but lack linguistic diversity and personal narratives inherent in human-human interactions. Through a qualitative examination, we found validation as well as complementary insights into the nature of AI responses, such as its neutrality of stance and the absence of seeking back-and-forth clarifications. We discuss the ethical and practical implications of integrating generative AI into OMHCs, advocating for frameworks that balance AI's scalability and timeliness with the irreplaceable authenticity, social interactiveness, and expertise of human connections that form the ethos of online support communities.