Weedguet Mildort

Griffin Pitts, Neha Rani, Weedguet Mildort

As generative AI systems are integrated into educational settings, students often encounter AI-generated output while working through learning tasks, either by requesting help or through integrated tools. Trust in AI can influence how students interpret and use that output, including whether they evaluate it critically or exhibit overreliance. We investigate how students' trust relates to their appropriate reliance on an AI assistant during programming problem-solving tasks, and whether this relationship differs by learner characteristics. With 432 undergraduate participants, students' completed Python output-prediction problems while receiving recommendations and explanations from an AI chatbot, including accurate and intentionally misleading suggestions. We operationalize reliance behaviorally as the extent to which students' responses reflected appropriate use of the AI assistant's suggestions, accepting them when they were correct and rejecting them when they were incorrect. Pre- and post-task surveys assessed trust in the assistant, AI literacy, need for cognition, programming self-efficacy, and programming literacy. Results showed a non-linear relationship in which higher trust was associated with lower appropriate reliance, suggesting weaker discrimination between correct and incorrect recommendations. This relationship was significantly moderated by students' AI literacy and need for cognition. These findings highlight the need for future work on instructional and system supports that encourage more reflective evaluation of AI assistance during problem-solving.

Griffin Pitts, Neha Rani, Weedguet Mildort et al.

The increasing availability and use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools in educational settings has raised concerns about students' overreliance on these technologies. Overreliance occurs when individuals accept incorrect AI-generated recommendations, often without critical evaluation, leading to flawed problem solutions and undermining learning outcomes. This study investigates potential factors contributing to patterns of AI reliance among undergraduate students, examining not only overreliance but also appropriate reliance (correctly accepting helpful and rejecting harmful recommendations) and underreliance (incorrectly rejecting helpful recommendations). Our approach combined pre- and post-surveys with a controlled experimental task where participants solved programming problems with an AI assistant that provided both accurate and deliberately incorrect suggestions, allowing direct observation of students' reliance patterns when faced with varying AI reliability. We find that appropriate reliance is significantly related to students' programming self-efficacy, programming literacy, and need for cognition, while showing negative correlations with post-task trust and satisfaction. Overreliance showed significant correlations with post-task trust and satisfaction with the AI assistant. Underreliance was negatively correlated with programming literacy, programming self-efficacy, and need for cognition. Overall, the findings provide insights for developing targeted interventions that promote appropriate reliance on AI tools, with implications for the integration of AI in curriculum and educational technologies.