Emily Kerzabi

Jiangang Hao, Wenju Cui, Patrick Kyllonen et al.

Collaborative problem solving (CPS) is widely recognized as a critical 21st-century skill. Assessing CPS depends heavily on coding the communication data using a construct-relevant framework, and this process has long been a major bottleneck to scaling up such assessments. Based on five datasets and two coding frameworks, we demonstrate that ChatGPT can code communication data to a satisfactory level, though performance varies across ChatGPT models, and depends on the coding framework and task characteristics. Interestingly, newer reasoning-focused models such as GPT-o1-mini and GPT-o3-mini do not necessarily yield better coding results. Additionally, we show that refining prompts based on feedback from miscoded cases can improve coding accuracy in some instances, though the effectiveness of this approach is not consistent across all tasks. These findings offer practical guidance for researchers and practitioners in developing scalable, efficient methods to analyze communication data in support of 21st-century skill assessment.

Jiangang Hao, Wenju Cui, Patrick Kyllonen et al.

Assessing communication and collaboration at scale depends on a labor intensive task of coding communication data into categories according to different frameworks. Prior research has established that ChatGPT can be directly instructed with coding rubrics to code the communication data and achieves accuracy comparable to human raters. However, whether the coding from ChatGPT or similar AI technology exhibits bias against different demographic groups, such as gender and race, remains unclear. To fill this gap, this paper investigates ChatGPT-based automated coding of communication data using a typical coding framework for collaborative problem solving, examining differences across gender and racial groups. The analysis draws on data from three types of collaborative tasks: negotiation, problem solving, and decision making. Our results show that ChatGPT-based coding exhibits no significant bias across gender and racial groups, paving the road for its adoption in large-scale assessment of collaboration and communication.