Date
Publisher
Computers in Human Behavior
This study explores the cognitive load and learning outcomes associated with using large language models (LLMs) versus traditional search engines for information gathering during learning. A total of 91 university students were randomly assigned to either use ChatGPT3.5 or Google to research the socio-scientific issue of nanoparticles in sunscreen to derive valid recommendations and justifications. The study aimed to investigate potential differences in cognitive load, as well as the quality and homogeneity of the students' recommendations and justifications. Results indicated that students using LLMs experienced significantly lower cognitive load. However, despite this reduction, these students demonstrated lower-quality reasoning and argumentation in their final recommendations compared to those who used traditional search engines. Further, the homogeneity of the recommendations and justifications did not differ significantly between the two groups, suggesting that LLMs did not restrict the diversity of students perspectives. These findings highlight the nuanced implications of digital tools on learning, suggesting that while LLMs can decrease the cognitive burden associated with information gathering during a learning task, they may not promote deeper engagement with content necessary for high-quality learning per se.
Study at a glance
- Question: How does using an AI chatbot compared to a search engine affect students' mental effort and learning quality?
- Setting and data: 91 university students researching a science topic
- Method: Randomized controlled trial comparing students assigned to use ChatGPT-3.5 or Google
Why it matters
Using large language models versus traditional search engines for information gathering may alter students' cognitive load during learning. How these different tools influence mental effort, alongside the quality and homogeneity of students' recommendations and justifications, requires investigation.
Key findings
- Among 91 university students researching a science topic, using ChatGPT resulted in lower-quality reasoning and arguments than using a traditional search engine.
- Students who used the AI tool experienced significantly lower mental effort while researching than those using a traditional search engine.
- Using the AI tool did not restrict the diversity of students' viewpoints or recommendations compared to using a search engine.
Summary drafted with AI from the paper’s abstract and may contain errors. See the full paper for details.
What is the application?
Who is the user?
Who age?
Why use AI?
Study design
