ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025
EEG assessment of artificial intelligence-generated content impact on student creative performance and neurophysiological states in product design.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Psychological engagement with automated design improvement feedback: a multiple case study of ChatGPT in design education.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The purpose of this study has been to evaluate the use of Artificial Intelligence-Generated Content (AIGC) tools in design education, in terms of their effects on creative performance, concentration, and relaxation levels, for university students enrolled in an undergraduate design program. Methods: An experimental design was implemented, using two groups differentiated by their design tool usage (AIGC tools versus traditional software). The sample consisted of 64 third-year undergraduate design students from a public university in Eastern China. Participants completed a three-hour intelligent walking cane design task. The AIGC group used ChatGPT, Midjourney, and Stable Diffusion, while the control group used traditional design software. Neurophysiological states were continuously monitored using BrainLink Pro EEG headband devices. Creative performance was evaluated using standardized design assessment criteria; concentration and relaxation levels were measured through EEG data analysis. Results: The study's participants demonstrated that use of AIGC tools significantly enhanced creative performance ( Conclusion: This study has demonstrated that use of AIGC tools improves creative performance and concentration in design students, with the enhancement primarily driven by improved attentional focus and cognitive resource optimization. The integration of AIGC and EEG technologies provides objective neurophysiological evidence for understanding AI-assisted creativity in design education. It is suggested that AIGC tools should be incorporated into design curricula to enhance student creative outcomes while maintaining appropriate balance with traditional design methods.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.