ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Psychological engagement with automated design improvement feedback: a multiple case study of ChatGPT in design education.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. 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.
- From traditional classroom to AI-enhanced flipped classroom: a three-year pedagogical evolution for international students in pharmacology.BMC medical education · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Understanding how students engage with AI-driven feedback remains understudied in educational psychology. With ChatGPT's emergence as a generative artificial intelligence tool, automated design improvement feedback (ADIF) has expanded significantly. This exploratory study investigates differential engagement patterns with ChatGPT-based ADIF across performance levels, grounded in self-regulated learning theory. Methods: A mixed-method multiple case study examined 50 design students (25 high performers, 25 low performers) during a product design session. Data included behavioral observations of prompt strategies and query patterns, lag sequential analysis of cognitive transitions, and semi-structured interviews on emotional engagement. Results: High performers employed diverse prompt strategies with iterative refinement, exhibited cyclical metacognitive transitions, and characterized interactions as exploratory and collaborative. Low performers used basic prompts with limited iterations, demonstrated linear query-to-implementation progressions, and described structured guidance-seeking interactions. Discussion: The findings extend self-regulated learning theory to human-AI contexts, revealing how metacognitive capabilities shape behavioral, cognitive, and emotional engagement with AI feedback. Results demonstrate the need for scaffolding interventions to support lower-performing students in developing metacognitive strategies for effective AI interaction. This study contributes initial insights into performance-based variations in human-AI collaboration within educational contexts.
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.