The research topic of interest is the tension between genAI’s potential for improving statistical learning outcomes and the risk of introducing cognitive laziness. Specifically, I am interested in the extent to which undergraduate life science students' usage of genAI (focusing on ChatGPT) as a personalised learning support for statistics fosters conceptual understanding versus cognitive laziness, and how the way genAI is incorporated into coursework affects which outcome predominates.
Personalised learning support: studies examining tailored feedback, pacing, clarification, repeated examples, motivation, engagement, and statistical reasoning.
Cognitive laziness / over-reliance: studies examining cognitive offloading, reduced self-regulation, weaker independent problem-solving, critical thinking, and the difference between task performance and genuine knowledge gain.
These two lenses were useful for organising the draft, but the final synthesis ultimately challenged the simple “pro-AI / anti-AI” split.