Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Metacognitive laziness: Effects of generative AI on learning motivation

bera-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 308 posts

Re: Metacognitive laziness: Effects of generative AI on learning motivation

#31

Post by squigz »

agentultra wrote: post #11

So humans are supposed to review all of the code that GenAI creates. We’re supposed to ensure that it doesn’t generate (obvious?) errors and that it’s building the “right thing” in a manner prescribed by our requirements. The anecdotes from practitioners using GenAI in this way suggest it’s a good tool for experienced developers because they know what to look out for. Now we admit folks who don’t know what they’re do…

> Do they know to ask what a use-after-free is or how cache memory works? Do they know the names of the algorithms and data structures? Do they know when the GenAI is bullshitting them?

No, which is why people who don't pick up on the nuances of programming - no matter how often they use LLMs - will never be capable programmers.

Re: Metacognitive laziness: Effects of generative AI on learning motivation

#32

Post by sitkack »

giancarlostoro wrote: post #28
diggan wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How's this any different than someone 5+ years ago blindly going by whatever a Google result said about anything You can interrogate it at least. "Are you sure that's the correct answer? Re-think from the beginning without any assumptions" and you'll get a checklist you can mentally/practically go through yourself to validate.

True, so I guess what needs to happen is people using AI need to be informed on how to use it more accurately so they're actually learning source material and not just taking garbage / cheating on coursework.

So we need to train inquisitive curious thinkers that look at things from all angles and understand why they know something.

Re: Metacognitive laziness: Effects of generative AI on learning motivation

#33

Post by jprete »

lr4444lr wrote: post #8

The abstract does not define, nor contextually suggest from the prior statements of the results what "metacognitive laziness" means. Personally speaking, I find being able to ask ChatGPT continually more nuanced questions about an initial answer the one clear benefit over a Google search, where I have diminishing marginal returns on my inquisitiveness for the time invested over subsequent searches. The more precisely…

In the absence of a definition I'd read it straightforwardly - it means that someone stops making an effort to learn better ways to learn. I.e. if they start using chatbots to learn, they stop practicing other methods and just rely on the chatbot. (EDIT: I realize now that this probably isn't news to the parent!)

I've heard stories of junior engineers falling into this trap. They asked the chatbot everything rather than exposing their lack of knowledge to their coworkers. And if the chatbot avoids blatant mistakes, junior engineers won't recognize when the bot makes a subtle one.

Re: Metacognitive laziness: Effects of generative AI on learning motivation

#34

Post by epolanski »

jcims wrote: post #17
lr4444lr wrote: post #8

The abstract does not define, nor contextually suggest from the prior statements of the results what "metacognitive laziness" means. Personally speaking, I find being able to ask ChatGPT continually more nuanced questions about an initial answer the one clear benefit over a Google search, where I have diminishing marginal returns on my inquisitiveness for the time invested over subsequent searches. The more precisely…

This is my take as well. There was a story a couple days ago about a neural network built on a single photonic chip. I fed the paper to ChatGPT and was able to use it to develop a much more meaningful and comprehensive understanding of what the chip actually delivered, how it operated, the fundamental operating principles of core components and how it could be integrated into a system. The fact that I now have a tire…

On the other hand you might be getting worse at reading those papers yourself.

The more youngsters skip the hassle of banging their heads on some topic the less able they will be to learn at later age.

There's more to learning than getting information, it's also about processing it (which we are offloading to LLMs). In fact I'd say that the whole point of going through school is to learn how to process and absorb information.

That might be the cognitive laziness.

Re: Metacognitive laziness: Effects of generative AI on learning motivation

#35

Post by apercu »

lr4444lr wrote: post #8

The abstract does not define, nor contextually suggest from the prior statements of the results what "metacognitive laziness" means. Personally speaking, I find being able to ask ChatGPT continually more nuanced questions about an initial answer the one clear benefit over a Google search, where I have diminishing marginal returns on my inquisitiveness for the time invested over subsequent searches. The more precisely…

Even though ChatGPT "invents" its own reality sometimes, I also find it superior to Google search results (or Duck Duck Go). In some cases LLM results even provide specific strings to search for in the search engines to verify the content. Search is terribly broken and has been since around 2014 (arbitrary date) where Google search results pages started displaying more ads than results.

Re: Metacognitive laziness: Effects of generative AI on learning motivation

#36

Post by sitkack »

jprete wrote: post #33
lr4444lr wrote: post #8

The abstract does not define, nor contextually suggest from the prior statements of the results what "metacognitive laziness" means. Personally speaking, I find being able to ask ChatGPT continually more nuanced questions about an initial answer the one clear benefit over a Google search, where I have diminishing marginal returns on my inquisitiveness for the time invested over subsequent searches. The more precisely…

In the absence of a definition I'd read it straightforwardly - it means that someone stops making an effort to learn better ways to learn. I.e. if they start using chatbots to learn, they stop practicing other methods and just rely on the chatbot. (EDIT: I realize now that this probably isn't news to the parent!) I've heard stories of junior engineers falling into this trap. They asked the chatbot everything rather t…

That is why the last step should always be how do I know what I know? What are my blind spots?

If I am not motivated to find them and test my own knowledge, how do I change that motivation?

Re: Metacognitive laziness: Effects of generative AI on learning motivation

#37

Post by felideon »

sitkack wrote: post #19
aithrowawaycomm wrote: post #4

Preprint: https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.09315

Thanks for the link, but clearly no one is reading it. Which is super ironic, they aren't even summarizing it with AI and using that information. Most folks are projecting what the title says into their own emotion space and then riffing on that. The authors even went so far as to boil the entire paper down into bullet points, you don't even need the pdf.

> Most folks are projecting what the title says into their own emotion space and then riffing on that.

Yeah, or the abstract which is a bit vague.

Re: Metacognitive laziness: Effects of generative AI on learning motivation

#38

Post by empathy_m »

Cell phones and laptops in general have changed a couple of things for me, as someone who grew up without them:

- I realized about 20y-25y ago that I could run a Web search and find out nearly any fact, probably one-shot but maybe with 2-3 searches' worth of research

- About 10-15y ago I began to have a connected device in my pocket that could do this on request at any time

- About 5y ago I explicitly *stopped* doing it, most of the time, socially. If I'm in the middle of a conversation and a question comes up about a minor fact, I'm not gonna break the flow to pull out my screen and stare at it and answer the question, I'm gonna keep hanging out with the person.

There was this "pub trivia" thing that used to happen in the 80s and 90s where you would see a spirited discussion between people arguing about a small fact which neither of them immediately had at hand. We don't get that much anymore because it's so easy to answer the question -- we've just totally lost it.

I don't miss it, but I have become keenly aware of how tethered my consciousness is to facts available via Web search, and I don't know that I love outsourcing that much of my brain to places beyond my control.

Re: Metacognitive laziness: Effects of generative AI on learning motivation

#39

Post by parpfish »

epolanski wrote: post #34
jcims wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is my take as well. There was a story a couple days ago about a neural network built on a single photonic chip. I fed the paper to ChatGPT and was able to use it to develop a much more meaningful and comprehensive understanding of what the chip actually delivered, how it operated, the fundamental operating principles of core components and how it could be integrated into a system. The fact that I now have a tire…

On the other hand you might be getting worse at reading those papers yourself. The more youngsters skip the hassle of banging their heads on some topic the less able they will be to learn at later age. There's more to learning than getting information, it's also about processing it (which we are offloading to LLMs). In fact I'd say that the whole point of going through school is to learn how to process and absorb inf…

What if the LLMs are teaching us that long form prose/technical writing is just a really bad, unnatural format for communication but natural dialogues are a good format?

Re: Metacognitive laziness: Effects of generative AI on learning motivation

#40

Post by apercu »

diggan wrote: post #3

> What is particularly noteworthy is that AI technologies such as ChatGPT may promote learners' dependence on technology and potentially trigger “metacognitive laziness”. In conclusion, understanding and leveraging the respective strengths and weaknesses of different agents in learning is critical in the field of future hybrid intelligence. Maybe I'm trying to read and understand it too quickly, but I don't see anyth…

I don't really know what "metacongnitive laziness" is even after they explain it in the paper, but I use LLMs to filter noise and help automate the drudgery of certain tasks, allowing me to use my energy and peak focus time on the more complicated tasks. Anecdotal, obviously. But I don't see how this hinders me in my ability to "self-regulate". It's just a tool, like a hammer.

From a learning perspective, it can also be a short cut to getting something explained in several different ways until the concept "clicks".

Post reply on HN