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

41–50 of 308 posts

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

#41

Post by giancarlostoro »

sitkack wrote: post #32
giancarlostoro wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

A friend and myself were talking not too long ago that people these days don't practice critical thinking. It might be worthwhile for not just schools but parents everywhere to teach their kids to think more critically, ask the right questions when presented with new information.

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

#42

Post by jprete »

empathy_m wrote: post #38

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…

A long time ago I had the idea that maybe Guinness started a "book of world records" precisely because it answers exactly the kind of question that will routinely pop up at the pub.

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

#43

Post by barrenko »

llm_trw wrote: post #18
MomsAVoxell wrote: post #13

I feel this, because it’s like I don’t need to know about something, I just need to know how to know about something. Like, the initial contact with a mystery subject is overcome by knowing how to describe the mystery in a way that AI understands what I don’t understand, and seeks to fill in the understanding. An example, I have no clue about React. I do know why I don’t like to use React and why I have avoided it ov…

> But when they came to writing, Theuth said: “O King, here is something that, once learned, will make the Egyptians wiser and will improve their memory; I have discovered a potion for memory and for wisdom.” Thamus, however, replied: “O most expert Theuth, one man can give birth to the elements of an art, but only another can judge how they can benefit or harm those who will use them. And now, since you are the fath…

Socrates is just the next monkey in line. As human monkeys, we have already traded (short-term) memory for abstract thinking and who knows what else.

I guess that is the curse of evolution/specialization.

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

#44

Post by tempest_ »

giancarlostoro wrote: post #21

How's this any different than someone 5+ years ago blindly going by whatever a Google result said about anything? I've run into conflicting answers to things off Google's first page of results, some things aren't 100% certain and require more research. I'm not surprised if this will make some lazier since you don't need to do the legwork of reading, but how many don't read only the headlines of articles before they s…

Part of it I think is the confidence with which LLMs return answers

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

#45

Post by roydivision »

This stands to reason. If you need the answer to a question, and you can either get it directly, or spend time researching the answer, you're going to learn much more with the latter approach than the former. You may be disciplined enough to do more research if the answer is directly presented to you, but most people will not do that, and most companies are not interested in that, they want quick 'efficient', 'competitive' solutions. They aren't considering the long term downside to this.

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

#46

Post by felideon »

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…

Yeah, the abstract could use a bit more work. The gist of it is being in a closed-loop cycle with ChatGPT only helps with the task at hand, and not with engaging with the full learning process. Instead they say "When using AI in learning, learners should focus on deepening their understanding of knowledge and actively engage in metacognitive processes such as evaluation, monitoring, and orientation, rather than blindly following ChatGPT's feedback solely to complete tasks efficiently."

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

#47

Post by Davidbrcz »

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 that context metacognitive process are the processes used to plan, monitor, and assess one's understanding and performances.

So metacognitive lazyness would be the lack of such processes

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

#48

Post by indoordin0saur »

empathy_m wrote: post #38

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…

I'm just old enough to remember pub trivia before it was possible to look things up with a phone. I firmly maintain that phones ruined pub trivia.

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

#49

Post by [deleted] »

bluefirebrand wrote: post #20
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…

> LLMs really build that bridge to precisely the answers I want. It is interesting that you describe this as "the answers you want" and not "the correct answer to the question I have" Not criticising you in particular, but this does sound to me like this approach has a good possibility of just reinforcing existing biases In fact the approach sounds very similar to "find a wikipedia article and then go dig through the…

[deleted]

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

#50

Post by probably_wrong »

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 when the GenAI is bullshitting them?

Anecdote from a friend who teaches CS: this year a large number of students started adding unnecessary `break` instructions to their C code, like so:

  while (condition) {
    do_stuff();
    if (!condition) {
      break;
    }
  }
They asked around and realized that the common thread was ChatGPT - everyone who asked how loops work got a variation of "use break() to exit the loop", so they did.

Given that this is not how you do it in CS (not only it's unnecessary, but it also makes your formal proofs more complex) they had to make a general one-time exception and add disclaimers in exams reminding them to do it "the way you were taught in class".

Post reply on HN