Combination-preferring students scored higher than answer-preferring students on evolving-knowledge (Axis 4) and source-of-ability (Axis 5) EBAPS dimensions¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Pairwise differences between Combination and Answer groups were statistically significant for Axis 4 (p = 0.038) and Axis 5 (p = 0.021), with Combination higher on both. → Amogh Sirnoorkar and Omkar Mamidpalliwar 2026

Evidence¶

Amogh Sirnoorkar and Omkar Mamidpalliwar 2026¶

Amogh Sirnoorkar and Omkar Mamidpalliwar. (2026). Students' Epistemological Beliefs and their Chatbot Preferences in AI-mediated Physics Learning. https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.29385 doi:10.48550/arxiv.2607.29385

q2 · i? · associational · r1

Dunn's post-hoc tests on the two axes with significant omnibus results; Table II prints Axis 4 means of 71.6% (Combination) versus 68.2% (Answer) and Axis 5 means of 82.5% versus 79.3%. No pairwise effect size is printed.

"we observed statistical significant difference between the scores associated with Combination and Answer-preferring groups (Axis 4: p = 0.038; Axis 5: p = 0.021). Across both axes, students preferring combination exhibited substantially higher scores than those preferring answer-providing chatbots."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Learning-Style Preferences — predictor: learners reporting different styles differed here; not a test of matching instruction to style

Related Claims¶

• Reflective thinking dimensions correlate positively with learning process/expert knowledge, and most correlate positively with learning effort and negatively with innate/fixed ability and certainty of knowledge — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it
• Chatbot preference groups differed in total EBAPS and Axis 4/5 scores at the nominal level, with small effect sizes, but not after Bonferroni adjustment — a broader claim this one bears on
• No statistically significant EBAPS differences were observed for Axes 1–3 or between guided-inquiry and answer-oriented chatbot preferrers — related
• Students preferring combination-style chatbots had higher total EBAPS scores than students preferring direct-answer chatbots (nominal significance only) — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
• Most introductory physics students preferred a combination chatbot (guidance first, answers when stuck), while few preferred pure guided Q&A — related