Engage-to-Unlock participants incorporated less verbatim AI-response text into final essays than Standard Chatbot participants¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·q3·i2medium
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q3 i2 Final-essay coverage by verbatim AI-response text averaged 27.32% under Engage-to-Unlock versus 47.16% under Standard Chatbot (pHolm=.002, d=−0.47), with no significant difference from Time-Matched Unlock (24.51%, pHolm=.617). → Xiaotian Su 2026
Evidence¶
Xiaotian Su 2026¶
Xiaotian Su, Laura Rimell, Jiazheng Li, Amal Rannen-Triki, Ulrich Paquet, Lisa Anne Hendricks, Rida Qadri, Daphne Ippolito and Piotr Mirowski. (2026). Who Thinks First? Designing Productive Friction with Engage-to-Unlock GenAI. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.01518 doi:10.48550/arxiv.2610.01518
q3 · i2 · causal · r2
Paste telemetry and sequence matching (n≥8 words) across the three AI-assisted conditions (n=299) in the controlled experiment; the Standard Chatbot contrast yielded d=−0.47 and the Time-Matched Unlock contrast d=0.07. The article notes these aggregate comparisons do not establish how prompt count relates to text incorporation within participants.
"Planned Welch contrasts with Holm correction confirmed significantly lower AI text coverage under Engage-to-Unlock (27.32%) than Standard Chatbot (47.16%;𝑝Holm =. 002,𝑑=−0.47), while Engage-to-Unlock and Time-Matched Unlock did not significantly differ (24.51%;𝑝Holm =.617,𝑑=0.07)."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Essays written under Standard Chatbot sat closest to AI-only essays in semantic embedding space, and Engage-to-Unlock differed significantly from Standard Chatbot along PC1 — related
- In this experiment, drafts—human-written or AI-generated—anchored the final essay, with AI-generated drafts revised somewhat more but underlying phrases largely retained across conditions. — related
- Text reproducers copied nearly all of their final text from ChatGPT with long verbatim sequences, while text integrators showed fragment-level micro-uptake — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
engage-to-unlock-lower-ai-text-coverage |
title |
Engage-to-Unlock participants incorporated less verbatim AI-response text into final essays than Standard Chatbot participants |
description |
Engage-to-Unlock participants incorporated less verbatim AI-response text into final essays than Standard Chatbot participants |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2026 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-10 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — xiaotian-su-2026 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.