Each additional correct GLAT response is associated with a 13.9% increase in modeled odds of correctly classifying a scenario¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? In the adjusted binomial model, the Non-Ethics GLAT score was significantly and positively associated with classification accuracy, OR = 1.14, 95% CI [1.07, 1.22]. → Reed 2026

Evidence¶

Reed 2026¶

Reed, J. M., Ferdig, R. E., Dodson, T. M., Gunstad, J., & Hughes, J. W. (2026). AI Literacy and Scenario-based Ethical Judgment About Generative AI Among Undergraduate Students. Journal of Academic Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-026-09757-w

q3 · i? · associational · r2

Binomial generalized linear model with logit link in the RQ3 results, holding sex and academic status constant. The fitted model improved on the intercept-only model, likelihood-ratio χ²(5) = 76.04, p < .001; each additional correct GLAT response was associated with a 13.9% increase in modeled odds.

"The 15-item Non-Ethics GLAT score was significantly and positively associated with classification accuracy, B = 0.130, SE = 0.033, Wald χ²(1) = 15.37, p < .001, OR = 1.14, 95% CI [1.07, 1.22]."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• AI literacy shows a small positive association with ethical scenario classification accuracy — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
• AI literacy is the strongest predictor of reliance type: each unit increase in AI literacy is associated with roughly a tenfold reduction in the odds of Dependent versus Strategic classification — related
• Academic status shows a significant overall association with classification accuracy, but sex does not; individual status contrasts are exploratory — related
• Undergraduate students classify common GenAI ethical scenarios with high accuracy, with a pronounced ceiling effect — related