Only half of students could clearly tell the AI-generated videos were AI-generated, the item with the highest variance¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Detectability was the only perception item without consensus: 50% agreed they could clearly tell the videos were AI-generated, 35% disagreed, and 15% were neutral. → Esse Ciego 2026

Evidence¶

Esse Ciego 2026¶

Esse Ciego, Shubbhi Taneja, Wilson Wong, and Amanpreet Kapoor. (2026). Student Perceptions and Preferences Regarding AI-Generated Instructional Videos in Computing Education. https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.28203 doi:10.48550/arxiv.2607.28203

q2 · i? · associational · r1

Post-survey item administered after perception ratings, with students not told a priori that the videos were AI-generated. The item showed "the highest variance of any item" (𝜇= 3.31, 𝜎=1.36), with responses split across agreement levels.

"detectability was the only item without consensus: just half of students (50%) agreed they could clearly tell the videos were AI-generated, while 35% disagreed and 15% were neutral (𝜇= 3.31, 𝜎=1.36) — the highest variance of any item."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Students oppose preferring AI videos over instructor-recorded videos and distrust AI video information as much as human-presented information — related
• Students view AI videos as appropriate for simple, visualizable, and supplemental learning contexts but inappropriate for complex, subjective, or interactive ones — related
• Computing students rate short AI-generated Markdown videos favorably across quality, comprehension, and accuracy dimensions — related