Human–human pair programming fostered the highest perceptions of collaboration and social presence, surpassing both AI-assisted and individual conditions¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·q3·i2medium
Currency · newest study 2025 · checked against its sources 2026-10-19 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · 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 Human–human pairs scored significantly higher than both AI-assisted groups on collaborative learning (η2p = 0.234) and higher than all other groups on social presence (η2p = 0.198). → Fan 2025
Evidence¶
Fan 2025¶
Fan, G., Liu, D., Zhang, R., & Pan, L. (2025). The impact of AI-assisted pair programming on student motivation, programming anxiety, collaborative learning, and programming performance: a comparative study with traditional pair programming and individual approaches. International Journal of STEM Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-025-00537-3
q3 · i2 · causal · r2
MANOVA on CLS and SPQ at T3 in the 234-student quasi-experiment showed a significant multivariate effect, Wilks' λ = 0.742, F(6, 458) = 12.376, p < 0.001, η2p = 0.139; univariate CLS effect η2p = 0.234 and SPQ effect η2p = 0.198, with the Human–Human Pair group "scored significantly higher than both AI-Assisted groups".
"Post hoc comparisons using the Tukey HSD test revealed that for CLS, the Human–Human Pair group scored significantly higher than both AI-Assisted groups (pGPT-3.5 = 0.031, pClaude 3 = 0.047), which in turn scored significantly higher than the Individual group (all ps < 0.001)."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- AI-assisted pair programming significantly increased undergraduate intrinsic motivation compared to individual programming, with outcomes comparable to human–human pair programming — related
- AI-assisted pair programming groups outperformed both individual and human–human pair groups on programming performance — related
- Perceived usefulness of the AI assistant significantly and partially mediated the relationship between AI-assisted programming and collaborative outcomes and performance — related
- AI-assisted pair programming significantly reduced programming anxiety compared to individual programming — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
human-pairing-highest-collaboration-social-presence |
title |
Human–human pair programming fostered the highest perceptions of collaboration and social presence, surpassing both AI-assisted and individual conditions |
description |
Human–human pair programming fostered the highest perceptions of collaboration and social presence, surpassing both AI-assisted and individual conditions |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2025 |
source_checked |
2026-10-19 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-15 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — fan-2025 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.