The instructional manipulation check confirmed that TBI and SBI videos were perceived as intended¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r3 · q3
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? TBI participants rated critical-thinking emphasis higher (M = 5.82) than SBI participants (M = 3.45), and SBI participants rated technique emphasis higher (M = 5.95 vs 3.61). → Yu S 2026

Evidence¶

Yu S 2026¶

Yu S, Lin Y and Chen C (2026) Designing for AI literacy: psychological mechanisms and self-determination. Front. Psychol. 17:1937845. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1937845

q3 · i? · causal · r3

Two-item 7-point manipulation check administered immediately after the instructional videos in the randomized experiment confirmed the intended differentiation between the TBI and SBI conditions (both t(318) > 20, p < 0.001).

"The TBI group scored significantly higher on “inspiring critical thinking” (M = 5.82, SD = 0.91) than the SBI group (M = 3.45, SD = 1.12), t(318) = 20.76, p < 0.001. Conversely, the SBI group scored significantly higher on “teaching specific techniques” (M = 5.95, SD = 0.87) than the TBI group (M = 3.61, SD = 1.04), t(318) = 21.83, p < 0.001."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The TBI advantage over SBI is larger under open-ended tasks than under structured tasks — related
• Thinking-based instruction produces higher AI literacy performance than skills-based instruction in an AIGC image-generation task — related
• Students perceived the intended expansive versus bounded framing manipulation (d = 1.4)
• Instructional approach operates indirectly through autonomy and competence, while task type operates primarily through autonomy — related