No AI participants spent roughly 1.5 times as long on the assessment as AI-Assisted participants, descriptively reported as a marker of offloading¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Descriptively, No AI participants spent M=24.1 minutes on the assessment versus M=16.4 for AI-Assisted participants, working nearly twice as long on Task 3; no confirmatory statistical comparisons were conducted. → Bergh 2026

Evidence¶

Bergh 2026¶

Bergh, C., Tag, B., Vassar, A., & Renzella, J. (2026). Your Programming Students'Cognition with ChatGPT: Higher Performance, Lower Retention, and Reduced Ownership. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.21194 doi:10.48550/arxiv.2609.21194

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Descriptive analysis of task durations derived from Tobii interval markers (n=28 in the AI-Assisted descriptive analysis after one recording failure). On Task 3 the No AI group worked nearly twice as long (M=11.4min vs M=5.9min). The article states these observations are descriptive only, with no confirmatory statistical comparisons.

"Across the full assessment, the No AI participants spent𝑀= 24.1min, while AI-Assisted participants took𝑀= 16.4min, sustaining their higher reported effort over a longer period"

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Time and Continuity — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• ChatGPT-assisted students scored substantially higher on the coding assessment than No AI students (89% vs 69%) — related
• AI assistance sped up only difficult tasks and only a few individual tasks, not easy ones — related
• AI assistance reduces subjective mental effort across all tasks even when it does not reduce completion time, dissociating time and effort — related
• AI assistance reduces task completion time in both education groups, the only outcome without an equalizing pattern — related
• AIDA-supported participants spent on average twice as long in the course platform as controls, but the difference in usage time was not statistically significant — related
• Intensive AI assistance predicts strong task performance even with low engagement, but follow-up performance is substantially higher only when intensive AI use is combined with sustained task engagement — related