Premium-access GenAI users report greater perceived benefits than free-only users, largest for tasks beyond current expertise¶

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

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Premium users reported greater use for finding information and brainstorming and higher perceived benefits, with the largest difference for completing tasks beyond current expertise (rrb = 0.46). → Manikonda 2026

Evidence¶

Manikonda 2026¶

Manikonda, L.; Si, M.; Munira, S.; Seneviratne, O.; Bennett, K. (2026). The Uneven Impact of Generative AI on Student Learning: Examining the Roles of Reliance, Evaluation Literacy, and Course Policy in AI-related Courses. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.18676 doi:10.48550/arxiv.2609.18676

q2 · i? · associational · r2

FDR-corrected Mann–Whitney U item comparisons in the N=118 survey, premium versus free-only access. The article reports "completing tasks beyond current expertise (rrb = 0.46)" as the largest difference, followed by academic-work quality (0.40).

"The largest premium-access difference was for completing tasks beyond current expertise (rrb = 0.46), followed by improved academic-work quality (0.40)."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Prior Knowledge — moderator: an instructional effect differs with it

Related Claims¶

• Perceived instructor policy is associated with GenAI task use, confidence, reliance, and perceived benefits, with small effect sizes — related
• Multi-tool GenAI users report higher support, reliance, and benefit than single-tool users, but lower confidence working without GenAI — related
• Economic, educational, and geopolitical inequalities structure differential access to AI capabilities, reproducing an epistemic hierarchy — related
• Chatbot users held more positive attitudes and reported greater perceived knowledge gains than non-users — related