Frequency of AI use predicts AI feedback preference, while comfort with technology and frequency of human feedback predict relative preference for AI over human grading¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · associational r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? In an ordinal logistic regression, students who rarely or never used AI had higher odds of higher AI preference (B = 2.11, p = 0.040, OR = 8.24); no other predictors were significant for that model. → Yildirim-Erbasli 2026 q2 i? In a second ordinal logistic regression, being somewhat uncomfortable with technology predicted lower relative preference for AI (OR = 0.26), and frequent human feedback predicted higher relative preference for AI (OR = 3.45). → Yildirim-Erbasli 2026 (2)

Evidence¶

Yildirim-Erbasli 2026¶

Yildirim-Erbasli, S. N., Ilgun Dibek, M., Thomas, M. L., & Lesoway, N. (2026). When Do Undergraduate Students Prefer AI? Insights into AI Scoring and Feedback. Behavioral Sciences, 16(7), 1196. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs16071196

q2 · i? · associational · r2

Ordinal logistic regression predicting AI scoring/feedback preference from comfort, familiarity, and feedback-frequency variables in the survey sample. "Frequency of AI use was a significant predictor of AI preference", with OR = 8.24; other predictors were non-significant at α = 0.05.

"students who rarely or never used AI had higher odds of being in a higher category of AI preference compared with the reference group, B = 2.11, SE = 1.03, t = 2.05, p = 0.040, OR = 8.24."

Yildirim-Erbasli 2026 (2)¶

Yildirim-Erbasli, S. N., Ilgun Dibek, M., Thomas, M. L., & Lesoway, N. (2026). When Do Undergraduate Students Prefer AI? Insights into AI Scoring and Feedback. Behavioral Sciences, 16(7), 1196. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs16071196

q2 · i? · associational · r2

Second ordinal logistic regression predicting preference for AI relative to human grading. Somewhat-uncomfortable-with-technology students had lower odds (B = −1.37, p = 0.045, OR = 0.26), and "students who received human feedback frequently had higher odds" (OR = 3.45).

"students who received human feedback frequently had higher odds of being in a higher category of preference for AI-based scoring and feedback compared with students receiving monthly feedback, B = 1.24, SE = 0.58, t = 2.13, p = 0.033, OR = 3.45."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Undergraduate students' preferences for AI feedback characteristics differ significantly from an equal distribution for tone, length, format, and focus, but not for timing
• Preferred scoring and feedback methods differ significantly across assignment types, with AI-based scoring rarely preferred and mixed options most chosen for low-stakes assignments
• Students' preferences for AI versus human scoring and feedback vary significantly across assessment scenarios, with strong human preference for high-stakes tasks
• After PAIRR, most students prefer combined peer and AI feedback over either source alone
• Students express concerns about GenAI, with non-users (never/rarely) significantly more concerned than other users, and concerns uncorrelated with knowledge — related