Students shame themselves, peers, and in one case a faculty member for using AI¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · qualitative r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Shaming was frequently directed at oneself, peers, and in one case a faculty member, shaping how students evaluated themselves and monitored others' AI use. → Kate Hamilton 2026

Evidence¶

Kate Hamilton 2026¶

Kate Hamilton, Irene Hou, Dev Patel, Sheena Nnam, Hena Patel, and Stephen MacNeil. (2026). “Stuck in a Spiral”: Shame and Guilt as Social Regulators of AI Use in Computing Education. https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.14920 doi:10.48550/arxiv.2606.14920

q2 · i? · qualitative · r3

Results section on shaming oneself and others: the interview study found "Shaming was frequently directed at oneself, peers, and in one case, a faculty member," including a participant describing students who "would shame him" over a teacher's AI use.

"Shaming was frequently directed at oneself, peers, and in one case, a faculty member. This culture of shaming appeared to shape how students evaluated themselves, monitored others’ behavior, and regulated when and where AI use felt acceptable."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Achievement Emotions — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• Shame and guilt regulate the visibility of AI use: students engage in hiding behaviors and selective disclosure rather than open disclosure — related
• Shame and guilt coexist with continued AI use, creating self-reinforcing cycles of reliance, concealment, and self-critique rather than behavior change — related
• AI guilt correlates with avoidance and concealment behaviours, most strongly with limiting use due to uneasiness — related
• AI use threatens students' computing identities as competent, hardworking, and ethical, with students identifying as cheaters, lazy, or incompetent even where AI is permitted — related