Self-reported LLM usage frequency shows Holm-corrected associations with all five baseline AI perception outcomes, strongest for complex-task trust, accuracy trust, and critical-thinking risk¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associationalr2·q2·i2medium
Currency · newest study 2026 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i2 Among 91 bioscience graduate and postdoctoral trainees, reported LLM usage frequency correlates with all five pre-instruction perception outcomes after Holm correction, with the largest association for complex-task trust (ρ=.409). → Yongkyung Oh 2026
Evidence¶
Yongkyung Oh 2026¶
Yongkyung Oh, Lynn Talton, Alex Bui. (2026). Engagement Intensity as a Learner-Modeling Signal for Adaptive AI Ethics Instruction. KDD 2026 AI for Education Day, at the ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (KDD '26). https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.18548 doi:10.48550/arxiv.2606.18548
q2 · i2 · associational · r2
Pre-instruction survey analysis of 91 bioscience graduate and postdoctoral trainees in a required RCR course, testing usage frequency as a five-level ordinal predictor with Spearman correlations and Holm correction. The largest printed association is ρ=.409 for complex-task trust, a medium correlation by Cohen's conventions (the article itself does not classify its size); usage survived correction on all five outcomes.
"Usage frequency shows the largest associations for complex-task trust (𝜌=.409 ), accuracy trust (𝜌=.370 ), and critical-thinking risk (𝜌=−.346 )."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- The cohort's baseline perception profile shows high endorsement of critical-thinking risk and training interest and substantially more cautious trust for complex-task use than for accuracy — related
- The threshold-like usage pattern at the lower end of the scale is strongest for training interest and accuracy trust rather than uniform across outcomes — related
- Self-rated LLM familiarity is a weaker secondary intake signal, surviving Holm correction for three of five outcomes with a bottom-anchored pattern — related
- Prior AI education shows no family-wise association with any baseline perception outcome, with at most small effect sizes, under both three-group and two-group codings — reports the opposite
- High-frequency LLM users show higher minimum course outcomes and reduced score variability, though interaction level is not a dominant outcome predictor — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
usage-frequency-associates-all-five-baseline-ai-perceptions |
title |
Self-reported LLM usage frequency shows Holm-corrected associations with all five baseline AI perception outcomes, strongest for complex-task trust, accuracy trust, and critical-thinking risk |
description |
Self-reported LLM usage frequency shows Holm-corrected associations with all five baseline AI perception outcomes, strongest for complex-task trust, accuracy trust, and critical-thinking risk |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2026 |
source_checked |
2026-10-20 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-10 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — yongkyung-oh-2026 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.