Asking generative artificial intelligence the right questions improves writing performance

Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) tools are widely used by learners and this trend is poised to continue. However, little is known about whether and how GenAI use impacts learning and performance. This study aimed to investigate the effect of GenAI on performance by examining a key affordance of GenAI—seeking help via question asking. We compared the questions that learners asked GenAI versus a human tutor online during a writing task. Using quantitative ethnographic methods, we found that: (a) participants in the GenAI condition asked significantly more questions compared to those in the Tutor condition; (b) GenAI participants tended to ask one-off questions, while Tutor participants tended to have longer conversational exchanges; (c) GenAI participants tended to question pragmatically, asking direct questions about conceptual and procedural knowledge, while Tutor participants tended to make indirect request for feedback; (d) question asking, as measured by epistemic network analysis, mediated the relationship between experimental condition and performance—the more pragmatic the questions, and thus the more like questions in the GenAI condition, the better the performance; and (e) questions in the GenAI condition were driven by social coordination and knowledge deficits, while questions in the Tutor condition were driven by social coordination and establishing common ground. These findings suggest learners may be less hesitant to admit knowledge deficits and more willing to repair them when interacting with GenAI compared to human tutors. Thus, GenAI can be a useful educational tool when improved performance is the goal and human tutoring may benefit from creating a space where learners are more comfortable revealing a lack of knowledge. • Participants asked GenAI significantly more questions than a human tutor. • Questions for GenAI were one-off and focused on conceptual knowledge. • Pragmatic questioning mediated positive impact of GenAI use on performance. • Questions in GenAI were driven by knowledge deficits and social coordination. • GenAI fosters openness in addressing knowledge gaps, enhancing performance.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence
Published
2025-02-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100374
Citations
8
Primary Topic
Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
19.85

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Asking generative artificial intelligence the right questions improves writing performance

Yizhou Fan, Dragan Gašević, Yixin Cheng, Zachari Swiecki et al.
8 citations
Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence
Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
19.85
article

Asking generative artificial intelligence the right questions improves writing performance

Yizhou Fan, Dragan Gašević, Yixin Cheng, Zachari Swiecki, Guanliang Chen, Xinyu Li
article en
8 citations

Abstract

Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) tools are widely used by learners and this trend is poised to continue. However, little is known about whether and how GenAI use impacts learning and performance. This study aimed to investigate the effect of GenAI on performance by examining a key affordance of GenAI—seeking help via question asking. We compared the questions that learners asked GenAI versus a human tutor online during a writing task. Using quantitative ethnographic methods, we found that: (a) participants in the GenAI condition asked significantly more questions compared to those in the Tutor condition; (b) GenAI participants tended to ask one-off questions, while Tutor participants tended to have longer conversational exchanges; (c) GenAI participants tended to question pragmatically, asking direct questions about conceptual and procedural knowledge, while Tutor participants tended to make indirect request for feedback; (d) question asking, as measured by epistemic network analysis, mediated the relationship between experimental condition and performance—the more pragmatic the questions, and thus the more like questions in the GenAI condition, the better the performance; and (e) questions in the GenAI condition were driven by social coordination and knowledge deficits, while questions in the Tutor condition were driven by social coordination and establishing common ground. These findings suggest learners may be less hesitant to admit knowledge deficits and more willing to repair them when interacting with GenAI compared to human tutors. Thus, GenAI can be a useful educational tool when improved performance is the goal and human tutoring may benefit from creating a space where learners are more comfortable revealing a lack of knowledge. • Participants asked GenAI significantly more questions than a human tutor. • Questions for GenAI were one-off and focused on conceptual knowledge. • Pragmatic questioning mediated positive impact of GenAI use on performance. • Questions in GenAI were driven by knowledge deficits and social coordination. • GenAI fosters openness in addressing knowledge gaps, enhancing performance.

Computers and Education Artificial IntelligenceVol. 8
Peking University (CN), Monash University (AU)
National Natural Science Foundation of China, Jacobs Foundation, Australian Research Council
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
19.85
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.