Self-assessment accuracy in the age of artificial Intelligence: Differential effects of LLM-generated feedback

Feedback is a promising intervention to foster students’ self-assessment accuracy (SAA), but the effect can vary depending on students' initial skill levels or prior performance. In particular, lower-performing students who are less accurate might benefit more from feedback in terms of SAA. To deepen our understanding, the present study investigated the mechanism and dependencies of feedback effects on SAA in the realm of large language models (LLMs). Within a randomized control experiment, we examined the effect of LLM-generated feedback on SAA by considering students’ initial performance and initial SAA as potential moderators. A sample of N = 459 upper secondary students wrote an argumentative essay in English as a foreign language and revised their text. After finishing their first draft (pretest) and revision (posttest) of the draft, students self-assessed their writing performance. Students in the experimental group received GPT-3.5-turbo-generated feedback on their first draft during their revision. In the control group, students could revise their text without feedback. Our results indicated no significant main effect of LLM-generated feedback on students’ SAA. Furthermore, we found a significant interaction effect between feedback and students' pretest SAA on SAA changes, indicating that lower-calibrated students improved their SAA with feedback more, compared to students with similar pretest SAA and without feedback. Exploratory analyses revealed that students with higher pretest SAA did not improve their SAA with feedback and decreased their SAA. We discuss this nuanced evidence and draw implications for research and practice using LLM-generated feedback in education. • LLM-generated feedback did not improve self-assessment accuracy (SAA) on average. • Feedback effectiveness depended on students' initial SAA, not performance. • Students with lower initial SAA improved their SAA after LLM feedback. • LLM-generated feedback offers a scalable way to support students who need it most.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Computers & Education
Published
2025-06-19
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2025.105385
Citations
6
Primary Topic
Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
12.64
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Self-assessment accuracy in the age of artificial Intelligence: Differential effects of LLM-generated feedback

Lucas W. Liebenow, Jennifer Meyer, Fabian T. C. Schmidt, Johanna Fleckenstein
6 citations
Computers & Education
Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
12.64
article

Self-assessment accuracy in the age of artificial Intelligence: Differential effects of LLM-generated feedback

Lucas W. Liebenow, Jennifer Meyer, Fabian T. C. Schmidt, Johanna Fleckenstein
article en
6 citations

Abstract

Feedback is a promising intervention to foster students’ self-assessment accuracy (SAA), but the effect can vary depending on students' initial skill levels or prior performance. In particular, lower-performing students who are less accurate might benefit more from feedback in terms of SAA. To deepen our understanding, the present study investigated the mechanism and dependencies of feedback effects on SAA in the realm of large language models (LLMs). Within a randomized control experiment, we examined the effect of LLM-generated feedback on SAA by considering students’ initial performance and initial SAA as potential moderators. A sample of N = 459 upper secondary students wrote an argumentative essay in English as a foreign language and revised their text. After finishing their first draft (pretest) and revision (posttest) of the draft, students self-assessed their writing performance. Students in the experimental group received GPT-3.5-turbo-generated feedback on their first draft during their revision. In the control group, students could revise their text without feedback. Our results indicated no significant main effect of LLM-generated feedback on students’ SAA. Furthermore, we found a significant interaction effect between feedback and students' pretest SAA on SAA changes, indicating that lower-calibrated students improved their SAA with feedback more, compared to students with similar pretest SAA and without feedback. Exploratory analyses revealed that students with higher pretest SAA did not improve their SAA with feedback and decreased their SAA. We discuss this nuanced evidence and draw implications for research and practice using LLM-generated feedback in education. • LLM-generated feedback did not improve self-assessment accuracy (SAA) on average. • Feedback effectiveness depended on students' initial SAA, not performance. • Students with lower initial SAA improved their SAA after LLM feedback. • LLM-generated feedback offers a scalable way to support students who need it most.

Computers & EducationVol. 237
University of Hildesheim (DE), Leibniz Institute for Science and Mathematics Education (DE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
12.64
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.