Who Gives Feedback Matters: Student Biases Towards Human and <scp>AI</scp> ‐Generated Formative Feedback

ABSTRACT Background Feedback is essential for learning, helping individuals understand and improve their performance. However, providing timely, personalised feedback in higher education is challenging. Generative AI offers a scalable solution, yet little is known about students' biases towards AI‐generated feedback. Objectives This study aims to investigate how the identity of the feedback provider (human vs. AI) affects students' perceptions of feedback quality and credibility. Methods The study involved 472 students across diverse academic programmes and levels in authentic educational environments and employed a within‐subject experimental design with a priming effect. A mixed‐methods approach combined quantitative analysis of feedback evaluations with qualitative insights into students' perceptions to deepen understanding of the observed biases. Results and Conclusions Students perceived AI as a significantly less credible feedback provider and tended to associate lower feedback quality with AI. Disclosing the feedback provider's identity led to decreased evaluations of AI‐generated feedback and an increased preference for human‐crafted feedback. These patterns were consistent across academic levels, genders, and fields of study. These insights highlight the need for targeted interventions, such as improving AI literacy and building human‐in‐the‐loop systems, to mitigate biases and enhance the effectiveness of AI in educational feedback systems.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Computer Assisted Learning
Published
2025-12-02
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.70153
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Student Assessment and Feedback
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
8.93
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Who Gives Feedback Matters: Student Biases Towards Human and AI ‐Generated Formative Feedback

Jibril Frej, Tanja Käser, Vinitra Swamy, Paola Mejia‐Domenzain et al.
1 citations
Journal of Computer Assisted Learning
Student Assessment and Feedback
8.93
article

Who Gives Feedback Matters: Student Biases Towards Human and AI ‐Generated Formative Feedback

Jibril Frej, Tanja Käser, Vinitra Swamy, Paola Mejia‐Domenzain, Tanya Nazaretsky
article en
1 citations

Abstract

ABSTRACT Background Feedback is essential for learning, helping individuals understand and improve their performance. However, providing timely, personalised feedback in higher education is challenging. Generative AI offers a scalable solution, yet little is known about students' biases towards AI‐generated feedback. Objectives This study aims to investigate how the identity of the feedback provider (human vs. AI) affects students' perceptions of feedback quality and credibility. Methods The study involved 472 students across diverse academic programmes and levels in authentic educational environments and employed a within‐subject experimental design with a priming effect. A mixed‐methods approach combined quantitative analysis of feedback evaluations with qualitative insights into students' perceptions to deepen understanding of the observed biases. Results and Conclusions Students perceived AI as a significantly less credible feedback provider and tended to associate lower feedback quality with AI. Disclosing the feedback provider's identity led to decreased evaluations of AI‐generated feedback and an increased preference for human‐crafted feedback. These patterns were consistent across academic levels, genders, and fields of study. These insights highlight the need for targeted interventions, such as improving AI literacy and building human‐in‐the‐loop systems, to mitigate biases and enhance the effectiveness of AI in educational feedback systems.

Journal of Computer Assisted LearningVol. 42(1)
École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (CH)
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
Student Assessment and Feedback
8.93
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.