Student Interpretation and Negotiation of AI-Generated Critique in Design Studio Education: A Feedback Literacy and Cooperative Learning Perspective

Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) is increasingly used in design education, where it can provide students with fast, repeated suggestions or critiques on their work. This study examines how design students interpret AI-generated critique individually and how they negotiate its relevance with their group when making studio design decisions. Feedback literacy and two cooperative learning processes serve as the analytical lenses. The study is a cross-sectional, convergent mixed-methods survey of 77 visual communication design students in a studio course. This article reports a post hoc, theory-guided secondary analysis of three composites, together with five open-ended questions. Perceptions of AI as a reflective partner were positively associated with both group processing and reflection and promotive interaction, and both associations remained significant after Holm correction. After removing items whose wording referred to both AI and group work, the associations were smaller but still positive (? = .545 and .421) and are taken as the conservative basis for interpretation. Students who viewed AI more favorably as a reflective partner also reported greater team reflection and mutual support. Reflexive thematic analysis of the open-ended responses from all 77 respondents produced four themes: reflective noticing prompted by AI critique, appraising and selectively using AI suggestions, negotiating AI suggestions through group discussion, and positioning AI as support while retaining human judgment.