Enhancing Students' Critical Evaluation of AI Versus Human-Generated Literature Reviews: Deliberative Pedagogy

BACKGROUND: AI misuse in literature reviews has emerged as an issue for educators. The goal of this teaching innovation was to foster learners' critical thinking about AI use in literature reviews. METHOD: A four-step deliberative pedagogical process was applied: (a) announcing literature review battles between AI and humans, (b) presenting review results generated by both sides, (c) using a poll to ask learners to choose their preferred review results for policy decision-making, and (d) debriefing on the speed and accuracy of both reviews. RESULTS: = 8) expressed their surprise at AI's performance. Debriefing showed that AI spent only 0.5 hours completing the review, but with low search accuracy, whereas humans achieved high accuracy but took more than 6 months. CONCLUSION: Deliberative pedagogy encourages learners to recalibrate their AI knowledge and reconsider the importance of human decision-making in literature reviews.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Nursing Education
Published
2026-11-02
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3928/01484834-20261009-02
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Enhancing Students' Critical Evaluation of AI Versus Human-Generated Literature Reviews: Deliberative Pedagogy

Kristen E. Pecanac, Diane Lauver, Wan‐chin Kuo, Pajarita Charles et al.
7 links
Journal of Nursing Education
Artificial Intelligence in Education
article

Enhancing Students' Critical Evaluation of AI Versus Human-Generated Literature Reviews: Deliberative Pedagogy

Kristen E. Pecanac, Diane Lauver, Wan‐chin Kuo, Pajarita Charles, Hung-Hui Chen, Che-Hao Tung
article en

Abstract

BACKGROUND: AI misuse in literature reviews has emerged as an issue for educators. The goal of this teaching innovation was to foster learners' critical thinking about AI use in literature reviews. METHOD: A four-step deliberative pedagogical process was applied: (a) announcing literature review battles between AI and humans, (b) presenting review results generated by both sides, (c) using a poll to ask learners to choose their preferred review results for policy decision-making, and (d) debriefing on the speed and accuracy of both reviews. RESULTS: = 8) expressed their surprise at AI's performance. Debriefing showed that AI spent only 0.5 hours completing the review, but with low search accuracy, whereas humans achieved high accuracy but took more than 6 months. CONCLUSION: Deliberative pedagogy encourages learners to recalibrate their AI knowledge and reconsider the importance of human decision-making in literature reviews.

Journal of Nursing Education
University of Wisconsin–Madison (US), National Taiwan University (TW)
Quality education
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Artificial Intelligence in Education
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.

Laika access coming soon