posted in Technology
Using AI for just 10 minutes erodes your ability to persist at hard things - Berkeley News
news.berkeley.edu/2026/10/09/using-ai-for-just-10-minutes-erodes-your-ability-to-persist-at-hard-things/
Replying to @themachinestops@lemmy.dbzer0.com
For the first experiment with 354 participants, one group was tasked with solving 15 basic fraction problems without help, while another had ChatGPT open on the side to use for assistance and to even ask for the answer. The group with AI access started off more accurate than the group without it. Then, after 12 problems, researchers took away the AI tool. Almost immediately, the people in that group stopped solving questions accurately.
A similar thing happened when they ran the experiment on a second, larger group of 667 participants. Whereas the AI users got answers wrong or gave up entirely when the AI assistance was withdrawn, the group without AI stuck with the task and were more successful at the end.
Researchers then ran a third experiment with 201 participants and an SAT reading comprehension prompt. The results echoed those from the fraction problems: When the AI tool was removed, persistence and accuracy dropped.
Replying to @xiao@sh.itjust.works
I wonder if this kind of test would show the same results if you compared people using calculators for math problems vs. those without. From the basic operations to doing trig and calculus, if you provide an easier way they're going to take it, and unfortunately not going to pick up on how the answer is obtained, which an LLM will usually tell in the process. Doing something yourself always teaches you better than watching it, or just being told the answer.
If the tests are implying or showing that people who already were proficient in doing these tests and would have done well without started declining after exposure to an LLM's help, and that persisted... that's a different problem and one that should be looked into. Losing skills you had because of help? That shouldn't happen.
Replying to @Rhaedas@fedia.io
A lot of pro AI people like to compare LLMs to calculators but it’s not comparable at all unless the math you’re doing is simple arithmetic. If you’re doing calculus, the skill you’re working on isn’t arithmetic, so the calculator isn’t much of a factor. Lots of people forget how to do long division after using calculators on the other hand.
Losing skills you had because of help? That shouldn’t happen.
That’s exactly what should happen. Cognitive thinking skills are use it or lose it. If you use an LLM to replace your brain, your brain will get worse.
Replying to @EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world
Over time yes, but this says skills were lost during a single session or short term. It was a random group of people, so unknown on what skills they did have before. I think what they observed wasn't a permanent loss, but a placebo effect of having extra help and it was taken away, so for the rest of the test they felt lacking.
My example of calculators was implying one that could do the test work. All calculators have trig functions, and some have calculus abilities. Would a student forget how to find cosine if the calculator was taken away, or do a derivative of a function? Not in one test. But if they were using it first half and then had to do it themselves for the rest, I imagine there's some psychological stuff going on that makes you feel like you've lost that skill.
Replying to @Rhaedas@fedia.io
They were tested on fractions
Did you use an LLM to summarize the study for you or something?
Replying to @h0tbeef@lemmy.zip
And reading comprehension.
We're discussing the effects of the test, not what the test was.
Replying to @Rhaedas@fedia.io
The content of the test is relevant to the outcome
Replying to @EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world
Tech evangelists rely heavily on logical fallacies. False equivalence is one of the main ones. “A thing happened before therefore this tech is nothing to worry about”. They’re redirecting the argument to bait people to try to prove why calculators are bad. But of course the past already happened and nobody is going prove otherwise.
Replying to @EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world
but it’s not comparable at all unless the math you’re doing is simple arithmetic.
That’s what they were studying on the math side
For the first experiment with 354 participants, one group was tasked with solving 15 basic fraction problems
Also
If you’re doing calculus, the skill you’re working on isn’t arithmetic, so the calculator isn’t much of a factor.
Calculators would be a big factor in solving calculus problems. Haven’t done calculus in a while but if I recall correctly you are breaking down or rearranging the problem into smaller steps that are more basic arithmetic. One part of a calculus problem could be finding out what the square root of 7 is , if you have a calculator to do that you’re more likely to solve the problem more accurately and to not give up on the problem, which were the two metrics this study was looking at.
Replying to @Not_mikey@lemmy.dbzer0.com
Realistically, you would just write root 7 as a coefficient of your answer if you’re performing this math long hand. No one really expects anyone to be able to calculate things like that.
Replying to @EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world
It’s funny because I actually think learning math the old fashioned way is super important. I used to struggle with math a lot as I’d always had calculators. I went back as an adult and got some old 1980s math textbooks based on Soviet pedagogy (widely considered the best for math at the time) and the impact has been huge. I’ve been building from the ground up math skills that got entirely skipped in school, and feel much better about it now. Calculators are useful but when LEARNING math they should not be used imo. Except maybe to check an answer after you already get it. Doing difficult things is good.