2026-10-14T11:38:22Z https://api.figshare.com/v2/oai

oai:figshare.com:article/34009098 2026-09-28T05:35:25Z category_173 portal_316 item_type_3 month_year_09_2026

Supplementary file 1_Independent judgment before viewing generative AI recommendations reduces susceptibility to misleading advice: a randomized scenario-based experiment with preservice teachers.docx Dong Yan (356556) Applied Psychology advice timing AI-assisted decision-making appropriate reliance automation bias generative AI recommendations judgment–recommendation sequence pedagogical judgment preservice teachers Introduction<p>Generative AI can support preservice teachers’ pedagogical decisions, but fluent recommendations may also redirect attention away from diagnostic classroom evidence. We compared an independent-judgment-before-recommendation sequence with a recommendation-before-judgment sequence under expert-keyed and misleading generative AI recommendations.</p>Methods<p>A three-arm randomized scenario-based experiment enrolled 240 preservice teachers from one Chinese university. Group A recorded an independent judgment before viewing an AI recommendation, Group B viewed the recommendation before its first recorded judgment, and Group C completed the tasks without AI as a contextual benchmark and did not enter the primary sequence × recommendation-quality hypothesis test. Groups A and B completed 12 fixed-order items, including six expert-keyed and six misleading recommendations. Expert-keyed joint accuracy—agreement with the expert-designated plan and rationale—was the primary outcome. After data-quality exclusions, 218 participants remained in the main analysis. Participant-clustered logistic generalized estimating equations tested sequence, recommendation quality, and their interaction.</p>Results<p>Under misleading recommendations, Group A had higher expert-keyed joint accuracy than Group B, OR = 1.912, 95% CI [1.413, 2.589], p < 0.001. The estimate remained significant among all 160 randomized A/B participants with available outcomes, OR = 1.814, 95% CI [1.345, 2.448], p < 0.001, and was similar after version adjustment. The difference appeared in both final plan accuracy and final rationale accuracy. Group A was also less likely to reproduce the misleading recommendation completely, OR = 0.403, 95% CI [0.296, 0.549], p < 0.001. Under expert-keyed recommendations, the between-group contrast was not statistically significant, OR = 0.821, 95% CI [0.598, 1.128], p = 0.225.</p>Discussion<p>Recording an independent judgment before viewing AI was associated with lower susceptibility to misleading recommendations in the selected controlled scenarios. The result supports further evaluation of independent-first workflows in teacher education, but it does not isolate a single cognitive mechanism or establish transfer to authentic classroom decision-making. These findings extend research on cognitive-forcing designs to contextualized pedagogical judgments that require both instructional action selection and evidence-based justification.</p> 2026-09-28T05:35:25Z Dataset Dataset 10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1936522.s001 https://figshare.com/articles/dataset/Supplementary_file_1_Independent_judgment_before_viewing_generative_AI_recommendations_reduces_susceptibility_to_misleading_advice_a_randomized_scenario-based_experiment_with_preservice_teachers_docx/34009098 CC BY 4.0