arXiv subjects
Publications and source records attributed to Samuel Greiff.
Generative artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly being integrated into education, where it can boost learners' performance. However, these uses do not promote the deep cognitive and metacognitive processing that are required for high-quality learning.
As generative AI systems become increasingly embedded in collaborative work, they are evolving from visible tools into human-like communicative actors that participate socially rather than merely providing information. Yet little is known about how such agents shape team dynamics when their artificial nature is not recognised, a growing concern as human-like AI is deployed at scale in education, organisations, and civic contexts where collaboration underpins collective outcomes. In a large-scale mixed-design experiment (N = 905), we examined how AI teammates with distinct communicative personas, supportive or contrarian, affected collaboration across analytical, creative, and ethical tasks. Participants worked in triads that were fully human or hybrid human-AI teams, without being informed of AI involvement. Results show that participants had limited ability to detect AI teammates, yet AI personas exerted robust social effects. Contrarian personas reduced psychological safety and discussion quality, whereas supportive personas improved discussion quality without affecting safety. These effects persisted after accounting for individual differences in detectability, revealing a dissociation between influence and awareness that we term the social blindspot. Linguistic analyses confirmed that personas were enacted through systematic differences in affective and relational language, with partial mediation for discussion quality but largely direct effects on psychological safety. Together, the findings demonstrate that AI systems can tacitly regulate collaborative norms through persona-level cues, even when users remain unaware of their presence. We argue that persona design constitutes a form of social governance in hybrid teams, with implications for the responsible deployment of AI in collective settings.
Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) holds the potential to transform the delivery, cultivation, and evaluation of human learning. This Perspective examines the integration of GenAI as a tool for human learning, addressing its promises and challenges from a holistic viewpoint that integrates insights from learning sciences, educational technology, and human-computer interaction. GenAI promises to enhance learning experiences by scaling personalised support, diversifying learning materials, enabling timely feedback, and innovating assessment methods. However, it also presents critical issues such as model imperfections, ethical dilemmas, and the disruption of traditional assessments. Cultivating AI literacy and adaptive skills is imperative for facilitating informed engagement with GenAI technologies. Rigorous research across learning contexts is essential to evaluate GenAI's impact on human cognition, metacognition, and creativity. Humanity must learn with and about GenAI, ensuring it becomes a powerful ally in the pursuit of knowledge and innovation, rather than a crutch that undermines our intellectual abilities.
Organizations rely on phishing interventions to enhance employees' vigilance and safe responses to phishing emails that bypass technical solutions. While various resources are available to counteract phishing, studies emphasize the need for interactive and practical training approaches. To investigate the effectiveness of such an approach, we developed and delivered two anti-phishing trainings, group discussion and role-playing, at a European university. We conducted a pre-registered experiment (N = 105), incorporating repeated measures at three time points, a control group, and three in-situ phishing tests. Both trainings enhanced employees' anti-phishing self-efficacy and support-seeking intention in within-group analyses. Only the role-playing training significantly improved support-seeking intention when compared to the control group. Participants in both trainings reported more phishing tests and demonstrated heightened vigilance to phishing attacks compared to the control group. We discuss practical implications for evaluating and improving phishing interventions and promoting safe responses to phishing threats within organizations.