AI tools like ChatGPT are popular among students who struggle with concentration and attention

AI tools like ChatGPT have had a major impact on content creation since their release, sparking an ongoing debate in schools and universities about whether these tools should be allowed or banned.

Now, Swedish researchers have investigated the relationship between adolescents’ executive function (EF) and their use of and perception of usefulness of a generative AI chatbot for learning. The cutting edge of artificial intelligence.

“Students with more EF challenges found these tools especially helpful in managing their tasks,” says Johan Clarin, school psychologist and research assistant at Lund University’s Department of Psychology. “This highlights the role of these tools as a potential support for students who struggle with cognitive processes that are essential for academic success.”

But the researchers also point out that over-reliance on such tools can hinder or slow down EF development and student learning. “This needs to be carefully considered when introducing AI support in schools, and its effectiveness should be studied in the long term,” added project leader Dr Daiva Daukantaite, Associate Professor at Lund University.

Perceived usefulness

The researchers conducted two studies: the first included 385 young people aged 12 to 16 attending four primary schools in southern Sweden, and the second included 359 students aged 15 to 19 attending the same high schools.

The survey revealed that the usage rate of AI chatbots was about 15% among early teens and about 53% among older students. One possible reason is that older students are often given complex tasks and therefore may use AI tools more frequently. The researchers also noted that the two surveys were conducted at different times (“Study 2” was conducted almost a year after “Study 1”), indicating that AI use may have become more prevalent in general during this period.

But more importantly, the study showed that students who struggle with EF perceived generative AI to be significantly more helpful academically than their peers, and the researchers say one possible reason is that these students saw greater productivity gains than their classmates.

Support or cheating?

“The line between cheating and using AI tools as an aid should be drawn based on the purpose and scope of use,” Clarin said. Using ChatGPT to complete an entire assignment or solve a problem and then submitting the results as your own is cheating. However, if a student critically engages with the generated content and adds their own understanding and effort, it could be considered a legitimate aid.

Ways in which students, especially those who struggle with EF, can use ChatGPT responsibly include researching, generating ideas, and understanding complex concepts.

“Educators need to provide guidelines and frameworks for appropriate use. Teaching digital literacy and ethical considerations is also important,” Clarin said.

The researchers said that leveraging technology, facilitating peer support programs and providing professional development to help teachers identify and support students with EF challenges could increase the real-world feasibility of such instruction.

Balancing AI and academic integrity

The researchers said their findings represent the first attempt to understand the relationship between the use of AI tools in schools and EF.

“Our study lays the first foundations to inform educators, policy makers and technology developers about the role of generative AI in education and how to balance its benefits with the need to maintain academic integrity and promote authentic learning. It also highlights the need for supportive measures, especially for students with EF challenges. However, further research is needed to gain a more comprehensive understanding,” Doukantaite concluded.

However, the team pointed out limitations of the study, such as the fact that students self-reported their AI use, and that the results may not be generalizable because they focused on a specific age group and educational context, and conducted the study in an environment where all students received laptops free of charge — factors that may vary across contexts and countries.