Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Trust in Generative AI among students: An Exploratory Study

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2310.04631 v2 pith:ODRHXEUI submitted 2023-10-07 cs.HC

Matin Amoozadeh , David Daniels , Daye Nam , Aayush Kumar , Stella Chen , Michael Hilton , Sruti Srinivasa Ragavan , Mohammad Amin Alipour This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.HC
keywords genaistudentstrustdifferentgenerativelearninglevelssystems
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Generative artificial systems (GenAI) have experienced exponential growth in the past couple of years. These systems offer exciting capabilities, such as generating programs, that students can well utilize for their learning. Among many dimensions that might affect the effective adoption of GenAI, in this paper, we investigate students' \textit{trust}. Trust in GenAI influences the extent to which students adopt GenAI, in turn affecting their learning. In this study, we surveyed 253 students at two large universities to understand how much they trust \genai tools and their feedback on how GenAI impacts their performance in CS courses. Our results show that students have different levels of trust in GenAI. We also observe different levels of confidence and motivation, highlighting the need for further understanding of factors impacting trust.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. OpenAlex reports about 16 citations worldwide. Full citation record

  1. To Police or to Guide: How Higher Education Computer Science Instructors Design and Implement Generative AI Policies

    cs.CY 2026-07 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

    Instructors' AI policies are mostly assessment-protection measures (paper exams, exam-heavy grading) that create policing burden and relationship strain, with learning-oriented alternatives available.

Pith tools