Performance and Metacognition Disconnect when Reasoning in Human-AI Interaction
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Optimizing human-AI interaction requires users to reflect on their own performance critically. Our paper examines whether people using AI to complete tasks can accurately monitor how well they perform. In Study 1, participants (N = 246) used AI to solve 20 logical problems from the Law School Admission Test. While their task performance improved by three points compared to a norm population, participants overestimated their performance by four points. Interestingly, higher AI literacy was linked to less accurate self-assessment. Participants with more technical knowledge of AI were more confident but less precise in judging their own performance. Using a computational model, we explored individual differences in metacognitive accuracy and found that the Dunning-Kruger effect, usually observed in this task, ceased to exist with AI. Study 2 (N = 452) replicates these findings. We discuss how AI levels metacognitive performance and consider consequences of performance overestimation for interactive AI systems enhancing cognition.
Key facts. Cited by 11 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 25 Sep 2024.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 10.
11 papers.
- 2025Understanding Critical Thinking in Generative Artificial Intelligence Use: Development, Validation, and Correlates of the Critical Thinking in AI Use Scalecited by 1
- 2026Metacognition in LLMs: Foundations, Progress, and Opportunitiescited by 1
- 2026Beyond the Steeper Curve: AI-Mediated Metacognitive Decoupling and the Limits of the Dunning-Kruger Metaphorcited by 0
- 2026Agentivism: a learning theory for the age of artificial intelligencecited by 0
- 2026Dead Cognitions: A Census of Misattributed Insightscited by 0
- 2026Co-Writing with AI: An Empirical Study of Diverse Academic Writing Workflowscited by 0
- 2026Access Timing as Scaffolding: A Reinforcement Learning Approach to GenAI in Educationcited by 0
- 2026SCAN: A Decision-Making Framework for Effective Task Allocation with Generative AIcited by 0
- 2026Can Legal AI Know When It Is Wrong? And Do Students Know When It Is?cited by 0
- 2026Available but Unclaimed: An Empirical Study of Human-AI Synergycited by 0
- 2026Structured pre-generation elicitation versus single-shot prompting in AI-assisted enterprise decision-making: a randomised online experimentcited by 0
- 2026Structured pre-generation elicitation versus single-shot prompting in AI-assisted enterprise decision-making: a randomised online experiment7 Oct 2026
- 2026Available but Unclaimed: An Empirical Study of Human-AI Synergy15 Sep 2026
- 2026Can Legal AI Know When It Is Wrong? And Do Students Know When It Is?21 Aug 2026
- 2026Metacognition in LLMs: Foundations, Progress, and Opportunities13 Jul 2026
- 2026SCAN: A Decision-Making Framework for Effective Task Allocation with Generative AI14 Jun 2026
- 2026Access Timing as Scaffolding: A Reinforcement Learning Approach to GenAI in Education15 May 2026
- 2026Co-Writing with AI: An Empirical Study of Diverse Academic Writing Workflows28 Apr 2026
- 2026Dead Cognitions: A Census of Misattributed Insights11 Apr 2026
- 2026Agentivism: a learning theory for the age of artificial intelligence9 Apr 2026
- 2026Beyond the Steeper Curve: AI-Mediated Metacognitive Decoupling and the Limits of the Dunning-Kruger Metaphor31 Mar 2026
- 2025Understanding Critical Thinking in Generative Artificial Intelligence Use: Development, Validation, and Correlates of the Critical Thinking in AI Use Scale13 Dec 2025