Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2603.21288

Unpacking Interaction Profiles and Strategies in Human-AI Collaborative Problem Solving: A Cognitive Distribution and Regulation Perspective

Abstract

This study adopts an integrated distributed cognition and regulation of learning perspective to examine the collaboration patterns and dynamics of human-AI collaboration when college students collaborating with AI for complex problem-solving. Through cluster analysis, three distinct collaborative problem-solving modes were identified in this study: Delegated Reasoning (DR), Concerted Interpretation (CI), and Delegated Elaboration (DE). This study found that the DR group achieved the highest task performance, significantly outperforming the CI group. Additionally, the semantic similarity between human and AI discourse was notably the highest in the DR group. In contrast, the CI group reported significantly greater use of self-regulation strategies. These findings uncover a critical tension between the efficiency of the distributed system and the depth of human learners regulatory engagement. Insights from this study offer valuable implications for the future design of AI-empowered educational tools and student-AI collaborative learning frameworks.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Zhanxin Hao, Xiaobo Liu, Jiaxin Fan, Yun Long, Jifan Yu, Wenli Chen, Yu Zhang. 2026-03-22. Unpacking Interaction Profiles and Strategies in Human-AI Collaborative Problem Solving: A Cognitive Distribution and Regulation Perspective. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2026.2722962

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Reducing Catastrophic Risk from AI with Systematic Monitoring and Evaluation of Rogue AI Progression

This article presents a structured framework of behavioral indicators that may signal progression toward potentially catastrophic threats from artificial intelligence systems. We adopt a pragmatic approach, inspired by established methodologies in cybersecurity and national security. By establishing clear metrics, indicators, and thresholds across multiple dimensions of AI capability and behavior, this framework enables researchers and policymakers to implement evidence-based monitoring protocols.

cs.CY

Experts Disagree on How to Fight AI Disinformation, but Agree That Health and Politics Need Different Solutions

When 54 international experts assessed AI-generated disinformation threats, they revealed a surprising pattern: while video deepfakes received the highest average threat ratings in the political domain (M = 6.31/7), the pattern differed in the health domain, where AI-generated text received the highest average rating (M = 5.80). Experts also diverge on what to do: government regulation drew both the most "most effective" (30%) and the most "least effective" (15%) votes, though rating distributions were contested rather than polarized, indicating disagreement over priorities rather than over efficacy. These findings offer an initial expert map of an AI-disinformation landscape that is still rapidly forming.

cs.CY

Thinking Inside the Box: Considerations for Putting Data Physicalization Workshops in a Box

Visualization researchers utilize workshops both for applied research and to engage different populations with visualization-based activities. While there are many benefits to running visualization workshops, their utility and impact rely on the presence of a researcher who has deep knowledge about visualization theory and practice. In this work, we introduce workshop-in-a-box as a design concept intended to challenge the researcher-centric approach to data physicalization workshops. Through a design study with a socially innovative organization, we deployed several data physicalization workshops that our collaborator ran instead of us. Based on this experience, along with two accompanying case studies that validate the concept, we present material and procedural considerations for how to put data physicalization workshops into a box and the implications it has for extending visualization research outside the bounds of academia.

cs.HC