Cette page a été traduite automatiquement et l'exactitude de la traduction n'est pas garantie. Veuillez vous référer au version anglaise pour un texte source.

The Creative Team Member: A Study of the Influence of AI Integration Timing on Brainstorming and Ideation

11 juillet 2026 mis à jour par: Mohit Bhandari, McMaster University

The Effect of Artificial Intelligence Integration Timing on Group Brainstorming and Ideation in Undergraduate Students: A Randomized Controlled Trial

This study aims to examine how the timing of artificial intelligence (AI) integration during group brainstorming activities affects the creativity and ideation of participants. Undergraduate student participants will be randomly allocated into teams of four to complete a structured 12-minute brainstorming task. The study utilizes a three-group experimental design to compare three conditions: no AI access, AI access from the outset of the session, and AI access introduced halfway through the session. The standardized generative AI tool used is ChatGPT Pro. The creative output produced by each group will be evaluated by a panel of independent expert judges using the Consensual Assessment Technique (CAT).

Aperçu de l'étude

Statut

Pas encore de recrutement

Les conditions

Intervention / Traitement

Description détaillée

Artificial intelligence (AI) tools are increasingly used in academic and professional environments, yet little is known about how the timing of AI's introduction during a collaborative brainstorming process shapes the creativity of the ideas produced. While recent literature suggests that human-AI collaboration can increase the likelihood of successful idea generation when AI is present throughout an entire session, the specific effect of integration timing remains a gap in the literature. This study aims to provide early data on whether AI functions more effectively as an early collaborator, a later resource, or whether its absence supports more creative thinking.

The study recruits undergraduate students enrolled in a summer research program, who are then randomly assigned to teams of four using a digital randomizer. Over the course of nine sessions, these teams participate in structured, 12-minute collaborative brainstorming tasks focused on designing strategies to address common university student challenges. To mitigate the influence of individual baseline characteristics on the group output, participants are re-randomized into new teams for each separate session.

To standardize the technological intervention and eliminate technical confounders, the study utilizes ChatGPT Pro (GPT-4o architecture) on pre-set devices. At the conclusion of the timed task, a designated team scribe submits the group's collaboratively generated idea list and their selected best idea via a secure, digital case report form.

Following data collection, all session outputs are immediately de-identified and assigned neutral identifiers. A panel of independent expert judges, blinded to the condition assignments, evaluate the output of each group.

Type d'étude

Interventionnel

Inscription (Estimé)

16

Phase

  • N'est pas applicable

Contacts et emplacements

Cette section fournit les coordonnées de ceux qui mènent l'étude et des informations sur le lieu où cette étude est menée.

Coordonnées de l'étude

  • Nom: Alexandra Leone, BSc
  • Numéro de téléphone: 44490 905-527-4322
  • E-mail: leonea5@mcmaster.ca

Sauvegarde des contacts de l'étude

Lieux d'étude

  • Canada
    • Ontario
      • Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, L8S 4L8
        • McMaster University
        • Contact:
        • Contact:
        • Sous-enquêteur:
          • Kaya Bhandari
        • Sous-enquêteur:
          • Alexandra Leone, BSc
        • Chercheur principal:
          • Mohit Bhandari, MD, PhD, FRCSC

Critères de participation

Les chercheurs recherchent des personnes qui correspondent à une certaine description, appelée critères d'éligibilité. Certains exemples de ces critères sont l'état de santé général d'une personne ou des traitements antérieurs.

Critère d'éligibilité

Âges éligibles pour étudier

  • Enfant
  • Adulte
  • Adulte plus âgé

Accepte les volontaires sains

Oui

La description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Enrolled as a student in the designated summer research program
  • Able to provide voluntary informed consent
  • Proficient in reading and communicating in English (required to engage with the scenarios and the artificial intelligence tool)

Exclusion Criteria:

-Not enrolled as an undergraduate student

Plan d'étude

Cette section fournit des détails sur le plan d'étude, y compris la façon dont l'étude est conçue et ce que l'étude mesure.

Comment l'étude est-elle conçue ?

Détails de conception

  • Objectif principal: Autre
  • Répartition: Randomisé
  • Modèle interventionnel: Affectation parallèle
  • Masquage: Seul

Armes et Interventions

Groupe de participants / Bras
Intervention / Traitement
Aucune intervention: No Artificial Intelligence Tools (Control)
Across nine separate sessions, teams of four participants will complete all nine distinct student-struggle scenarios (one scenario per 12-minute session). In each session, participants engage in a structured collaborative brainstorming task entirely without access to artificial intelligence tools for the full 12 minutes. At the conclusion of each session, the team must evaluate their generated list and select their single best idea to solve that specific scenario.
Expérimental: Artificial Intelligence First (Early Integration)
Across nine separate sessions, teams of four participants will complete all nine distinct student-struggle scenarios (one scenario per 12-minute session). In each session, at minute 0, participants input the scenario prompt into ChatGPT Pro (GPT-4o architecture). The team receives a single initial output of ideas and does not engage in further back-and-forth dialogue with the tool. Participants use this initial artificial intelligence response as a baseline to continue human brainstorming and ideation for the remainder of the 12 minutes, ultimately selecting and submitting their single best idea for that specific scenario.
Comportemental: Artificial Intelligence First (Early Integration)
The introduction of ChatGPT Pro (GPT-4o architecture) at the beginning (minute 0) of a 12-minute group brainstorming session. A single prompt containing the scenario is submitted to generate an initial set of ideas, with no further back-and-forth dialogue permitted. This single artificial intelligence output serves as the baseline for the team's subsequent human ideation.
Expérimental: Artificial Intelligence Last (Late Integration)
Across nine separate sessions, teams of four participants will complete all nine distinct student-struggle scenarios (one scenario per 12-minute session). In each session, participants brainstorm independently without technology for the first 6 minutes. At minute 6, the team inputs the scenario prompt along with their already-generated human ideas into ChatGPT Pro (GPT-4o architecture). Receiving a single output with no further back-and-forth dialogue, the team uses the artificial intelligence response to continue ideating for the final 6 minutes, ultimately selecting and submitting their single best idea for that specific scenario.
Comportemental: Artificial Intelligence Last (Late Integration)
The introduction of ChatGPT Pro (GPT-4o architecture) at the midpoint (minute 6) of a 12-minute group brainstorming session. A single prompt containing both the scenario and the team's already-generated human ideas is submitted, with no further back-and-forth dialogue permitted. This single artificial intelligence output is used to guide the team's human ideation for the remaining 6 minutes.

Que mesure l'étude ?

Principaux critères de jugement

Mesure des résultats
Description de la mesure
Délai
Creativity Score of the Selected Best Idea
Délai: Evaluated cross-sectionally upon the conclusion of each 12-minute session, across the 9 study sessions.
The primary outcome is the mean expert creativity rating assigned to each team's top idea, across each of the 9 sessions, as assessed by independent judges using the Consensual Assessment Technique (CAT). Higher average scores denote a more creative output, while lower scores denote a less creative output.
Evaluated cross-sectionally upon the conclusion of each 12-minute session, across the 9 study sessions.

Mesures de résultats secondaires

Mesure des résultats
Description de la mesure
Délai
Overall Creativity Score of Full Idea List
Délai: Evaluated cross-sectionally upon the conclusion of each 12-minute session, across the 9 study sessions.
The collective creative quality of the entire list of ideas generated by the team during the session, evaluated by independent expert judges using the Consensual Assessment Technique (CAT).
Evaluated cross-sectionally upon the conclusion of each 12-minute session, across the 9 study sessions.
Number of Ideas Generated During the 12-Minute Session
Délai: Evaluated cross-sectionally upon the conclusion of each 12-minute session, across the 9 study sessions.
The total number of ideas generated (fluency) will be reported with the explicit methodological limitation that AI generation speed inherently outpaces human typing speed. Fluency will be analysed purely observationally, as the 12-minute constraint does not control for the mechanical advantage of the AI tool.
Evaluated cross-sectionally upon the conclusion of each 12-minute session, across the 9 study sessions.
Qualitative Resemblance of the Team's Output to Typical AI-Generated Responses
Délai: Evaluated cross-sectionally upon the conclusion of each 12-minute session, across the 9 study sessions.
This will be subjectively assessed by the expert judges on a 1-5 scale (anchored from 'strongly AI-typical' to 'strongly human'), independent of the CAT creativity evaluation.
Evaluated cross-sectionally upon the conclusion of each 12-minute session, across the 9 study sessions.

Collaborateurs et enquêteurs

C'est ici que vous trouverez les personnes et les organisations impliquées dans cette étude.

Parrainer

McMaster University

Les enquêteurs

  • Chercheur principal: Mohit Bhandari, MD, PhD, FRCSC, McMaster University

Publications et liens utiles

La personne responsable de la saisie des informations sur l'étude fournit volontairement ces publications. Il peut s'agir de tout ce qui concerne l'étude.

Publications générales

Dates d'enregistrement des études

Ces dates suivent la progression des dossiers d'étude et des soumissions de résultats sommaires à ClinicalTrials.gov. Les dossiers d'étude et les résultats rapportés sont examinés par la Bibliothèque nationale de médecine (NLM) pour s'assurer qu'ils répondent à des normes de contrôle de qualité spécifiques avant d'être publiés sur le site Web public.

Dates principales de l'étude

Début de l'étude (Estimé)

20 juillet 2026

Achèvement primaire (Estimé)

15 août 2026

Achèvement de l'étude (Estimé)

15 septembre 2026

Dates d'inscription aux études

Première soumission

5 juillet 2026

Première soumission répondant aux critères de contrôle qualité

5 juillet 2026

Première publication (Réel)

9 juillet 2026

Mises à jour des dossiers d'étude

Dernière mise à jour publiée (Réel)

14 juillet 2026

Dernière mise à jour soumise répondant aux critères de contrôle qualité

11 juillet 2026

Dernière vérification

1 juillet 2026

Plus d'information

Termes liés à cette étude

Mots clés

Autres numéros d'identification d'étude

  • 20358

Plan pour les données individuelles des participants (IPD)

Prévoyez-vous de partager les données individuelles des participants (DPI) ?

NON

Description du régime IPD

Individual participant data (IPD) will not be shared publicly due to an elevated risk of deductive re-identification. While numeric outcomes could be anonymized, the primary data consists of raw qualitative text (transcribed group brainstorming ideas and solutions) generated by a highly specific, geographically localized cohort of undergraduate students enrolled in the 2026 summer research program. Because the 2026 cohort size is small and the context is unique, sharing raw textual transcripts poses a risk of accidentally exposing the identities of the participants through specific phrasing, examples, or contextual clues, despite de-identification efforts. Therefore, to ensure participant confidentiality in accordance with institutional ethics guidelines, the raw data will remain confidential within the primary research team.

Informations sur les médicaments et les dispositifs, documents d'étude

Étudie un produit pharmaceutique réglementé par la FDA américaine

Non

Étudie un produit d'appareil réglementé par la FDA américaine

Non

Ces informations ont été extraites directement du site Web clinicaltrials.gov sans aucune modification. Si vous avez des demandes de modification, de suppression ou de mise à jour des détails de votre étude, veuillez contacter register@clinicaltrials.gov. Dès qu'un changement est mis en œuvre sur clinicaltrials.gov, il sera également mis à jour automatiquement sur notre site Web .

S'abonner