- ICH GCP
- Реестр клинических исследований США
- Клиническое испытание NCT07693803
The Creative Team Member: A Study of the Influence of AI Integration Timing on Brainstorming and Ideation
The Effect of Artificial Intelligence Integration Timing on Group Brainstorming and Ideation in Undergraduate Students: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Обзор исследования
Статус
Условия
Подробное описание
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.
Тип исследования
Регистрация (Оцененный)
Фаза
- Непригодный
Контакты и местонахождение
Контакты исследования
- Имя: Alexandra Leone, BSc
- Номер телефона: 44490 905-527-4322
- Электронная почта: leonea5@mcmaster.ca
Учебное резервное копирование контактов
- Имя: Kaya Bhandari
- Электронная почта: bhandk5@mcmaster.ca
Места учебы
-
-
Ontario
-
Hamilton, Ontario, Канада, L8S 4L8
- McMaster University
-
Контакт:
- Kaya Bhandari
- Электронная почта: bhandk5@mcmaster.ca
-
Контакт:
- Alexandra Leone, BSc.
- Номер телефона: 44490 905-527-4322
- Электронная почта: leonea5@mcmaster.ca
-
Младший исследователь:
- Kaya Bhandari
-
Младший исследователь:
- Alexandra Leone, BSc
-
Главный следователь:
- Mohit Bhandari, MD, PhD, FRCSC
-
-
Критерии участия
Критерии приемлемости
Возраст, подходящий для обучения
- Ребенок
- Взрослый
- Пожилой взрослый
Принимает здоровых добровольцев
Описание
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
Учебный план
Как устроено исследование?
Детали дизайна
- Основная цель: Другой
- Распределение: Рандомизированный
- Интервенционная модель: Параллельное назначение
- Маскировка: Одинокий
Оружие и интервенции
Группа участников / Армия |
Вмешательство/лечение |
|---|---|
|
Без вмешательства: 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.
|
|
|
Экспериментальный: 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.
|
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.
|
|
Экспериментальный: 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.
|
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.
|
Что измеряет исследование?
Первичные показатели результатов
Мера результата |
Мера Описание |
Временное ограничение |
|---|---|---|
|
Creativity Score of the Selected Best Idea
Временное ограничение: 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.
|
Вторичные показатели результатов
Мера результата |
Мера Описание |
Временное ограничение |
|---|---|---|
|
Overall Creativity Score of Full Idea List
Временное ограничение: 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
Временное ограничение: 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
Временное ограничение: 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.
|
Соавторы и исследователи
Спонсор
Следователи
- Главный следователь: Mohit Bhandari, MD, PhD, FRCSC, McMaster University
Публикации и полезные ссылки
Общие публикации
- Koo TK, Li MY. A Guideline of Selecting and Reporting Intraclass Correlation Coefficients for Reliability Research. J Chiropr Med. 2016 Jun;15(2):155-63. doi: 10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012. Epub 2016 Mar 31.
- Çelik, T. İ., & Akay, C. (2025). The Impact of Brainstorming Technique on Academic Achievement and Creative Thinking: A Meta-Analysis Study. Sage Open, 15(3). 62
- Muller, M., Houde, S., Gonzalez, G., Brimijoin, K., Ross, S. I., Silva Moran, D. A., & Weisz, J. D. (2024). Group brainstorming with an AI agent: Creating and selecting ideas. Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Computational Creativity (ICCC 2024). https://computationalcreativity.net/iccc24/papers/ICCC24_paper_18.pdf
- Amabile, Teresa. (1982). Social psychology of creativity: A consensual assessment technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 43. 997-1013. 10.1037/0022-3514.43.5.997
- Zhang C, Shao Y, Yuan Y, Shen W. Artificial Intelligence Reshapes Creativity: A Multidimensional Evaluation. Psych J. 2025 Dec;14(6):831-840. doi: 10.1002/pchj.70042. Epub 2025 Aug 5.
- Lee BC, Chung JJ. An empirical investigation of the impact of ChatGPT on creativity. Nat Hum Behav. 2024 Oct;8(10):1906-1914. doi: 10.1038/s41562-024-01953-1. Epub 2024 Aug 12.
Даты записи исследования
Изучение основных дат
Начало исследования (Оцененный)
Первичное завершение (Оцененный)
Завершение исследования (Оцененный)
Даты регистрации исследования
Первый отправленный
Впервые представлено, что соответствует критериям контроля качества
Первый опубликованный (Действительный)
Обновления учебных записей
Последнее опубликованное обновление (Действительный)
Последнее отправленное обновление, отвечающее критериям контроля качества
Последняя проверка
Дополнительная информация
Термины, связанные с этим исследованием
Ключевые слова
Другие идентификационные номера исследования
- 20358
Планирование данных отдельных участников (IPD)
Планируете делиться данными об отдельных участниках (IPD)?
Описание плана IPD
Информация о лекарствах и устройствах, исследовательские документы
Изучает лекарственный продукт, регулируемый FDA США.
Изучает продукт устройства, регулируемый Управлением по санитарному надзору за качеством пищевых продуктов и медикаментов США.
Эта информация была получена непосредственно с веб-сайта clinicaltrials.gov без каких-либо изменений. Если у вас есть запросы на изменение, удаление или обновление сведений об исследовании, обращайтесь по адресу register@clinicaltrials.gov. Как только изменение будет реализовано на clinicaltrials.gov, оно будет автоматически обновлено и на нашем веб-сайте. .