NCT Number: NCT07693803
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).
Trial opening soon.
Get NotifiedAll sexes
Interventional
Not applicable
Hamilton, Ontario, L8S 4L8, Canada
Alexandra Leone, BSc
SUB_INVESTIGATOR
Alexandra Leone, BSc.
CONTACT
905-527-4322 ext. 44490
Kaya Bhandari
CONTACT
Kaya Bhandari
SUB_INVESTIGATOR
Mohit Bhandari, MD, PhD, FRCSC
PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
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.
Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
-Not enrolled as an undergraduate student
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.
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.
Time frame: 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.
Time frame: 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).
Time frame: 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.
Time frame: 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.
Contact information is provided by the study sponsor or research team.
McMaster University
Other
The Effect of Artificial Intelligence Integration Timing on Group Brainstorming and Ideation in Undergraduate Students: A Randomized Controlled Trial
OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.
View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.
Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.
NCT07538453
Behavior, Creativity
Castellon, Castellón, Spain
View Trial DetailsNCT04137913
Cognition Disorders, Cognitive Dysfunction
Houston, Texas, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT06542003
Arts syndrome, Behavior
Singapore
View Trial DetailsNCT05775978
Anxiety, Anxiety Disorders
Granada, Spain
View Trial Details