Large Language Models (LLMs) have rapidly become central components of cognitive computing systems and AI-assisted knowledge work. However, the effectiveness of LLM-generated outputs depends not only on the model’s capabilities but also on the structure of the prompts used to guide them. This study investigates how structured prompting techniques influence perceived output usefulness in business-oriented tasks. First, we conduct a systematic literature review following PRISMA guidelines to identify, classify, and synthesize existing prompt enhancement strategies. The review leads to the development of a taxonomy distinguishing task-alignment techniques (e.g., one-shot and few-shot prompting) from reasoning-transparency techniques (e.g., Chain-of-Thought prompting). Building on this taxonomy, we design a controlled experimental study in which knowledge workers evaluate LLM-generated outputs across analytical and summarization tasks. Using linear mixed-effects modeling, we assess the impact of prompting techniques and the moderating role of Generative AI usage frequency. Results indicate that structured prompting significantly increases perceived usefulness compared to baseline approaches, with the combination of example-based conditioning and explicit reasoning scaffolding yielding the highest evaluations. The moderating effect of usage frequency is not statistically significant, suggesting that the benefits of structured prompt design are robust across different experience levels. These findings position prompt structure as a practical cognitive interface mechanism and provide evidence-based guidelines for enhancing human–AI interaction in cognitive computing environments.
Cantini et al. (Mon,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: