Meta-analysis compares AI-generated and human feedback effectiveness in learners, suggesting a hybrid approach.
This exploratory meta-analysis synthesises current research on the effectiveness of Artificial Intelligence (AI)-generated feedback compared to traditional human-provided feedback. Drawing on 41 studies involving a total of 4813 students, the findings reveal no statistically significant differences in learning performance between students who received AI-generated feedback and those who received human-provided feedback. The pooled effect size was small and statistically insignificant (Hedge’s g = 0.25, CI [−0.11; 0.60]), indicating that AI feedback is potentially as effective as human feedback. A separate meta-analysis focusing exclusively on studies in the domain of language and writing confirmed similar findings, with high heterogeneity persisting (I2 = 95%). The study further explored differences in feedback perception and found a small, negative, and statistically insignificant effect size (Hedge’s g = −0.20, CI [−0.67; 0.27]). The study advocates for a hybrid approach, leveraging the scalability of AI while retaining the deep, empathetic, and contextual features of human feedback.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kaliisa et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: