Table 5.

Summary of qualitative themes and illustrative evidence

Research questionThemeDescriptionIllustrative quoteInterpretation
RQ3Task importance shaped checkingParticipants checked less in low-stakes tasks such as brainstorming or drafting“If it’s just an early draft or ideas, I don’t feel the need to check everything.” (S3)Verification was often delayed rather than ignored
RQ3Confidence supported delayed checkingHigh AI literacy increased confidence in noticing errors later“I trust it enough to move fast, but I also trust myself to catch mistakes if they show up.” (S6)Literacy supported confidence, but not always immediate scrutiny
RQ3Effort–time trade-offParticipants weighed the value of checking against the effort required“Checking everything defeats the purpose.” (S8)Verification was shaped by efficiency considerations
RQ4Topic familiarity triggered doubtDomain knowledge helped participants detect problems quickly“When it touched something, I really know well, I stopped trusting it straight away.” (S9)Background knowledge supported critical evaluation
RQ4Overconfident fluency triggered cautionVery polished answers to complex issues raised suspicion“If it gives a very clean answer to a messy problem, that’s when alarms go off.” (S12)Fluency sometimes prompted scrutiny rather than trust
RQ4Accountability triggered verificationHigh-stakes tasks increased checking behaviour“If my name is on it, I check everything.” (S1)Personal responsibility influenced active verification
Source(s): Authors’ own work

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal