跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2611.12019 · v1

Feeling Easier, Working Harder: Cognitive Load in AI-Assisted Code Comprehension

首次提交 2026-11-09 15:56
版本更新 2026-11-09 15:56
雷达观测 2026-11-10 13:18
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Software developers spend significant time reading and understanding code, increasingly supplemented by generative AI. While these tools aim to reduce the difficulty of reading code, interacting with them introduces a dual-task environment that may impose extraneous cognitive load that is challenging to capture. This study investigates how access to generative AI affects developers' real-time cognitive workload, code comprehension performance, and self-perceived code comprehension strategies. We conducted a 3x2 within-subjects study with 20 novice CS students reviewing Java code snippets of varying lengths with or without AI assistance, followed by an AI-unassisted comprehension quiz. Cognitive workload was continuously captured using a Detection-Response Task (tDRT) during both reading and quiz phases, and compared to post-quiz NASA-TLX and SEQ scores. AI assistance significantly increased objective cognitive workload, raising tDRT reaction times by 11.2%, yet participants' perceived workload remained unchanged. Code comprehension scores were high under both conditions, with no evidence that AI assistance improved comprehension at the difficulty levels evaluated; a ceiling effect limited power to detect benefits on harder tasks. Qualitatively, participants reported trusting the AI conditionally -verifying its output against their own reading for more complex snippets, but directly trusting it for simpler code- and, while many felt their reading process was unchanged, a notable subset shifted toward skimming or reading the AI's explanations in place of the code itself. These findings reveal that developers do not accurately perceive the cognitive resources they expend when managing AI tools. This study provides evidence of added cognitive effort associated with using generative AI, pointing towards a need to account for this dual-task penalty in software engineering tools and education.

作者备注:Accepted to ICSE 2027

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v1 · 2026-11-09 15:56 · 最新观测版本

Feeling Easier, Working Harder: Cognitive Load in AI-Assisted Code Comprehension

Software developers spend significant time reading and understanding code, increasingly supplemented by generative AI. While these tools aim to reduce the difficulty of reading code, interacting with them introduces a dual-task environment that may impose extraneous cognitive load that is challenging to capture. This study investigates how access to generative AI affects developers' real-time cognitive workload, code comprehension performance, and self-perceived code comprehension strategies. We conducted a 3x2 within-subjects study with 20 novice CS students reviewing Java code snippets of varying lengths with or without AI assistance, followed by an AI-unassisted comprehension quiz. Cognitive workload was continuously captured using a Detection-Response Task (tDRT) during both reading and quiz phases, and compared to post-quiz NASA-TLX and SEQ scores. AI assistance significantly increased objective cognitive workload, raising tDRT reaction times by 11.2%, yet participants' perceived workload remained unchanged. Code comprehension scores were high under both conditions, with no evidence that AI assistance improved comprehension at the difficulty levels evaluated; a ceiling effect limited power to detect benefits on harder tasks. Qualitatively, participants reported trusting the AI conditionally -verifying its output against their own reading for more complex snippets, but directly trusting it for simpler code- and, while many felt their reading process was unchanged, a notable subset shifted toward skimming or reading the AI's explanations in place of the code itself. These findings reveal that developers do not accurately perceive the cognitive resources they expend when managing AI tools. This study provides evidence of added cognitive effort associated with using generative AI, pointing towards a need to account for this dual-task penalty in software engineering tools and education.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗