Almighty ChatGPT?: Development of gifted secondary school students’ AI (mis)conceptions

Journal articleResearchPeer reviewed

Publication data


ByAnn-Kathrin Jaggy, Thorben Jansen, Tim Fütterer, Ulrich Trautwein
Original languageEnglish
Published inJournal of Educational Psychology
Pages17
Editor (Publisher)American Psychological Association
ISSN0022-0663, 1939-2176
DOI/Linkhttps://doi.org/10.1037/edu0001063 (Open Access)
Publication statusPublished advanced online – 07.2026
Keywords(mis)conceptions, secondary school, giftedness, AI development, generative AI

The current limitations of generative AI (genAI), such as , are well-documented. However, research indicates that young students may misconceive genAI as omniscient. How such a misconception develops remains unclear, particularly as the use of advanced AI grows and exposure to AI increases. Building on certain assumptions from the model, this study investigates the “omniscient-AI” misconception among gifted secondary school students during a year of rapid AI advancement (2023–2024) by examining its , , and its association with individual characteristics such as intelligence and personality. A multicohort design yielded cross-sectional data across 2 years (N = 870, Grades 6–8) and for a (n = 512). Results show that a notable minority (20% in 2023; 16% in 2024) of sixth to eighth graders hold the misconception that genAI is omniscient. Higher intelligence and a greater predicted a lower misconception prevalence. Trend analyses suggest a decrease in the prevalence from 2023 to 2024. However, analyses revealed no change in individual students, indicating this trend was driven by a rather than individual development, although individual varied statistically significant. Students with higher intelligence and a higher need for cognition were more likely to revise their conceptions about genAI. The results suggest an emerging , showing that students with a higher capacity and for effortful thinking are better equipped to critically evaluate genAI, potentially exacerbating educational inequalities as those with lower resources remain more susceptible to persistent misconceptions.