The Creative Team Member: A Study of the Influence of AI Integration Timing on Brainstorming and Ideation

NCT07693803 | Not Yet Recruiting

• 1 other identifier: 20358
• Study Type: interventional
• Target: 16
• Locations: 1 country
• Sites: 1

Brief Summary

This study aims to examine how the timing of artificial intelligence (AI) integration during group brainstorming activities affects the creativity and ideation of participants. Undergraduate student participants will be randomly allocated into teams of four to complete a structured 12-minute brainstorming task. The study utilizes a three-group experimental design to compare three conditions: no AI access, AI access from the outset of the session, and AI access introduced halfway through the session. The standardized generative AI tool used is ChatGPT Pro. The creative output produced by each group will be evaluated by a panel of independent expert judges using the Consensual Assessment Technique (CAT).

Conditions

Creativity

Keywords

Artificial Intelligence; Generative AI; ChatGPT; Human-AI Collaboration; Problem Solving; Teamwork; Undergraduate Students; Ideation; Brainstorming; Creativity

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

• Creativity Score of the Selected Best Idea

  The primary outcome is the mean expert creativity rating assigned to each team's top idea, across each of the 9 sessions, as assessed by independent judges using the Consensual Assessment Technique (CAT). Higher average scores denote a more creative output, while lower scores denote a less creative output.

  Evaluated cross-sectionally upon the conclusion of each 12-minute session, across the 9 study sessions.

Secondary Outcomes (3)

• Overall Creativity Score of Full Idea List

  Evaluated cross-sectionally upon the conclusion of each 12-minute session, across the 9 study sessions.

• Number of Ideas Generated During the 12-Minute Session

  Evaluated cross-sectionally upon the conclusion of each 12-minute session, across the 9 study sessions.

• Qualitative Resemblance of the Team's Output to Typical AI-Generated Responses

  Evaluated cross-sectionally upon the conclusion of each 12-minute session, across the 9 study sessions.

Study Arms (3)

No Artificial Intelligence Tools (Control)

NO INTERVENTION

Across nine separate sessions, teams of four participants will complete all nine distinct student-struggle scenarios (one scenario per 12-minute session). In each session, participants engage in a structured collaborative brainstorming task entirely without access to artificial intelligence tools for the full 12 minutes. At the conclusion of each session, the team must evaluate their generated list and select their single best idea to solve that specific scenario.

Artificial Intelligence First (Early Integration)

EXPERIMENTAL

Across nine separate sessions, teams of four participants will complete all nine distinct student-struggle scenarios (one scenario per 12-minute session). In each session, at minute 0, participants input the scenario prompt into ChatGPT Pro (GPT-4o architecture). The team receives a single initial output of ideas and does not engage in further back-and-forth dialogue with the tool. Participants use this initial artificial intelligence response as a baseline to continue human brainstorming and ideation for the remainder of the 12 minutes, ultimately selecting and submitting their single best idea for that specific scenario.

Behavioral: Artificial Intelligence First (Early Integration)

Artificial Intelligence Last (Late Integration)

EXPERIMENTAL

Across nine separate sessions, teams of four participants will complete all nine distinct student-struggle scenarios (one scenario per 12-minute session). In each session, participants brainstorm independently without technology for the first 6 minutes. At minute 6, the team inputs the scenario prompt along with their already-generated human ideas into ChatGPT Pro (GPT-4o architecture). Receiving a single output with no further back-and-forth dialogue, the team uses the artificial intelligence response to continue ideating for the final 6 minutes, ultimately selecting and submitting their single best idea for that specific scenario.

Behavioral: Artificial Intelligence Last (Late Integration)

Interventions

Artificial Intelligence First (Early Integration) BEHAVIORAL

The introduction of ChatGPT Pro (GPT-4o architecture) at the beginning (minute 0) of a 12-minute group brainstorming session. A single prompt containing the scenario is submitted to generate an initial set of ideas, with no further back-and-forth dialogue permitted. This single artificial intelligence output serves as the baseline for the team's subsequent human ideation.

Artificial Intelligence First (Early Integration)

Artificial Intelligence Last (Late Integration) BEHAVIORAL

The introduction of ChatGPT Pro (GPT-4o architecture) at the midpoint (minute 6) of a 12-minute group brainstorming session. A single prompt containing both the scenario and the team's already-generated human ideas is submitted, with no further back-and-forth dialogue permitted. This single artificial intelligence output is used to guide the team's human ideation for the remaining 6 minutes.

Artificial Intelligence Last (Late Integration)

Eligibility Criteria

• Sex: all
• Healthy Volunteers: Yes
• Age Groups: Child (0-17), Adult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

• Enrolled as a student in the designated summer research program
• Able to provide voluntary informed consent
• Proficient in reading and communicating in English (required to engage with the scenarios and the artificial intelligence tool)

You may not qualify if:

• Not enrolled as an undergraduate student

Sponsors & Collaborators

• McMaster University: lead

Study Sites (1)

McMaster University

Hamilton, Ontario, L8S 4L8, Canada

Location

Related Publications (6)

• Çelik, T. İ., & Akay, C. (2025). The Impact of Brainstorming Technique on Academic Achievement and Creative Thinking: A Meta-Analysis Study. Sage Open, 15(3). 62

  BACKGROUND

• Muller, M., Houde, S., Gonzalez, G., Brimijoin, K., Ross, S. I., Silva Moran, D. A., & Weisz, J. D. (2024). Group brainstorming with an AI agent: Creating and selecting ideas. Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Computational Creativity (ICCC 2024). https://computationalcreativity.net/iccc24/papers/ICCC24_paper_18.pdf

  BACKGROUND

• Amabile, Teresa. (1982). Social psychology of creativity: A consensual assessment technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 43. 997-1013. 10.1037/0022-3514.43.5.997

  BACKGROUND

• Koo TK, Li MY. A Guideline of Selecting and Reporting Intraclass Correlation Coefficients for Reliability Research. J Chiropr Med. 2016 Jun;15(2):155-63. doi: 10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012. Epub 2016 Mar 31.

  PMID: 27330520 BACKGROUND

• Zhang C, Shao Y, Yuan Y, Shen W. Artificial Intelligence Reshapes Creativity: A Multidimensional Evaluation. Psych J. 2025 Dec;14(6):831-840. doi: 10.1002/pchj.70042. Epub 2025 Aug 5.

  PMID: 40764253 BACKGROUND

• Lee BC, Chung JJ. An empirical investigation of the impact of ChatGPT on creativity. Nat Hum Behav. 2024 Oct;8(10):1906-1914. doi: 10.1038/s41562-024-01953-1. Epub 2024 Aug 12.

  PMID: 39134737 BACKGROUND

Study Officials

• Mohit Bhandari, MD, PhD, FRCSC

  McMaster University

  PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Central Study Contacts

Alexandra Leone, BSc

CONTACT

905-527-4322; leonea5@mcmaster.ca

Kaya Bhandari

CONTACT

bhandk5@mcmaster.ca

Study Design

• Study Type: interventional
• Phase: not applicable
• Allocation: RANDOMIZED
• Masking: SINGLE
• Who Masked: OUTCOMES ASSESSOR
• Purpose: OTHER
• Intervention Model: PARALLEL
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
• PI Title: Professor and Chair, Department of Surgery

Model Details: The study uses a three-group experimental design where participants are allocated into teams of four and randomly assigned to one of three parallel experimental conditions: No AI, AI First, and AI Last. This design allows for the direct comparison of how the timing and availability of artificial intelligence access shapes creative output during a structured brainstorming task under otherwise identical conditions.

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: July 5, 2026
• First Posted: July 9, 2026
• Study Start: July 20, 2026
• Primary Completion (Estimated): August 15, 2026
• Study Completion (Estimated): September 15, 2026
• Last Updated: July 14, 2026

Record last verified: 2026-07

Data Sharing

• IPD Sharing: Will not share

Locations

CA (1)