Verification-Conditioned Use: A Qualitative Study on How Generative AI Reshapes Learning, Autonomy, and Market Entry for Junior Software Developers

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.24606v1
• Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2026 16:07:21 GMT
• Title: Verification-Conditioned Use: A Qualitative Study on How Generative AI Reshapes Learning, Autonomy, and Market Entry for Junior Software Developers
• Abstract summary: This study investigates how the use of generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools affects the early stages of a career in software development.<n> sixteen themes emerged, organized around a central concept: verification-conditioned use.<n>Two themes expose tensions in newcomers' self-perception: the autonomy paradox and the first-person denial of dependence.
• Score: 0.3342165620612816
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Objective: to investigate how the use of generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools affects the early stages of a career in software development, from the perspective of the newcomers themselves. Method: thirteen interns and junior developers were interviewed individually, by videoconference. Interviews were analyzed using the six phases of Braun and Clarke's thematic analysis, with inductive coding and a semantic approach. Results: sixteen themes emerged, organized around a central concept: verification-conditioned use. Across the study's four research questions (usage patterns, learning, autonomy, and market entry), the criterion that most often decides between AI and manual work is not deadline or task complexity, but the ability to check the result. Two themes expose tensions in newcomers' self-perception: the autonomy paradox (feeling more capable yet less in ownership of the result) and the first-person denial of dependence. Together, these findings point to a theoretical contribution, the formative paradox: the shallow learning that AI induces makes it harder to build the very critical-judgment competence that, according to participants, the market has begun to demand. Conclusion: what makes AI use sustainable, from participants' own point of view, is not the tool itself but the individual practice of reviewing before accepting, refusing to use AI without understanding it, asking the tool for explanations, and keeping deliberate practice outside of AI-assisted work.

Related papers

• AI literacy over tool design: a mixed-methods study of scaffolded versus unrestricted generative AI in programming education [0.0]
  This paper reports a seven-week mixed-methods pilot study in a master's-level data analytics course.<n>33 students were randomly assigned either to a scaffolded AI Study Coach embedded in the notebook-based laboratory sessions or to unrestricted use of AI tools of their own choosing.<n>The design of the tool mattered less than the students' capacity to govern their own use of it, a capacity that is at present acquired by chance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-15T07:53:58Z)
• You Shall Not Pass! Where and Why Developers Draw The Line on AI Autonomy [7.477031451733673]
  Most developers accepted AI producing work under their oversight, although accepted autonomy varied substantively across tasks and individuals.<n> Acceptance was lowest for identity-defining, human-facing, and design-oriented work, and higher among developers with more AI experience and risk tolerance.<n>Our findings suggest that preferences for AI autonomy reflect how developers cognitively experience their work.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-01T07:24:14Z)
• Framing, Judging, Steering: An Assessable Competency Model for Teach-ing Students to Reason With Generative AI [47.027290803102666]
  We propose CoRe-3 (Co-Reasoning), a competency model factoring productive AI use into three assessable skills.<n>We ground the skills in theory, state five testable propositions, and instantiate them in CoReasoningLab.<n>Human-rater agreement and outcomes are next; we release the instrument, data, and protocol.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-04T10:25:31Z)
• Characterizing initial human-AI proof formalization workflows [66.06866890889131]
  Advances in AI systems' ability to generate code and engage in increasingly high-level mathematical reasoning promise to transform people's ability to formalize and thereby verify proofs.<n>We conduct a mixed-methods analysis into the initial impact of AI on people's formalization.<n>A qualitative survey shows that people's preferences are diverse, but with a general desire for AI assistance in formalization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-02T22:58:19Z)
• AI Phenomenology for Understanding Human-AI Experiences Across Eras [8.54750896635797]
  We argue for AI phenomenology: a research stance that asks "How did it feel?" when interacting with AI systems.<n>We motivate AI phenomenology as a framework that captures how alignment is experienced, negotiated, and updated between users and AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-09T23:26:46Z)
• Understanding Critical Thinking in Generative Artificial Intelligence Use: Development, Validation, and Correlates of the Critical Thinking in AI Use Scale [1.0946458347622612]
  This research conceptualises critical thinking in AI use as a dispositional tendency to verify the source and content of AI-generated information.<n>We developed and validated the 13-item critical thinking in AI use scale and mapped its nomological network.<n>Studies 3 and 4 revealed that critical thinking in AI use was positively associated with openness, extraversion, positive trait affect, and frequency of AI use.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-13T17:56:12Z)
• The next question after Turing's question: Introducing the Grow-AI test [51.56484100374058]
  This study aims to extend the framework for assessing artificial intelligence, called GROW-AI.<n>GROW-AI is designed to answer the question "Can machines grow up?" -- a natural successor to the Turing Test.<n>The originality of the work lies in the conceptual transposition of the process of "growing" from the human world to that of artificial intelligence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-22T10:19:42Z)
• Mapping Students' AI Literacy Framing and Learning through Reflective Journals [0.13154296174423616]
  This research paper presents a study of undergraduate technology students' self-reflective learning about artificial intelligence (AI)<n>It is important to understand what, how, and why students learn about AI so formal instruction can better support their learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-20T23:01:51Z)
• Training Towards Critical Use: Learning to Situate AI Predictions Relative to Human Knowledge [22.21959942886099]
  We introduce a process-oriented notion of appropriate reliance called critical use that centers the human's ability to situate AI predictions against knowledge that is uniquely available to them but unavailable to the AI model. We conduct a randomized online experiment in a complex social decision-making setting: child maltreatment screening. We find that, by providing participants with accelerated, low-stakes opportunities to practice AI-assisted decision-making, novices came to exhibit patterns of disagreement with AI that resemble those of experienced workers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-30T01:54:31Z)
• Cybertrust: From Explainable to Actionable and Interpretable AI (AI2) [58.981120701284816]
  Actionable and Interpretable AI (AI2) will incorporate explicit quantifications and visualizations of user confidence in AI recommendations. It will allow examining and testing of AI system predictions to establish a basis for trust in the systems' decision making.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-26T18:53:09Z)
• A User-Centred Framework for Explainable Artificial Intelligence in Human-Robot Interaction [70.11080854486953]
  We propose a user-centred framework for XAI that focuses on its social-interactive aspect. The framework aims to provide a structure for interactive XAI solutions thought for non-expert users.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-27T09:56:23Z)
• Building Bridges: Generative Artworks to Explore AI Ethics [56.058588908294446]
  In recent years, there has been an increased emphasis on understanding and mitigating adverse impacts of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies on society. A significant challenge in the design of ethical AI systems is that there are multiple stakeholders in the AI pipeline, each with their own set of constraints and interests. This position paper outlines some potential ways in which generative artworks can play this role by serving as accessible and powerful educational tools.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-25T22:31:55Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.