Stuck in a Spiral": Shame and Guilt as Social Regulators of AI Use in Computing Education

An interview study with 19 computing students through a functionalist perspective of shame and guilt. Findings show these emotions regulate when and how students make their AI use visible, engaging in hiding behaviors and selective disclosure. Students described shaming themselves, peers, and faculty for using AI. Shame and guilt coexist with continued AI use, creating cycles of reduced agency and moral tension rather than promoting behavior change. Students used language and metaphors of addiction. Highlights need to consider socio-emotional aspects of AI use in policy and classroom practice.

Key Findings

Shame and guilt regulate when and how students make their AI use visible, producing hiding behaviors and selective disclosure.

Students described shaming themselves, peers, and faculty for using AI, indicating that these emotions circulate socially rather than only privately.

Shame and guilt coexist with continued AI use, creating cycles of reduced agency and moral tension rather than promoting behavior change.

Students used language and metaphors of addiction to describe their relationships with AI use.

These experiences emerged alongside broader feelings of nihilism and pessimism about their academic futures.

Study Design & Method

The study interviewed 19 computing students and analyzed their relationships with AI use through a functionalist lens of shame and guilt — that is, asking what social work these emotions do in regulating behavior. The analysis examined how students' emotional experiences relate to academic identity, confidence, and self-perception, and how those experiences intersect with institutional responses such as surveillance and detection.

Implications for Policy and Classroom Practice

The findings suggest that prevailing responses to AI use — particularly those emphasizing surveillance and detection — risk overlooking or exacerbating the socio-emotional costs of AI use. When shame drives students to hide their AI use rather than change it, detection-focused policy can deepen the spiral: reduced agency, moral tension, and addiction-like language describe a dynamic in which students continue using AI but cannot openly negotiate how to do so well. Left unaddressed, these dynamics may undermine students' learning, identities, and long-term engagement in computing fields. For instructors and institutions, the study highlights the need to consider the socio-emotional aspects of AI use alongside Academic Integrity enforcement — creating classroom conditions in which AI use can be discussed candidly, so that policy addresses behavior rather than driving it underground. The work also connects to Over Reliance and Student Experience research by showing that the emotional valence of AI use is itself consequential for learning and persistence in CS Education.

Connected Concepts

Connected Articles

AI Availability Student Motivation — Why Put in This Much Effort?": How AI Availability Shapes Students' Motivation in Introductory Programming

AI Partner Science Epistemic Vigilance — AI as a Partner in Learning about, Doing, and Engaging with Science: Vigilance as the Key to Productive Augmentation

Student Rationalization AI Writing — It''s OK Because...": The Wild West of Student Rationalization of AI Use in Academic Writing

AI Learning Assistants Higher Ed Large Scale — Using AI-based Learning Assistants in Higher Education: A Large-Scale Descriptive Analysis

Youtube Frames Chatgpt Education — How YouTube Frames ChatGPT Use in Education: An Epistemic Network Analysis with Supporting Multimodal Metadata

GenAI Reliance Types Scale — Measuring How Students Rely on Generative AI in Academic Writing: Development and Multi-Source Validation of the Generative AI Reliance Types Scale (GenAI-RTS)

Citation

Hamilton, K., Hou, I., Patel, D., Nnam, S., Patel, H., & MacNeil, S. (2026). "Stuck in a Spiral": Shame and Guilt as Social Regulators of AI Use in Computing Education. arXiv:2606.14920.