Peer Learning Through stace-Taking: How Students Engage with AI-Generated Images in Intercultural Virtual Exchanges
Roč.31,č.3(2026)
Peer Learning in Higher Education: Redefining Peers, Expanding Opportunities, and Mapping the Limits
The increasing use of artificial intelligence (AI) raises questions about how future professionals engage with AI-generated content, which may reproduce stereotypes and cultural biases. This study examines how university students in virtual exchanges engage with AI-generated images, offering an interactional perspective on peer learning, which is achieved by deploying practices through which students negotiate interpretations and take stances as part of intercultural competence. Drawing on video-recorded interactions from six student groups participating in two international virtual exchanges involving universities in Austria, Czechia, and Finland, the study analyzes how students collaboratively produce assessments, epistemic accounts, and (dis)align with their peers, taking stances toward AI-generated visual content depicting everyday situations in their university cities. The analysis demonstrates how students reject or problematize AI-generated representations by treating them as laughable and ridiculing them, or by producing downgraded assessments and detailed epistemic accounts. The detailed description of these interactional practices contributes to the emerging body of research that calls for critical engagement with AI-generated content and highlights how peer learning in the area of intercultural competence unfolds through stance-taking in virtual exchanges.
intercultural competence; stance-taking; video-mediated interaction; multimodal conversation analysis
AlDahoul, N., Rahwan, T., & Zaki, Y. (2025). AI-generated faces influence gender stereotypes and racial homogenization. Scientific Reports, 15(1), 14449. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-99623-3
Barmeyer, C. I., Bausch, M., & Mayrhofer, U. (2021). Constructive intercultural management: Integrating cultural differences successfully. Edward Elgar.
Bianchi, F., Kalluri, P., Durmus, E., Ladhak, F., Cheng, M., Nozza, D., Hashimoto, T., Jurafsky, D., Zou, J., & Caliskan, A. (2023). Easily accessible text-to-image generation amplifies demographic stereotypes at large scale. In Proceedings of 2023 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (pp. 1493–1504). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3593013.3594095
Bird, A., Oddou, G., & Bond, M. H. (2020). Developing intercultural competency: With a focus on higher education. In B. Szkudlarek, L. Romani, D. Caprar, & J. Osland (Eds.), The Sage handbook of contemporary cross-cultural management (pp. 498–518). Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781529714340
Bolten, J. (2020). Rethinking intercultural competence. In G. Rings & S. Rasinger (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of intercultural communication (pp. 56–67). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108555067.005
Byram, M. (1997). Teaching and assessing intercultural communicative competence. Multilingual Matters.
Clayman, S. E. (2024). Working with collections in conversation analysis. In J. D. Robinson, R. Clift, K. H. Kendrick, & C. W. Raymond (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of methods in conversation analysis (pp. 191–216). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108936583.008
Clayman, S. E., & Reisner, A. (1998). Gatekeeping in action: Editorial conferences and assessments of newsworthiness. American Sociological Review, 63(2), 178–199. https://doi.org/10.2307/2657322
Digital Education Council. (2024). Digital Education Council Global AI Student Survey 2024: AI or not AI: What students want. https://www.digitaleducationcouncil.com/post/digital-education-council-global-ai-studentsurvey-2024
Du Bois, J. W. (2007). The stance triangle. In R. Englebretson (Ed.), Stancetaking in discourse: Subjectivity, evaluation, interaction (pp. 139–182). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.164.07du
Eurostat. (2025). Use of artificial intelligence in enterprises.
Fasulo, A., & Monzoni, C. (2009). Assessing mutable objects: A multimodal analysis. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 42(4), 362–376. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351810903296481
Fleisig, E., Smith, G., Bossi, M., Rustagi, I., Yin, X., & Klein, D. (2024). Linguistic bias in ChatGPT: Language models reinforce dialect discrimination. In Proceedings of the 2024 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (pp. 13541–13564). Association for Computational Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2024.emnlp-main.750
Ford, C., & Fox, B. (2010). Multiple practices for constructing laughables. In D. Barth-Weingarten, E. Reber, & M. Selting (Eds.), Prosody in interaction (pp. 339–368). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/sidag.23.27for
Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. Prentice Hall.
Glenn, P., & Holt, E. (2017). Conversation analysis of humor. In S. Attardo (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of language and humor (pp. 295–308). Routledge.
Goodwin, C. (2018). Co-operative action. Cambridge University Press.
Goodwin, C., & Goodwin, M. H. (1987). Concurrent operations on talk: Notes on the interactive organization of assessments. IPrA Papers in Pragmatics, 1(1), 1–54. https://doi.org/10.1075/iprapip.1.1.01goo
Heritage, J. (1984). A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement. In M. J. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 299–345). Cambridge University Press.
Heritage, J., & Raymond, G. (2005). The terms of agreement: Indexing epistemic authority and subordination in talk-in-interaction. Social Psychology Quarterly, 68(1), 15–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/019027250506800103
Jefferson, G. (2004). Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. In G. H. Lerner (Ed.), Conversation analysis: Studies from the first generation (pp. 13–31). John Benjamins.
Johnson, J. P., Lenartowicz, T., & Apud, S. (2006). Cross-cultural competence in international business: Toward a definition and a model. Journal of International Business Studies, 37(4), 525–543. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400205
Kendon, A. (2004). Gesture: Visible action as utterance. Cambridge University Press.
Li, C., Cui, H., & Hagedorn, L. S. (2026). The cognitive impact of ChatGPT in higher education: A systematic review of critical and creative thinking outcomes. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 10, 100571. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2026.100571
Majlesi, A. R. (2021). The intersubjective objectivity of learnables. In S. Kunitz, N. Markee, & O. Sert (Eds.), Classroom-based conversation analytic research (Vol. 46, pp. 41–69). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-52193-6_4
Markee, N. (Ed.). (2015). The handbook of classroom discourse and interaction. John Wiley & Sons.
Maslej, N., Fattorini, L., Perrault, R., Gil, Y., Parli, V., Kariuki, N., Capstick, E., Reuel, A., Brynjolfsson, E., Etchemendy, J., Ligett, K., Lyons, T., Manyika, J., Niebles, J. C., Shoham, Y., Wald, R., Walsh, T., Hamrah, A., Santarlasci, L., … Oak, S. (2025). Artificial intelligence index report 2025 (Version 3). Institute for Human-Centered AI, Stanford University. https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2504.07139
Moerman, M., & Sacks, H. (1988). On “understanding” in the analysis of natural conversation. In M. Moerman (Ed.), Talking culture: Ethnography and conversation analysis (pp. 180–186). University of Pennsylvania Press.
Mondada, L. (2009). The embodied and negotiated production of assessments in instructed actions. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 42(4), 329–361. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351810903296473
Mondada, L. (2019). Contemporary issues in conversation analysis: Embodiment and materiality, multimodality and multisensoriality in social interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 145, 47–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2019.01.016
Önder, Z., & Balaman, U. (2025). Situated orientations to interculturality in video-mediated virtual exchange interactions. In H. R’boul (Ed.), Teaching and researching interculturality in the Middle East and North Africa (pp. 203–221). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003595793-15
Park, I., & Kline, J. (2020). Incomplete utterances as critical assessments. Discourse Studies, 22(4), 441–459. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445620914669
Pekarek Doehler, S. (2019). On the nature and the development of L2 interactional competence: State of the art and implications for praxis. In M. R. Salaberry & S. Kunitz (Eds.), Teaching and testing L2 interactional competence (pp. 25–59). Routledge.
Pillet-Shore, D. (2016). Criticizing another’s child: How teachers evaluate students during parent-teacher conferences. Language in Society, 45(1), 33–58. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404515000809
Pomerantz, A. (1984). Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In M. J. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 57–101). Cambridge University Press.
Pulles, M., Berenst, J., De Glopper, K., & Koole, T. (2022). Children’s discussions about texts: Integrating and evaluating practices. Linguistics and Education, 69, 101051. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2022.101051
Schneider, B., & Oliveira, M. (2025). Developing critical AI language literacy: Prompting experiments on raciolinguistic bias to understand large language models as cultural artefacts. AI & Society, 41, 3015–3026. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-025-02727-7
Sherman, T., & Tůma, F. (2023). Claiming insufficient knowledge in pairwork and groupwork classroom activities. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 43, 100758. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2023.100758
Sidnell, J. (2013). Basic conversation analytic methods. In J. Sidnell & T. Stivers (Eds.), The handbook of conversation analysis (pp. 77–99). Wiley-Blackwell.
Soulé, M. V., Parmaxi, A., & Nicolaou, A. (2024). Internationalization at home in higher education: A systematic review of teaching and learning practices. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 17(7), 29–60. https://doi.org/10.1108/JARHE-10-2023-0484
Stivers, T., Mondada, L., & Steensig, J. (2011). Knowledge, morality and affiliation in social interaction. In T. Stivers, L. Mondada, & J. Steensig (Eds.), The morality of knowledge in conversation (Vol. 2011, pp. 3–24). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511921674.002
Takanashi, H. (2018). Stance. In J.-O. Östman & J. Verschueren (Eds.), Handbook of pragmatics: 21st annual installment (pp. 173–199). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/hop.21.sta2
Wei Dai, D., Zhu, H., & Chen, G. (2025). How does interaction with LLM powered chatbots shape human understanding of culture? The need for Critical Interactional Competence (CritIC). Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 45, 28–49. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190525000054
Zirar, A. (2023). Exploring the impact of language models, such as ChatGPT, on student learning and assessment. Review of Education, 11(3), e3433. https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3433
Copyright © 2026 Studia paedagogica