Higher reliance on AI tools is correlated with lower critical-thinking performance, mediated by cognitive offloading¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 2 studies · 1 design r1, 1 theoretical r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · checked against its sources 2026-10-15 (automated, 2 of 2 entries) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? A user study across age and education levels found higher AI reliance correlated with lower HCTA critical-thinking performance, mediated by cognitive offloading. → Favero 2025

q2 i? Among 666 participants, AI tool use correlated negatively with critical thinking, with cognitive offloading as mediator and a stronger association in younger users. → Mahbub Ul Alam 2026

Evidence¶

Favero 2025¶

Favero, L., Pérez-Ortiz, J. A., Käser, T., & Oliver, N. (2025). Do AI tutors empower or enslave learners? Toward a critical use of AI in education. Applications of Generative AI to support teaching and learning in Higher Education, co-located with AIED 2025, Palermo, Italy. https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.06878 doi:10.48550/arxiv.2507.06878

q2 · i? · theoretical · r3

The paper reports, citing Gerlich, a user study across age and education levels in which "a higher reliance on AI was correlated with lower performance on the HCTA critical thinking assessment". The correlation is reported as mediated by cognitive offloading; no effect size is printed.

"A user study by Gerlich [9] across age and education levels found that a higher reliance on AI was correlated with lower performance on the HCTA critical thinking assessment by Halpern [18] mediated by cognitive offloading."

Mahbub Ul Alam 2026¶

Mahbub Ul Alam. (2026). PAUSE: A Privacy-Preserving Self-Reflection Tool for AI-Associated Cognitive Offloading. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.13155 doi:10.48550/arxiv.2609.13155

q2 · i? · design · r1

The review reports, citing Gerlich (2025a), a mixed-methods study of 666 participants finding a "significant negative correlation between AI tool use and critical thinking". No effect size is printed in the review.

"Gerlich (2025a), in a mixed-methods study of 666 participants, found a significant negative correlation between AI tool use and critical thinking, mediated by cognitive offloading and strongest in younger users."

Studies bearing on this claim¶

When learners lean heavily on AI tools, do their own critical thinking and learning suffer? This table gathers the studies behind this claim and the 8 narrower claims that bear on it: 10 distinct studies (5 associational, 2 theoretical, 2 qualitative, 1 design), q2–q3, 1 of 10 with an effect size coded. One row per study, codes as each entry records them; no effect is averaged and no verdict is drawn. Built by scripts/synthesize_claim.py from eval/synthesis/; a row that looks wrong is fixed on the claim it comes from.

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Meta-reviews reach contradictory conclusions on whether AI reliance harms or helps critical thinking, with substantial design limitations limiting generalizability — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it

• Cognitive offloading tendency is negatively associated with critical thinking, technical problem-solving, and metacognitive self-regulation — related

• Metacognitive self-regulation mediates the relationships between all three AI interaction mechanisms and both higher-order outcomes — related
• A moderate negative correlation exists between cognitive offloading tendency and critical thinking while the constructs remain empirically distinct — related
• Cognitive offloading to generative AI is associated with reduced learner engagement, lower critical thinking, and lower-quality reasoning — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
• High-achieving students less often endorse AI-supported autonomy, effective learning, and active engagement, and more often agree that reliance on AI hinders critical thinking and independent problem solving — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Polychronicity moderates the relationships between effective AI use, AI over-reliance, and learning outcomes — related
• GenAI's effects on higher-order thinking are mixed: support for reflection and idea expansion alongside cognitive offloading and no overall innovativeness gain — a broader claim this one bears on
• Need for cognition correlates positively with critical genAI use and negatively with perceived usefulness of genAI — related
• Among LLM users, Low-Reliance students (use in under half of submissions) consistently outperformed High-Reliance students by roughly 7-8% across all three midterms — related
• AI-based educational technology use is positively associated with critical thinking among undergraduate medical students — reports the opposite
• Positive LLM tutor perceptions do not necessarily translate to learning gains, creating an over-reliance risk — related
• 80% of IB student essays explicitly link reliance on AI to reduced thinking — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Digital literacy develops unevenly rather than robustly for many adolescents — related