In certain instances, we may earn revenue when a reader makes a purchase or completes a form through our pages or on a partner’s website. We adhere to a strict 
There is no denying the growing reliance on ChatGPT and other AI assistants for even the commonest of tasks. It has become so commonplace that students now brazenly show the world how ChatGPT helped them complete their final projects, even at graduation ceremonies.
While this trend might seem like a clever use of technology, a new study by a group of MIT researchers has found that prolonged reliance on AI tools can have serious consequences for our cognitive abilities.
Are we witnessing genuine cognitive decline or simply observing normal adaptation to transformative technology?
Key Takeaways
- MIT research shows heavy AI use can lower brain activity and memory recall.
- This cognitive offloading may dull creativity and critical thinking over time.
- The effect, called “cognitive debt,” reflects long-term costs of mental shortcutting.
- Experts recommend slowing AI down or adding friction to prompt reflection.
- Educators stress a human-first workflow: think first, then use AI.
When AI Assistance Becomes a Cognitive Crutch
New findings from MIT are raising questions about how AI is changing the way we use our cognitive functions.
In an experiment, researchers observed 54 students as they wrote essays using either ChatGPT, Google, or just their own memory and reasoning.
This raises broader questions about the relationship between AI and critical thinking, especially in learning environments.
The MIT team calls this pattern “cognitive debt” – a long-term cost of cognitive offloading using AI, where we repeatedly shift thinking to external systems like LLMs instead of engaging in those cognitive processes ourselves.
“Cognitive debt defers mental effort in the short term but results in long-term costs, such as diminished critical inquiry, increased vulnerability to manipulation, decreased creativity,” the researchers wrote.
According to the study, over four months, students who consistently used ChatGPT underperformed across neural, linguistic, and behavioral levels. When asked to write without assistance, their performance remained flat, suggesting a residual effect from earlier reliance.
Fundamental Rewiring or Temporary Adaptation?
Perhaps, the biggest question here is whether these changes are permanent. Are we witnessing a fundamental rewiring of the brain, or is this just another case of temporary adaptation as we learn to work with new tools?
Although the findings are troubling and hard to ignore, the MIT researchers caution against jumping to conclusions due to the small sample size and limited set of tasks.
Commenting on the MIT research, Chief Strategy Officer at Neurologyca, Marc Fernandez, told Techopedia that the changes in mental capacities may not reflect a natural decline or just cognitive offloading, but rather flaws in how AI systems are designed.
Explaining this, he said:
“The danger isn’t AI making us less capable; it’s that many systems are designed in ways that disengage us from the thinking process. When AI provides quick answers, users may bypass the mental effort crucial for problem-solving and reflection.”
It’s worth noting that the concept of cognitive offloading is not unique to AI. Remember when calculators first appeared in classrooms, many people were worried that students would lose basic math skills. Even when GPS became ubiquitous, some fretted over our declining sense of direction.
However, in each case, we adapted, and the tools eventually raised the bar for what people could achieve.
The only difference is that AI brings a new level of automation and abstraction.
Tej Kalianda, Design Lead at Google, told Techopedia that this level of automation, by extension, ends up making us lose our unique perspectives. In her words:
“As we keep handing things over to AI, we see less and less of our own unique points of view. The less we tap into our own unique thoughts and perspectives, the more we just blend into the larger collective.”
Despite the perceived dangers, Jethro Jones, CEO of Transformative Principal, posed a different take when he spoke with Techopedia. He argues that some students know what they want to say but struggle with structuring their thoughts into clear sentences, which limits their ability to express themselves fully.
Jones observed:
“Many students struggle with the cognitive load that writing requires, and being able to offload that cognitive load to the AI makes it possible for them to express their ideas, but not let sentence structure and grammar prevent them from sharing their ideas.”
Addressing Over-Reliance on AI
There’s no putting the AI genie back in the bottle. But researchers and educators say there’s still time to shape how we use it.
First, not all cognitive offloading is bad. According to the MIT study, using AI for simple or repetitive tasks can free up mental space for deeper thinking.
The danger is when we start using it for complex reasoning or ethical decision-making, areas where nuance and experience matter most.
One way to cut down over-reliance on AI systems, according to Google’s Kalianda, is to slow down its response time. She said:
“First off, slow it down. I love that feature in Gemini or ChatGPT for ‘deep research,’ where it takes a long time to give you an answer. During that time, I’m intentionally slowing down, and I’m thinking.”
She also suggests that making a slower AI version the default could be a major design shift to prevent overuse.
Another option, Kalianda said, is to add friction to the user experience:
“If we had to pay per question, we’d use it less. We would only go to AI for the really critical tasks. Making it super convenient is part of the problem. We have to learn to prioritize when we use it.”
Another way is using AI selectively and with intention. For example, rather than let ChatGPT write a full essay, students can use it to brainstorm themes or outline key points.
Sabrina Habib, MFA, PhD, Associate Professor and College AI Coordinator at the University of South Carolina, echoes that sentiment. In her view, the key is making AI part of a back-and-forth process, rather than a starting point.
She told Techopedia:
“Start with human thought, then introduce AI, alternating between AI and human input as the work progresses.”
In educational settings, that could mean brainstorming or drafting first, then editing with AI. In professional use, it might mean sketching out solutions or framing the problem before bringing in automation.
“When we preserve the human-first phase,” Habib said, “AI becomes a true collaborator, not a crutch.”
The Bottom Line
AI is not inherently dangerous, but how we use it matters. The MIT study shows that overreliance can quietly reshape how we think, making mental shortcuts feel normal.
Yet history reminds us that change often brings trade-offs. Engineers once gave up drawing circuits by hand and gained tools that sparked massive growth.
We will lose some cognitive habits, but we can also gain new ones, that is, if we stay intentional. The future of AI will not be defined by the technology alone, but by the habits we build around it.
