That’s the question a recent survey conducted by Microsoft Research and Carnegie Mellon University tried to answer, and it doesn’t look good for the humans (at least not in ways we are accustomed to defining it). In The Impact of Generative AI on Critical Thinking: Self-Reported Reductions in Cognitive Effort and Confidence Effects From a Survey of Knowledge Workers, researchers tried to understand how workers who use generative AI tools in their workflows perceived their own confidence in their critical thinking skills was affected by the technology. They generally found higher confidence in GenAI is associated with less critical thinking.
The survey polled 319 knowledge workers about the perception of their critical thinking when using GenAI, and when and why GenAI affects their effort to do so.
“Used improperly, technologies can and do result in the deterioration of cognitive faculties that ought to be preserved,” the report’s authors wrote. “GenAI tools appear to reduce the perceived effort required for critical thinking tasks among knowledge workers, especially when they have higher confidence in AI capabilities.”
While the cognitive tasks workers are used to doing have shifted due to GenAI tools, however, the evolving tasks still require cognitive abilities. Information verification, for example (cross-referencing AI-generated outputs with external sources and their own expertise to ensure accuracy and reliability) has become more important. Also, knowledge workers are shifting from task execution to oversight, requiring them to guide and monitor AI to produce high-quality outputs—a less familiar role researchers describe as “stewardship.”
