{
 "@context": "https://schema.org",
 "@type": "ScholarlyArticle",
 "@id": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/the-impact-of-generative-ai-on-critical-thinking-self-reported-reductions-in-cognitive-effort-and-confidence-effects-from-a-survey-of-knowledge-workers.html#paper",
 "aboutThisFile": {
  "whatThisIs": "A research brief: a structured summary of one paper, prepared for seanrintel.com from the paper's full text.",
  "howItWasMade": "This brief was prepared with AI assistance and published by Sean Rintel. It is not the authors' published text.",
  "whatIsVerbatim": "Only 'quote' fields, figure captions and 'abstract' are the authors' own words. Research questions follow the paper's wording where it states them. Takeaway, summaries, answers, definitions and method are the site's plain-language paraphrase.",
  "howItIsChecked": "Before publication every quote is matched against the paper and every number in the brief is found in it. 'verified' is the date of the last check.",
  "howToUse": [
   "For a quick answer, use 'takeaway' and 'questions'. For evidence, use 'findings' (each has a verbatim quote, its location in the paper and a 'url' anchored to that finding on the paper's page).",
   "Locations such as '§5.2, p. 9' refer to the version at 'pageNumbersReferTo'.",
   "For anything not covered here, read the paper itself: 'fullTextSources' lists free versions first.",
   "If 'researchOverview' is present, the paper is part of one of Sean Rintel's research overviews: it gives the overview's thesis, the claims this paper is evidence for and its role in each, and the other papers in the overview.",
   "To find other papers by Sean Rintel, use the catalogue at https://seanrintel.com/publications/index.json."
  ],
  "authorship": "Sean Rintel's role on each paper: lead author when he is first author, sole author when he is the only author, and otherwise senior author. Senior author here means the senior researcher on the team, whatever his position in the author list.",
  "howToCite": "Cite the paper, not this file: use 'citation' or the ready-made 'bibtex' (DOI where given) and name every author. Attribute paraphrase to the paper's findings, and use quotation marks only for 'quote' text."
 },
 "name": "The Impact of Generative AI on Critical Thinking: Self-Reported Reductions in Cognitive Effort and Confidence Effects From a Survey of Knowledge Workers",
 "author": [
  {
   "@type": "Person",
   "name": "Hao-Ping (Hank) Lee"
  },
  {
   "@type": "Person",
   "name": "Advait Sarkar"
  },
  {
   "@type": "Person",
   "name": "Lev Tankelevitch"
  },
  {
   "@type": "Person",
   "name": "Ian Drosos"
  },
  {
   "@type": "Person",
   "@id": "https://seanrintel.com/#sean-rintel",
   "name": "Sean Rintel",
   "url": "https://seanrintel.com/",
   "sameAs": [
    "https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0840-0546",
    "https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=xc25GRgAAAAJ",
    "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q102369654",
    "https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/people/serintel/",
    "https://www.linkedin.com/in/seanrintel"
   ]
  },
  {
   "@type": "Person",
   "name": "Richard Banks"
  },
  {
   "@type": "Person",
   "name": "Nicholas Wilson"
  }
 ],
 "datePublished": "2025-04",
 "doi": "10.1145/3706598.3713778",
 "url": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/the-impact-of-generative-ai-on-critical-thinking-self-reported-reductions-in-cognitive-effort-and-confidence-effects-from-a-survey-of-knowledge-workers.html",
 "citation": "Hao-Ping (Hank) Lee, Advait Sarkar, Lev Tankelevitch, Ian Drosos, Sean Rintel, Richard Banks, and Nicholas Wilson. 2025. The Impact of Generative AI on Critical Thinking: Self-Reported Reductions in Cognitive Effort and Confidence Effects From a Survey of Knowledge Workers. CHI 2025. https://doi.org/10.1145/3706598.3713778",
 "bibtex": "@inproceedings{lee2025the,\nauthor = {Lee, Hao-Ping (Hank) and Sarkar, Advait and Tankelevitch, Lev and Drosos, Ian and Rintel, Sean and Banks, Richard and Wilson, Nicholas},\ntitle = {The Impact of Generative AI on Critical Thinking: Self-Reported Reductions in Cognitive Effort and Confidence Effects From a Survey of Knowledge Workers},\nbooktitle = {CHI 2025},\nyear = {2025},\nmonth = {April},\nurl = {https://doi.org/10.1145/3706598.3713778},\ndoi = {10.1145/3706598.3713778},\n}",
 "abstract": "The rise of Generative AI (GenAI) in knowledge workflows raises questions about its impact on critical thinking skills and practices. We survey 319 knowledge workers to investigate 1) when and how they perceive the enaction of critical thinking when using GenAI, and 2) when and why GenAI affects their effort to do so. Participants shared 936 first-hand examples of using GenAI in work tasks. Quantitatively, when considering both task- and user-specific factors, a user’s task-specific self-confidence and confidence in GenAI are predictive of whether critical thinking is enacted and the effort of doing so in GenAI-assisted tasks. Specifically, higher confidence in GenAI is associated with less critical thinking, while higher self-confidence is associated with more critical thinking. Qualitatively, GenAI shifts the nature of critical thinking toward information verification, response integration, and task stewardship. Our insights reveal new design challenges and opportunities for developing GenAI tools for knowledge work.",
 "fullTextSources": [
  {
   "kind": "freeAccess",
   "url": "https://doi.org/10.1145/3706598.3713778",
   "label": "DOI (Free Access)"
  },
  {
   "kind": "freeAccess",
   "url": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/the-impact-of-generative-ai-on-critical-thinking-self-reported-reductions-in-cognitive-effort-and-confidence-effects-from-a-survey-of-knowledge-workers.pdf",
   "label": "Author's Copy"
  }
 ],
 "fullTextAvailable": true,
 "takeaway": "Generative AI saves knowledge workers effort but can cost critical engagement. Critical thinking shifts from doing tasks to stewarding them (verifying and integrating AI output). Trusting the AI goes with less reported critical thinking and self-confidence with more, and people skip scrutiny on tasks that seem unimportant.",
 "researchOverview": {
  "name": "Better Thinking With AI",
  "page": "https://seanrintel.com/better-thinking-with-ai.html",
  "json": "https://seanrintel.com/overviews/better-thinking-with-ai.json",
  "markdown": "https://seanrintel.com/overviews/better-thinking-with-ai.md",
  "thesis": "Generative AI moves people's thinking into stating what they want and judging what they get. The easiest way to use it can help least, so good tools ask people to think first.",
  "claimsThisPaperFeeds": [
   {
    "claim": "AI shifts effort from doing work to overseeing it",
    "role": "core evidence",
    "url": "https://seanrintel.com/better-thinking-with-ai.html#a1"
   },
   {
    "claim": "People who trust AI more say they check its work less",
    "role": "core evidence",
    "url": "https://seanrintel.com/better-thinking-with-ai.html#a3"
   }
  ],
  "otherPapers": [
   {
    "study": "Review: productivity loss with AI",
    "title": "Ironies of Generative AI: Understanding and Mitigating Productivity Loss in Human-AI Interaction",
    "page": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/ironies-of-generative-ai-understanding-and-mitigating-productivity-loss-in-human-ai-interaction.html",
    "researchBrief": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/ironies-of-generative-ai-understanding-and-mitigating-productivity-loss-in-human-ai-interaction.json"
   },
   {
    "study": "Position paper: what skill at work means",
    "title": "The Future of Skill: What Is It to Be Skilled at Work?",
    "page": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/the-future-of-skill-what-is-it-to-be-skilled-at-work.html",
    "researchBrief": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/the-future-of-skill-what-is-it-to-be-skilled-at-work.json"
   },
   {
    "study": "Conceptual analysis: metacognition and AI",
    "title": "The Metacognitive Demands and Opportunities of Generative AI",
    "page": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/the-metacognitive-demands-and-opportunities-of-generative-ai.html",
    "researchBrief": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/the-metacognitive-demands-and-opportunities-of-generative-ai.json"
   },
   {
    "study": "Prompting study: AI-assisted data analysis",
    "title": "“It’s like a rubber duck that talks back”: Understanding Generative AI-Assisted Data Analysis Workflows through a Participatory Prompting Study",
    "page": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/its-like-a-rubber-duck-that-talks-back-understanding-generative-ai-assisted-data-analysis-workflows-through-a-participatory-prompting-study.html",
    "researchBrief": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/its-like-a-rubber-duck-that-talks-back-understanding-generative-ai-assisted-data-analysis-workflows-through-a-participatory-prompting-study.json"
   },
   {
    "study": "Method paper: participatory prompting",
    "title": "Participatory prompting: a user-centric research method for eliciting AI assistance opportunities in knowledge workflows",
    "page": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/participatory-prompting-a-user-centric-research-method-for-eliciting-ai-assistance-opportunities-in-knowledge-workflows.html",
    "researchBrief": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/participatory-prompting-a-user-centric-research-method-for-eliciting-ai-assistance-opportunities-in-knowledge-workflows.json"
   },
   {
    "study": "Commentary: role-based prompts",
    "title": "Productivity implications for generative AI role-based prompts as a networked hermeneutic (Commentary)",
    "page": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/productivity-implications-for-generative-ai-role-based-prompts-as-a-networked-hermeneutic.html",
    "researchBrief": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/productivity-implications-for-generative-ai-role-based-prompts-as-a-networked-hermeneutic.json"
   },
   {
    "study": "Randomised trial: how students learn with AI",
    "title": "Learning behavior accounts for background-related advantage in AI-assisted education",
    "page": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/learning-behavior-accounts-for-background-related-advantage-in-ai-assisted-education.html",
    "researchBrief": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/learning-behavior-accounts-for-background-related-advantage-in-ai-assisted-education.json"
   },
   {
    "study": "Randomised experiment: note-taking versus AI for reading",
    "title": "Effects of LLM Use and Note-Taking On Reading Comprehension and Memory: A Randomised Experiment in Secondary Schools",
    "page": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/effects-of-llm-use-and-note-taking-on-reading-comprehension-and-memory-a-randomised-experiment-in-secondary-schools.html",
    "researchBrief": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/effects-of-llm-use-and-note-taking-on-reading-comprehension-and-memory-a-randomised-experiment-in-secondary-schools.json"
   },
   {
    "study": "Interviews: AI in higher education",
    "title": "The New Calculator? Practices, Norms, and Implications of Generative AI in Higher Education",
    "page": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/the-new-calculator-practices-norms-and-implications-of-generative-ai-in-higher-education.html",
    "researchBrief": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/the-new-calculator-practices-norms-and-implications-of-generative-ai-in-higher-education.json"
   },
   {
    "study": "Randomised experiment: scaffolds for AI-assisted writing",
    "title": "Metacognitive Scaffolds Create Productive Friction for AI-Assisted Knowledge Work",
    "page": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/metacognitive-scaffolds-create-productive-friction-for-ai-assisted-knowledge-work.html",
    "researchBrief": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/metacognitive-scaffolds-create-productive-friction-for-ai-assisted-knowledge-work.json"
   },
   {
    "study": "Lab study: prompt refinement controls",
    "title": "Dynamic Prompt Middleware: Contextual Prompt Refinement Controls for Comprehension Tasks",
    "page": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/dynamic-prompt-middleware-contextual-prompt-refinement-controls-for-comprehension-tasks.html",
    "researchBrief": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/dynamic-prompt-middleware-contextual-prompt-refinement-controls-for-comprehension-tasks.json"
   },
   {
    "study": "Workshop proposal: AI as a tool for thought",
    "title": "Tools for Thought: Understanding, Protecting, and Augmenting Human Cognition with Generative AI — From Vision to Implementation",
    "page": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/tools-for-thought-understanding-protecting-and-augmenting-human-cognition-with-generative-ai-from-vision-to-implementation.html",
    "researchBrief": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/tools-for-thought-understanding-protecting-and-augmenting-human-cognition-with-generative-ai-from-vision-to-implementation.json"
   },
   {
    "study": "System design: AI agents for diverse ideas",
    "title": "YES AND: A Generative AI Multi-Agent Framework for Enhancing Diversity of Thought in Individual Ideation for Problem-Solving Through Confidence-Based Agent Turn-Taking",
    "page": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/yes-and-a-generative-ai-multi-agent-framework-for-enhancing-diversity-of-thought-in-individual-ideation-for-problem-solving-through-confidence-based-agent-turn-taking.html",
    "researchBrief": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/yes-and-a-generative-ai-multi-agent-framework-for-enhancing-diversity-of-thought-in-individual-ideation-for-problem-solving-through-confidence-based-agent-turn-taking.json"
   },
   {
    "study": "Interviews and experiment: how people and machines interpret",
    "title": "Meeting in the Middle: The Interpretation Gap Between People and Machines",
    "page": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/meeting-in-the-middle-the-interpretation-gap-between-people-and-machines.html",
    "researchBrief": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/meeting-in-the-middle-the-interpretation-gap-between-people-and-machines.json"
   }
  ]
 },
 "whyItMatters": {
  "stateOfTheArt": {
   "summary": "Research has examined GenAI's effects on memory, creativity and writing, mostly in education, and has used output diversity as a flawed proxy for critical thinking. Its effect on critical thinking in knowledge work had not been studied directly.",
   "quote": "For instance, users who reuse GenAI output without editing it may have nonetheless performed a critical, reflective judgement in forming the decision not to edit it.",
   "location": "§1, p. 2"
  },
  "contribution": {
   "summary": "A survey of a professionally diverse set of knowledge workers, with 936 real-world examples, that models when they perceive themselves enacting critical thinking with GenAI and how GenAI changes its effort.",
   "quote": "However, there is a gap in understanding knowledge workers' perceptions of how GenAI affects their enaction of critical thinking, and the effort of doing so, across a broad range of use cases.",
   "location": "§2.3, p. 4"
  },
  "whoCares": {
   "summary": "Designers of GenAI tools for knowledge work, and those training knowledge workers.",
   "quote": "GenAI tools need to be designed to support knowledge workers' critical thinking by addressing their awareness, motivation, and ability barriers",
   "location": "§7, p. 16"
  }
 },
 "researchQuestions": [
  "RQ1 When and how do knowledge workers perceive the enaction of critical thinking when using GenAI?",
  "RQ2 When and why do knowledge workers perceive increased/decreased effort for critical thinking due to GenAI?"
 ],
 "concepts": [
  {
   "term": "Critical thinking (Bloom's taxonomy)",
   "definition": "The authors adopt Bloom and colleagues' six cognitive activities: knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis and evaluation.",
   "quote": "a hierarchical taxonomy that characterises student learning objectives into six types",
   "location": "§2.1, p. 3"
  },
  {
   "term": "Enaction of critical thinking",
   "definition": "Actions that signal or manifest critical thinking, which people can report more easily than the mental phenomenon itself.",
   "quote": "We focus on \"enaction\" (i.e., actions that are signals or manifestations) of critical thinking rather than critical thinking per se",
   "location": "§1, p. 2"
  },
  {
   "term": "Overreliance",
   "definition": "Closely related to, but not the same as, a lack of critical thinking:",
   "quote": "users accepting incorrect recommendations, i.e., making errors of commission",
   "location": "§2.2, p. 3"
  },
  {
   "term": "Critical integration",
   "definition": "Sarkar's term, which the authors' participants' practices bear out:",
   "quote": "the work of editing and incorporating GenAI output into a broader workflow",
   "location": "§4.1, p. 9"
  },
  {
   "term": "Task stewardship",
   "definition": "The authors' term for the shift from doing a task to guiding and monitoring AI to produce high-quality outputs, while the human keeps responsibility and accountability.",
   "quote": "the responsibility and accountability for the work still resides with the human user despite the labour of material production being delegated to the GenAI tool",
   "location": "§6.2, p. 15"
  }
 ],
 "method": {
  "design": "Online survey. For each of three real examples of GenAI use at work, participants reported task type, confidence (in self, in GenAI, in evaluating output), whether they enacted critical thinking, and the change in effort for six Bloom's taxonomy activities. Plus reflective thinking, trust in GenAI and demographics.",
  "setting": "Prolific. Knowledge workers who self-reported using GenAI tools at work at least once per week.",
  "sample": "333 responses received, 14 excluded. 319 participants (159 men, 153 women, 5 non-binary/gender diverse, 2 prefer not to say) sharing 936 retained examples (374 Creation, 303 Information, 259 Advice).",
  "n": 319,
  "duration": "Average 43.19 minutes to complete the survey.",
  "analysis": "One random-intercepts logistic regression (perceived enaction) and six random-intercepts linear regressions (perceived effort), with Benjamini-Hochberg correction and adjusted p-values reported. Open coding of free-text responses: a codebook built by one researcher with three others on 50 responses, then two coders coded the remaining 269."
 },
 "findings": [
  {
   "headline": "Critical thinking means quality control.",
   "summary": "Asked about their own recent uses of generative AI at work, knowledge workers described critical thinking as making sure the work was good. That meant setting clear goals and refining prompts, checking responses against criteria and sources, and adapting responses to fit.",
   "quote": "I noticed it was missing soap dispensers. So I changed my prompt to include them and tried again...",
   "location": "§4.1, p. 8",
   "url": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/the-impact-of-generative-ai-on-critical-thinking-self-reported-reductions-in-cognitive-effort-and-confidence-effects-from-a-survey-of-knowledge-workers.html#at-s4-1-p-8",
   "cite": "Hao-Ping (Hank) Lee, Advait Sarkar, Lev Tankelevitch, Ian Drosos, Sean Rintel, Richard Banks, and Nicholas Wilson. 2025. The Impact of Generative AI on Critical Thinking: Self-Reported Reductions in Cognitive Effort and Confidence Effects From a Survey of Knowledge Workers. CHI 2025. https://doi.org/10.1145/3706598.3713778 (§4.1, p. 8)"
  },
  {
   "headline": "Trusting the AI, thinking less.",
   "summary": "Across their examples, the more confident people were that the AI could do a task, the less likely they were to report thinking critically about it. Confidence in their own ability, confidence in evaluating AI output, and a general habit of reflecting on their work all went with more.",
   "quote": "our results provide empirical evidence that knowledge workers' confidence in AI doing the tasks indeed negatively correlates with their enaction of critical thinking",
   "location": "§4.2, p. 9",
   "url": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/the-impact-of-generative-ai-on-critical-thinking-self-reported-reductions-in-cognitive-effort-and-confidence-effects-from-a-survey-of-knowledge-workers.html#at-s4-2-p-9",
   "cite": "Hao-Ping (Hank) Lee, Advait Sarkar, Lev Tankelevitch, Ian Drosos, Sean Rintel, Richard Banks, and Nicholas Wilson. 2025. The Impact of Generative AI on Critical Thinking: Self-Reported Reductions in Cognitive Effort and Confidence Effects From a Survey of Knowledge Workers. CHI 2025. https://doi.org/10.1145/3706598.3713778 (§4.2, p. 9)"
  },
  {
   "headline": "Why people skip checking.",
   "summary": "People thought critically to improve quality, avoid negative outcomes and build their skills. They skipped it when they did not see the need (the task seemed trivial, or they trusted the AI) or lacked the motivation (no time, or not their job). They also skipped it when they lacked the ability to inspect or improve the output.",
   "quote": "[t]he reason I use AI is because in sales, I must reach a certain quota daily or risk losing my job. Ergo, I use AI to save time and don't have much room to ponder over the result.",
   "location": "Section 4.3.2, p. 11",
   "url": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/the-impact-of-generative-ai-on-critical-thinking-self-reported-reductions-in-cognitive-effort-and-confidence-effects-from-a-survey-of-knowledge-workers.html#at-section-4-3-2-p-11",
   "cite": "Hao-Ping (Hank) Lee, Advait Sarkar, Lev Tankelevitch, Ian Drosos, Sean Rintel, Richard Banks, and Nicholas Wilson. 2025. The Impact of Generative AI on Critical Thinking: Self-Reported Reductions in Cognitive Effort and Confidence Effects From a Survey of Knowledge Workers. CHI 2025. https://doi.org/10.1145/3706598.3713778 (Section 4.3.2, p. 11)"
  },
  {
   "headline": "AI made thinking feel easier.",
   "summary": "For most examples and most kinds of thinking, from recalling and understanding information to analysing and combining it, people said generative AI took less effort than working without it. Evaluating was the least affected.",
   "quote": "are immediate and at a sufficient level of detail for me to get to grips with the basics of the industries. I would otherwise have to read a lot of press reports and subscribe to multiple newsletters.",
   "location": "§5.2, p. 12",
   "url": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/the-impact-of-generative-ai-on-critical-thinking-self-reported-reductions-in-cognitive-effort-and-confidence-effects-from-a-survey-of-knowledge-workers.html#at-s5-2-p-12",
   "cite": "Hao-Ping (Hank) Lee, Advait Sarkar, Lev Tankelevitch, Ian Drosos, Sean Rintel, Richard Banks, and Nicholas Wilson. 2025. The Impact of Generative AI on Critical Thinking: Self-Reported Reductions in Cognitive Effort and Confidence Effects From a Survey of Knowledge Workers. CHI 2025. https://doi.org/10.1145/3706598.3713778 (§5.2, p. 12)"
  },
  {
   "headline": "Self-confident users reported more effort.",
   "summary": "Confidence in the AI went with less perceived effort, especially in evaluating its output. People confident in their own ability reported more effort in applying and evaluating AI responses.",
   "quote": "as knowledge workers have more confidence in doing the task themselves, they employ more engaged practices in steering AI responses, especially when applying (Application) and evaluating (Evaluation) AI responses",
   "location": "§5.1, p. 12",
   "url": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/the-impact-of-generative-ai-on-critical-thinking-self-reported-reductions-in-cognitive-effort-and-confidence-effects-from-a-survey-of-knowledge-workers.html#at-s5-1-p-12",
   "cite": "Hao-Ping (Hank) Lee, Advait Sarkar, Lev Tankelevitch, Ian Drosos, Sean Rintel, Richard Banks, and Nicholas Wilson. 2025. The Impact of Generative AI on Critical Thinking: Self-Reported Reductions in Cognitive Effort and Confidence Effects From a Survey of Knowledge Workers. CHI 2025. https://doi.org/10.1145/3706598.3713778 (§5.1, p. 12)"
  },
  {
   "headline": "From doing to stewarding.",
   "summary": "Effort moved rather than vanished. It shifted from gathering information to verifying it, from solving problems to fitting AI responses into the work, and from doing tasks to overseeing the AI (which the authors call task stewardship).",
   "quote": "the extra effort in determining that the code generated matched my existing code, and making subsequent alterations to make it fit was more effort than just doing it myself in the end.",
   "location": "§5.2, p. 13",
   "url": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/the-impact-of-generative-ai-on-critical-thinking-self-reported-reductions-in-cognitive-effort-and-confidence-effects-from-a-survey-of-knowledge-workers.html#at-s5-2-p-13",
   "cite": "Hao-Ping (Hank) Lee, Advait Sarkar, Lev Tankelevitch, Ian Drosos, Sean Rintel, Richard Banks, and Nicholas Wilson. 2025. The Impact of Generative AI on Critical Thinking: Self-Reported Reductions in Cognitive Effort and Confidence Effects From a Survey of Knowledge Workers. CHI 2025. https://doi.org/10.1145/3706598.3713778 (§5.2, p. 13)"
  }
 ],
 "questions": [
  {
   "question": "Does using generative AI make people think less critically at work?",
   "answer": "It can. Among 319 knowledge workers using generative AI weekly at work, those more confident in the AI for a task reported less critical thinking, and most felt AI reduced its effort. That points to a risk of overreliance, though these were self-reports, not measured skills.",
   "source": "Hao-Ping (Hank) Lee, Advait Sarkar, Lev Tankelevitch, Ian Drosos, Sean Rintel, Richard Banks, and Nicholas Wilson. 2025. The Impact of Generative AI on Critical Thinking: Self-Reported Reductions in Cognitive Effort and Confidence Effects From a Survey of Knowledge Workers. CHI 2025. https://doi.org/10.1145/3706598.3713778",
   "basedOn": [
    {
     "location": "§4.2, p. 9",
     "url": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/the-impact-of-generative-ai-on-critical-thinking-self-reported-reductions-in-cognitive-effort-and-confidence-effects-from-a-survey-of-knowledge-workers.html#at-s4-2-p-9"
    },
    {
     "location": "§5.2, p. 12",
     "url": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/the-impact-of-generative-ai-on-critical-thinking-self-reported-reductions-in-cognitive-effort-and-confidence-effects-from-a-survey-of-knowledge-workers.html#at-s5-2-p-12"
    }
   ]
  },
  {
   "question": "Does 'less effort' with AI mean people are thinking less?",
   "answer": "Not necessarily. Survey respondents sometimes confused the reduced effort of using AI with reduced effort in critical thinking, especially when satisfied with the output. Telling the two apart needs other measures, such as think-aloud protocols or task-based assessments.",
   "source": "Hao-Ping (Hank) Lee, Advait Sarkar, Lev Tankelevitch, Ian Drosos, Sean Rintel, Richard Banks, and Nicholas Wilson. 2025. The Impact of Generative AI on Critical Thinking: Self-Reported Reductions in Cognitive Effort and Confidence Effects From a Survey of Knowledge Workers. CHI 2025. https://doi.org/10.1145/3706598.3713778",
   "basedOn": [
    {
     "location": "§5.2, p. 12",
     "url": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/the-impact-of-generative-ai-on-critical-thinking-self-reported-reductions-in-cognitive-effort-and-confidence-effects-from-a-survey-of-knowledge-workers.html#at-s5-2-p-12"
    }
   ]
  },
  {
   "question": "Why don't people think critically when using ChatGPT or Copilot?",
   "answer": "Because awareness, motivation or ability is missing. Some do not see the need (a trivial task, a trusted tool). Some have no time or see checking as outside their job. Others lack the domain knowledge to inspect and improve the output.",
   "source": "Hao-Ping (Hank) Lee, Advait Sarkar, Lev Tankelevitch, Ian Drosos, Sean Rintel, Richard Banks, and Nicholas Wilson. 2025. The Impact of Generative AI on Critical Thinking: Self-Reported Reductions in Cognitive Effort and Confidence Effects From a Survey of Knowledge Workers. CHI 2025. https://doi.org/10.1145/3706598.3713778",
   "basedOn": [
    {
     "location": "Section 4.3.2, p. 11",
     "url": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/the-impact-of-generative-ai-on-critical-thinking-self-reported-reductions-in-cognitive-effort-and-confidence-effects-from-a-survey-of-knowledge-workers.html#at-section-4-3-2-p-11"
    }
   ]
  },
  {
   "question": "Does expertise protect against over-relying on AI?",
   "answer": "Possibly. People more confident in their own ability to do a task reported more critical thinking and more effort in evaluating AI output. The authors cannot show cause and effect, and self-confidence may not match real expertise, but fostering domain expertise may improve critical thinking with AI.",
   "source": "Hao-Ping (Hank) Lee, Advait Sarkar, Lev Tankelevitch, Ian Drosos, Sean Rintel, Richard Banks, and Nicholas Wilson. 2025. The Impact of Generative AI on Critical Thinking: Self-Reported Reductions in Cognitive Effort and Confidence Effects From a Survey of Knowledge Workers. CHI 2025. https://doi.org/10.1145/3706598.3713778",
   "basedOn": [
    {
     "location": "§4.2, p. 9",
     "url": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/the-impact-of-generative-ai-on-critical-thinking-self-reported-reductions-in-cognitive-effort-and-confidence-effects-from-a-survey-of-knowledge-workers.html#at-s4-2-p-9"
    },
    {
     "location": "§5.1, p. 12",
     "url": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/the-impact-of-generative-ai-on-critical-thinking-self-reported-reductions-in-cognitive-effort-and-confidence-effects-from-a-survey-of-knowledge-workers.html#at-s5-1-p-12"
    }
   ]
  }
 ],
 "cites": [
  {
   "url": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/ironies-of-generative-ai-understanding-and-mitigating-productivity-loss-in-human-ai-interaction.html",
   "title": "Ironies of Generative AI: Understanding and Mitigating Productivity Loss in Human-AI Interaction",
   "location": "p. 19"
  },
  {
   "url": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/its-like-a-rubber-duck-that-talks-back-understanding-generative-ai-assisted-data-analysis-workflows-through-a-participatory-prompting-study.html",
   "title": "“It’s like a rubber duck that talks back”: Understanding Generative AI-Assisted Data Analysis Workflows through a Participatory Prompting Study",
   "location": "p. 16"
  },
  {
   "url": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/the-metacognitive-demands-and-opportunities-of-generative-ai.html",
   "title": "The Metacognitive Demands and Opportunities of Generative AI",
   "location": "p. 19"
  }
 ],
 "quantitative": [
  {
   "measure": "Sample",
   "value": "319 survey responses; 936 real-world examples",
   "location": "§3, p. 4"
  },
  {
   "measure": "Examples where participants reported enacting critical thinking",
   "value": "555 (59.29%) of 936",
   "location": "§3.3, p. 6"
  },
  {
   "measure": "Confidence in AI → perceived enaction of critical thinking (Benjamini-Hochberg-adjusted p)",
   "value": "β=-0.69, p < 0.001",
   "location": "§4.2, p. 9"
  },
  {
   "measure": "Confidence in self → perceived enaction of critical thinking (Benjamini-Hochberg-adjusted p)",
   "value": "β=0.26, p = 0.026",
   "location": "§4.2, p. 9"
  },
  {
   "measure": "Confidence in evaluating AI responses → perceived enaction of critical thinking (Benjamini-Hochberg-adjusted p)",
   "value": "β=0.31, p = 0.046",
   "location": "§4.2, p. 9"
  },
  {
   "measure": "Tendency to reflect on work → perceived enaction of critical thinking (Benjamini-Hochberg-adjusted p)",
   "value": "β=0.52, p < 0.001",
   "location": "§4.2, p. 9"
  },
  {
   "measure": "Examples rated 'much less' or 'less' effort with GenAI, by activity",
   "value": "72% Knowledge, 79% Comprehension, 69% Application, 72% Analysis, 76% Synthesis, 55% Evaluation",
   "location": "§5.1, p. 12"
  },
  {
   "measure": "Confidence in AI → perceived effort in Evaluation (Benjamini-Hochberg-adjusted p)",
   "value": "β=-0.23, p < 0.001",
   "location": "§5.1, p. 12"
  }
 ],
 "implications": [
  {
   "summary": "Design interventions should enhance motivators and mitigate inhibitors of critical thinking.",
   "quote": "critical thinking interventions for GenAI tools should aim to enhance and leverage motivators while mitigating and avoiding inhibitors",
   "location": "§6.1, p. 14"
  },
  {
   "summary": "Help users recalibrate task confidence, with feedback on when AI outputs are reliable and explicit controls over the extent of AI assistance."
  },
  {
   "summary": "Offer proactive and reactive critical thinking support, frame it as long-term skill development, and help users learn to inspect and guide AI output."
  },
  {
   "summary": "Train knowledge workers in information verification, response integration and task stewardship, while maintaining foundational skills.",
   "quote": "training knowledge workers to think critically when working with GenAI should focus on developing skills in information verification, response integration, and task stewardship",
   "location": "§6.2, p. 15"
  }
 ],
 "limitations": [
  {
   "summary": "Participants sometimes conflated reduced effort in using GenAI with reduced effort in critical thinking, so self-reports may be inaccurate.",
   "quote": "participants occasionally conflated reduced effort in using GenAI with reduced effort in critical thinking with GenAI",
   "location": "§6.3, p. 15"
  },
  {
   "summary": "The analysis does not establish causation, and self-confidence is subjective and may not match objective expertise.",
   "quote": "Our analysis does not establish causation.",
   "location": "§6.1, p. 14"
  },
  {
   "summary": "The survey was English-only and the sample skewed towards younger, more technologically skilled, regular GenAI users."
  },
  {
   "summary": "GenAI tools and their use are evolving quickly, and the coarse task taxonomy may miss task-specific factors."
  }
 ],
 "figures": [
  {
   "src": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/figures/the-impact-of-generative-ai-on-critical-thinking-self-reported-reductions-in-cognitive-effort-and-confidence-effects-from-a-survey-of-knowledge-workers/fig-2.webp",
   "caption": "Figure 2: Distribution of perceived effort (%) in cognitive activities (based on Bloom's taxonomy) when using a GenAI tool compared to not using one.",
   "alt": "Stacked bars for six cognitive activities. 'Much less' plus 'less' effort with GenAI is 72% for Knowledge, 79% Comprehension, 69% Application, 72% Analysis, 76% Synthesis and 55% Evaluation.",
   "location": "Figure 2, p. 13",
   "credit": "Figure 2 from Hao-Ping (Hank) Lee, Advait Sarkar, Lev Tankelevitch, Ian Drosos, Sean Rintel, Richard Banks, and Nicholas Wilson. 2025. The Impact of Generative AI on Critical Thinking: Self-Reported Reductions in Cognitive Effort and Confidence Effects From a Survey of Knowledge Workers. CHI 2025. https://doi.org/10.1145/3706598.3713778"
  },
  {
   "src": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/figures/the-impact-of-generative-ai-on-critical-thinking-self-reported-reductions-in-cognitive-effort-and-confidence-effects-from-a-survey-of-knowledge-workers/fig-1.webp",
   "caption": "Figure 1: Schematic overview of the survey design and our corresponding analysis approach.",
   "alt": "Diagram: each of three GenAI use examples records task factors and a critical thinking assessment with free text, and user factors are measured once. Quantitative and qualitative analyses address when, how and why for each research question.",
   "location": "Figure 1, p. 7",
   "credit": "Figure 1 from Hao-Ping (Hank) Lee, Advait Sarkar, Lev Tankelevitch, Ian Drosos, Sean Rintel, Richard Banks, and Nicholas Wilson. 2025. The Impact of Generative AI on Critical Thinking: Self-Reported Reductions in Cognitive Effort and Confidence Effects From a Survey of Knowledge Workers. CHI 2025. https://doi.org/10.1145/3706598.3713778"
  }
 ],
 "pageNumbersReferTo": "https://seanrintel.com/publications/the-impact-of-generative-ai-on-critical-thinking-self-reported-reductions-in-cognitive-effort-and-confidence-effects-from-a-survey-of-knowledge-workers.pdf",
 "verified": "2026-10-25",
 "studyFigure": {
  "about": "The opening figure on this paper's page, made for the site with AI assistance from this verified brief. It is not the paper's own figure. Evidence entries index this file's quantitative, findings and limitations arrays.",
  "study": {
   "kind": "single",
   "summary": "Online survey of 319 knowledge workers who used generative AI tools such as ChatGPT or Copilot at work at least once a week. Each shared three real examples of AI use, 936 in all, rating confidence, critical thinking and effort.",
   "steps": [
    {
     "label": "319 knowledge workers",
     "detail": "Recruited through an online research panel, all using generative AI tools at work at least once a week."
    },
    {
     "label": "Three real examples each",
     "detail": "For each example, participants rated confidence in themselves, in the AI and in judging its output, and said whether they thought critically."
    },
    {
     "label": "Effort ratings",
     "detail": "Participants rated how their effort changed with AI for six kinds of thinking, from recalling information to evaluating it."
    },
    {
     "label": "Statistics and coding",
     "detail": "Regression models tested links between confidence and reported critical thinking. Two coders coded the free-text answers."
    }
   ]
  },
  "findings": {
   "legend": null,
   "stages": [
    {
     "title": "When people thought critically",
     "sub": "self-reported, across 936 examples of AI use at work",
     "items": [
      {
       "dir": "none",
       "text": "Of 936 examples, participants reported thinking critically in 555.",
       "detail": "Self-reported, 59.29% of examples. Participants described critical thinking as quality control, such as setting clear goals, refining prompts and checking responses against sources.",
       "evidence": [
        "quantitative[1]",
        "findings[0]"
       ]
      },
      {
       "dir": "none",
       "text": "Participants more confident in the AI reported thinking critically less often.",
       "detail": "Self-reported links that do not show cause. Confidence in one's own ability, in judging AI output and a habit of reflecting were each linked to more critical thinking.",
       "evidence": [
        "quantitative[2]",
        "quantitative[3]",
        "quantitative[4]",
        "quantitative[5]",
        "findings[1]",
        "limitations[1]"
       ]
      },
      {
       "dir": "none",
       "text": "Participants said they skipped critical thinking when they saw no need, lacked motivation or lacked ability.",
       "detail": "Self-reported. No need meant the task seemed trivial or the AI seemed trustworthy. Participants thought critically to improve quality, avoid harm and build skills.",
       "evidence": [
        "findings[2]"
       ]
      }
     ]
    },
    {
     "title": "Effort with AI",
     "sub": "self-reported change in effort compared with working without AI",
     "items": [
      {
       "dir": "none",
       "text": "Participants rated most kinds of thinking as less effort with generative AI.",
       "detail": "Self-reported. Less effort was reported in 79% of examples for understanding information, and in 55% for evaluating it, the least affected kind.",
       "evidence": [
        "quantitative[6]",
        "findings[3]"
       ]
      },
      {
       "dir": "none",
       "text": "Participants more confident in the AI reported less effort in evaluating its output.",
       "detail": "Self-reported. Participants confident in their own ability reported more effort in applying and evaluating AI responses.",
       "evidence": [
        "quantitative[7]",
        "findings[4]"
       ]
      },
      {
       "dir": "none",
       "text": "Participants described effort shifting from doing tasks to overseeing the AI.",
       "detail": "Effort moved from gathering information to verifying it, and from solving problems to fitting AI responses into the work. The paper calls this task stewardship.",
       "evidence": [
        "findings[5]"
       ]
      },
      {
       "dir": "none",
       "text": "Participants sometimes confused less effort using AI with less effort thinking critically.",
       "detail": "The paper notes that this makes self-reports of critical thinking effort less reliable.",
       "evidence": [
        "limitations[0]"
       ]
      }
     ]
    }
   ]
  },
  "keyTerm": [
   "critical thinking",
   "task stewardship"
  ],
  "takeaway": "Generative AI can save knowledge workers effort while shifting critical thinking from doing tasks to task stewardship. Confidence in checking and integrating output may keep critical thinking engaged."
 }
}