In an era of smart assistants and navigation apps, are we outsourcing so much thinking that our own cognitive skills are dwindling?

Artificial intelligence has quickly woven itself into everyday life – from mapping our routes to completing our sentences. It promises to lighten our mental load by handling tasks that once demanded effort and attention. But as we eagerly delegate more thinking to machines, a critical question arises: Is AI actually making us less intelligent? In this exploration, we examine the science and real-world evidence behind cognitive offloading – the habit of outsourcing mental work to external tools – and what it means for our brains in the age of automation. The answer is nuanced: AI isn’t inherently turning humans into mindless drones, but our uncritical overreliance on it just might be.

The Lure of Letting Machines Think for Us

Humans have always offloaded cognitive work to tools – from pen and paper for remembering information to calculators for crunching numbers. This “cognitive offloading” is not new. It’s the reason we no longer have to memorize dozens of phone numbers or do long division by hand. In many ways, it’s a feature of our intelligence: offloading routine tasks frees up our brains for more complex, creative endeavors. Navigation offers a perfect example. Why struggle to fold a paper map or memorize directions when GPS apps can get you there with turn-by-turn prompts?

However, what’s new in the AI era is the scale and breadth of what we can offload. Advanced AI systems and large language models (think ChatGPT and its kin) can generate essays, answer complex questions, and even make decisions. With a simple prompt, a machine can now produce code, academic-style research, or a business strategy. The temptation to hand over ever more of our mental heavy lifting is strong. Why not let the AI take care of it? After all, these tools are often faster, sometimes more accurate, and definitely tireless. The lure is especially strong when AI appears to perform as well as or better than human experts. AI pioneer Dr. Geoffrey Hinton – often dubbed the “Godfather of AI” – notes that modern AI systems can absorb knowledge extremely efficiently. A leading chatbot might have a trillion internal connections versus the human brain’s 100 trillion, yet it “knows far more than you do,” Hinton points out, suggesting it has “a much better way of getting knowledge” into those connections. In other words, these systems are really good at what they do, which makes it easy to trust them with our thinking.

This offloading isn’t inherently bad. When we use Google Maps instead of mentally calculating a route, we’re leveraging technology to save time. When a writer uses an AI assistant to generate ideas, it’s a collaboration between human and machine that can enhance creativity. The danger lies not in using AI, but in overusing it without awareness of what we’re trading away. As one observer quipped, “It is very challenging not to offload your critical thinking to these machines”. We need to understand what habitual offloading does to our own cognitive muscles.

Use It or Lose It: How Offloading Impacts Our Brains

Modern neuroscience and psychology suggest that our mental skills are a “use it or lose it” asset. Just as muscles atrophy from disuse, cognitive abilities can weaken if we don’t exercise them. So, what happens when AI becomes a constant intellectual crutch?

Research is painting a cautious picture. A 2024 study published in Computers in Human Behavior found that college students who used ChatGPT to help write an essay produced work that was less thorough and reasoned than students who did their research via a traditional web search. The ChatGPT-assisted students reported the task felt easier – their cognitive load was lower – but this convenience came at a cost: they tended to accept the AI’s summaries without digging deeper into the topic. In contrast, students who had to scour the web and evaluate diverse sources developed more detailed arguments, reflecting the extra mental effort they invested. In short, relying on the AI made the students think less, even if it made the work faster. The researchers concluded that while AI can streamline our thought processes, it may also short-circuit the kind of critical analysis that leads to real understanding.

Other experts have voiced similar concerns. Cognitive offloading to AI tools could lead to a gradual atrophy of memory and analytical skills, as suggested by a report in Frontiers in Psychology. If an app always remembers things for you, you may slowly lose the habit of memorization. If an AI always tells you the answer, you might stop questioning and verifying information. Michael Gerlich, a researcher who has studied AI’s effect on critical thinking, coined the phrase “cognitive costs of AI tool reliance” to describe this phenomenon. For example, he describes a scenario in healthcare: a hospital that automates diagnostic analysis with AI might become more efficient, but its human doctors could lose practice in independent critical analysis, meaning their decision-making skills might dull over time. This isn’t science fiction; it’s an observable trade-off.

Even basic tasks like navigation have come under scrutiny. We’ve all heard anecdotes of drivers following GPS instructions into absurd situations – like onto closed roads or even into lakes – because they trusted the device over their own eyes. Those stories underscore what researchers call automation bias or algorithmic complacency: the tendency to trust a computer’s recommendation too readily. Beyond anecdotes, studies indicate there’s a real effect on our internal navigation sense. Neuroscientists at University College London found that when people use turn-by-turn GPS guidance, parts of the brain’s spatial memory system essentially shut down – they don’t engage as they would during free navigation. One long-term study published in Scientific Reports showed that people with a history of heavy GPS use performed worse on navigating tasks from memory, and over years, they experienced a steeper decline in hippocampus-dependent spatial memory – the very brain area critical for navigation. In other words, if you never flex your internal map-reading skills, you risk losing them. (Interestingly, not all research agrees; another study in 2024 didn’t find a clear difference in navigation ability between frequent GPS users and non-users, suggesting the relationship isn’t so straightforward. Still, the overall consensus is that constant reliance on automation can diminish our natural abilities.)

The Google Effect – a term coined after a 2011 study – is another example of digital offloading. It found that people are less likely to remember information if they know it’s easily searchable online; instead, they remember how to find it. Our brains, adaptive as ever, decide there’s no point storing facts that are one quick query away. The risk with AI tools is a magnified version of the Google Effect: why learn or reason through a problem when an AI can spit out an answer in seconds? The long-term danger is a kind of learned helplessness, where we reflexively turn to AI for every question and lose confidence in our own intellect.

Algorithmic Complacency: Trusting the “Magic Box”

One of the subtle ways AI might be making us “dumber” is by fostering algorithmic complacency – a passive acceptance of whatever output or recommendation an algorithm gives us. As AI systems become more complex, their workings turn into opaque “magic boxes.” We ask a question or input data and get an answer, often without any transparency into how the AI arrived at that result. Yet because the answers sound confident – even authoritative – we tend to assume they’re correct.

This complacency isn’t just hypothetical. In the social media and information space, many people now consume news and content curated entirely by algorithms. Over time, this can narrow one’s perspective (the so-called filter bubble effect) and also reduce the habit of actively seeking information. Alec Watson, a media researcher, describes “succumbing to algorithmic complacency” as “surrendering your own agency in ways you may not realize.” In other words, if you let the TikTok or YouTube algorithm decide everything you watch, you’ve essentially outsourced your choices and curiosity to a piece of code.

Consider how autocomplete and recommendation algorithms influence our daily behavior. Something as simple as Google’s autocomplete might finish our questions for us – subtly steering our thinking. Facebook’s feed algorithm chooses which posts you see, potentially shaping your mood and opinions without you noticing. On streaming platforms, auto-play next suggestions can lead you down a viewing path you didn’t choose, but to which you passively acquiesce. Bit by bit, constantly trusting these automated suggestions can make us less inclined to question them. We get used to a world where the answers are pre-selected and pre-digested.

In professional settings, automation bias can have serious repercussions. For instance, pilots are trained to monitor autopilot systems and maintain flying skills, yet incidents have occurred when overreliance on autopilot led to delayed reactions in emergencies. In medicine, there have been cases where AI decision-support systems recommended a certain diagnosis or treatment and clinicians, trusting the AI, did not double-check patient data – sometimes resulting in errors. The common factor is humans assuming the computer is always right. It’s easy to see how this develops: if the AI gets it right 99 times, on the 100th time we may follow it blindly even when it’s wrong. Confidence in AI breeds complacency, and complacency dulls our vigilance.

Perhaps the most jarring examples of algorithmic complacency come from the criminal justice arena. Police departments have increasingly used AI-driven tools like facial recognition to identify suspects. But these systems are far from perfect – especially in identifying people of color – and blind faith in them can be dangerous. In the U.S., at least eight people have been wrongfully arrested due to faulty facial recognition matches. One early case in 2020 involved Robert Williams, a Black man in Detroit who was arrested for a robbery he didn’t commit because an algorithm matched a grainy surveillance photo to his driver’s license picture. Williams later testified, “Detroit police were supposed to treat face recognition matches as an investigative lead, not as the only proof... They had none of [the corroborating evidence] – just an out-of-focus image… that a faulty algorithm had determined was me.” His chilling statement underscores how human judgment can be completely sidelined when an AI output is taken at face value. In these instances, the officers involved weren’t being malicious; they were, arguably, victims of automation bias – treating the AI’s word as truth and failing to apply the healthy skepticism and investigation that would normally be standard. The result was an innocent man jailed for something a machine said he did. Such real-world consequences hammer home the point: surrendering our thinking too completely to algorithms can erode not only individual skills but fundamental principles like due diligence and critical inquiry.

When AI Feeds on Itself: The Risk of Model Collapse

It’s somewhat ironic, but as we lean on AI for more answers, the AI systems themselves could start getting “dumber” in a feedback loop – a phenomenon researchers are calling model collapse. This doesn’t refer to a single model suddenly failing, but a gradual decline in quality across generations of AI models, caused by AI essentially learning from its own flawed outputs. Here’s how it works: today’s AI language and image models are trained mostly on human-generated data (texts, photos, artwork created by people). But with the explosion of AI-generated content online – from chatbot-written articles to AI-created images – there’s a growing chance that tomorrow’s models will train on those AI-produced materials. When AI trains on AI data, errors and quirks in the machine-made content get baked into the next generation. Over time, as this cycle repeats, the AI can drift further from reality. They start to “mis-perceive reality” because they’re no longer learning from the true source (human world data) but a distorted version of it.

Imagine a copy of a copy of a copy – eventually the text becomes fuzzy. In AI terms, researchers Ilia Shumailov and colleagues found that models trained on the synthetic data of other models see a loss of information, especially in the tails of distributions – meaning they lose understanding of uncommon, yet important cases (early signs of model collapse). With more generations, the AI’s output distribution can converge to a narrow, bland norm that barely resembles the richness of the original human data. The AI might become very confident but very wrong outside of generic situations. Crucially, this process is irreversible if unchecked – once those errors compound, you can’t easily teach the AI what it never saw. IBM researchers described this outcome starkly: models “beset by ‘irreversible defects’ eventually become useless” if they ingest too much AI-generated junk.

Why is model collapse relevant to whether AI makes humans dumber? Because it shows how overreliance on AI can poison the well for knowledge itself. If we flood the internet with AI-written text and AI-forged images – and simultaneously stop producing as much original human content – we risk creating a future where both humans and machines are learning from secondhand, degraded information. Our own critical thinking could suffer in such a milieu, as genuinely factual or creative material becomes harder to distinguish from auto-generated mediocrity. It’s a reminder that human wisdom and oversight are needed to keep our tools (and ourselves) sharp. Geoffrey Hinton has warned in broader terms that as AI systems continue to rapidly improve, we must be careful that we don’t lose control or understanding of them. Part of that understanding is knowing what data they learn from. We’ll need strategies to ensure AI models keep learning from reality – which includes the best of human outputs – rather than regurgitating and amplifying their own mistakes. In a sense, avoiding model collapse is like avoiding cognitive offloading on a civilization scale: it means not letting our future AI tutors be trained on yesterday’s AI cheat-sheets.

How to Stay Smart When Everything’s Smart: Avoiding Overreliance

The genie is out of the bottle – AI is here to stay, and it will only become more embedded in our work and lives. Completely shunning these tools isn’t realistic, nor is it desirable; the productivity and convenience gains are very real. The challenge, then, is learning to use AI thoughtfully without letting our own minds atrophy. Experts across disciplines suggest a variety of strategies to achieve this balance:

Practice Mindful Offloading: It’s fine to use AI or GPS or Google – just do it deliberately. If you use an AI writing assistant to draft an email, for example, read it critically before hitting send. Ask yourself if the tone and reasoning truly reflect what you want to convey. By actively reviewing and editing, you re-engage your brain and avoid being a passive passenger. Similarly, if you navigate with GPS, you might occasionally challenge yourself to go device-free on a familiar route, or at least cross-check that the route makes sense. Small exercises in self-reliance can keep your neurons in shape.
Stay Curious and Double-Check: One way to beat algorithmic complacency is to adopt a habit of “searching one more source.” Even if an AI gives you a quick answer, do a little legwork to verify it. For instance, if ChatGPT summarizes a news story for you, consider clicking through to the actual article or a different news outlet. This extra step not only guards against AI errors, but it keeps your critical research skills honed. Remember that AI can sound confident and still be wrong (the notorious AI “hallucinations”), so never let polished prose or a neat answer stop you from asking, “Is that really true?”
Limit the Autopilot Moments: In an age of endless autoplay and algorithmic feeds, take back some control. Curate your own media diet at least part of the time – choose a book, a long-form article, or a playlist you made yourself, rather than letting the next YouTube video or Spotify recommendation roll. By intentionally steering your consumption, you resist the drift into full complacency. It can be as simple as pausing the endless scroll to ask why a particular piece of content was recommended to you, which re-engages your analytical mind about the process. Retain your agency; don’t hand it all to the algorithm.
Keep Learning New Skills (the Old-Fashioned Way): One of the best safeguards against mental deskilling is to keep challenging yourself with new, effortful learning experiences. That could be learning a language (without solely relying on translation apps), taking up an instrument, or doing brain teasers and puzzles. These activities force you to struggle and grow, strengthening neural connections. It’s like cross-training for the brain. When you maintain the habit of learning and problem-solving, you’re less likely to become overdependent on AI for every answer.
Use AI as a Partner, Not a Oracle: The mindset matters. If you treat AI as an all-knowing oracle, you’ll tend to accept its outputs uncritically. Instead, treat it as a junior partner or a tool. In a sense, argue with it: ask follow-up questions, feed it additional info, and see if it revises answers. By maintaining an active role, you ensure you are the one steering the thought process. For example, a software engineer might use an AI to generate code suggestions, but then test and debug them vigorously rather than assuming they’re plug-and-play. A student might get an AI’s explanation of a concept, but then rephrase that explanation in their own words to confirm they truly understand.
Educators and Experts: Emphasize Fundamentals: If you’re in a teaching role (including parenting), place some focus on building foundational skills without always leaning on AI. Mental math, handwriting, map-reading – these may sound antiquated, but they build cognitive pathways that support more advanced thinking. Some schools are already adjusting by integrating AI literacy – teaching students how to use tools like ChatGPT and how to spot when the tools are wrong. The lesson is that AI can assist learning, but it can’t replace the need to grasp concepts. As one Harvard educator put it, “When we regularly offload certain tasks, our related skills and mental faculties can atrophy”, so the goal is to consciously decide which tasks to offload and which to keep practicing.

A Critical but Hopeful Outlook

The fear that technology might be making us stupid is not new – every innovation from the written word to smartphones has faced similar scrutiny. (Socrates famously worried that writing would weaken our memories.) Artificial Intelligence is simply the latest and most powerful tool to provoke these anxieties. Yes, if we misuse it, overuse it, or use it carelessly, AI can undoubtedly contribute to intellectual stagnation. It can sap our attention, narrow our skills, and lull us into mental laziness. The evidence, from lab studies to real-world mishaps, makes that clear. But the flip side is also true: when harnessed wisely, AI can augment human intelligence rather than replace it.

Ultimately, asking “Is AI making us dumber?” leads to a more empowering question: What can we do to stay smart? The responsibility lies with us. We can choose to be passive consumers of AI outputs – or active users who engage and question. We can let our mental muscles atrophy – or keep them in shape through deliberate effort. The presence of a calculator doesn’t stop a truly curious person from working through a math problem for understanding’s sake. Similarly, the presence of ChatGPT need not stop us from brainstorming ideas or writing first drafts ourselves. It comes down to intentional use.

Society is still in the early days of navigating this AI-laden landscape. Tech luminaries like Geoffrey Hinton urge that we approach AI’s proliferation with caution and humility, acknowledging how fallible both AI and humans can be. “It’s not clear to me that we can solve this problem,” Hinton said regarding controlling superintelligent AI, emphasizing the need for intense thinking about solutions. His warning can apply on the individual level too: we each need to think hard about how we let AI into our lives. The good news is that our brains are remarkably adaptable. With the right habits and awareness, we can enjoy the fruits of AI – the efficiency, the creativity, the insights – without surrendering our intellect or autonomy.

In the end, AI can make us far more capable — or it can make us complacent. The critical difference is in how we balance the cognitive equation. Rather than AI making us dumber, the real risk is us allowing it to. By staying curious, vigilant, and engaged, we ensure that even in the age of smart machines, human intelligence remains very much alive and kicking.

AI Ethics

Is AI Making Us Dumber? A Critical Look at Cognitive Offloading in the Age of Automation