TFOW: Research Says Reliance on AI Tools Has Cognitive Costs For Humans
The weekly newsletter of curated content from Peak Performer that explores the evolving landscape of work, leadership, and technology.
Welcome to The Future of Work, the weekly newsletter of curated content from Peak Performer that explores the evolving landscape of work, leadership, and technology. Each week, I'll bring you perspectives from industry, research and popular media that dive into the critical topics shaping how we live and work in an era of rapid technological change. Whether you’re a manager striving to inspire your team, an industry leader navigating disruption, a graduate entering the workforce, or a worker adapting to new challenges, this newsletter is your go-to resource for news and insights to thrive in the future of work.
The future of work isn’t a distant concept—it’s unfolding now. From cultural shifts to cutting-edge technologies and the evolving nature of leadership, the goal of this weekly publication is to keep you informed and empowered to navigate these changes confidently.
After an extended Christmas break, I’m returning with interesting research to highlight. Rather than offer several sources this week in The Future of Work article, I’m zeroing in on an article from Dr Michael Gerlich, Head of the Center for Strategic Corporate Foresight and Sustainability at SBS-Swiss Business School. It’s a natural follow-up to the recent article here on the importance of handwriting for cognition. This current offering is open to everyone.
Why Handwriting Is Essential for Memory, Learning, Creativity & Personal Growth
Cognitive Offloading and Its Impact on Learning and Memory
Cognitive offloading, which involves delegating mental tasks to external tools, has become increasingly relevant in today’s technology-driven world. Whether using a calendar app to remember your appointments or leaning on artificial intelligence to interpret a complex dataset, cognitive offloading shapes how we interact with our environment. While this practice can potentially enhance workplace efficiency, it raises significant concerns about its implications for learning, development, memory, and critical thinking skills. Some researchers suggest that a dumbing down of the human intellect is underway, and the negative consequences outweigh the benefits. In this article, I’m exploring this concept, highlighting the benefits and potential pitfalls with a
“Technology offers the prospect of universal access to increase fundamentally new ways of teaching. I want to emphasise that a lot of AI is also going to automate really bad ways of teaching.”
Daniel Schwartz | Professor of Educational Technology at Stanford Graduate School of Education
What Is Cognitive Offloading?
Cognitive offloading refers to using tools and devices to externalise mental processes and reduce cognitive load or mental effort. This practice is developed from the “extended mind” theory, proposed by Clark and Chalmers (1998)1, which suggests that these devices act as external aids and function as extensions of our cognitive systems—they extend the human mind. And it’s not just digital technology. This offloading exercise has gone on for centuries, maybe millennia. From the early use of physical tools like the abacus to contemporary reliance on AI systems, offloading has been a hallmark of human creativity and ingenuity. The brain is an energy-hungry organ, and this tactic allows us to conserve mental energy and focus on higher-order tasks, such as creative problem-solving or strategic planning.
Despite its benefits, cognitive offloading is a double-edged sword. While it supports task performance by lightening the cognitive load, it may also, after a time, undermine the internal cognitive processes required for critical thinking and memory formation and retrieval. As Grinschgl et al. (2021)2 note, offloading can impair long-term memory retention because we bypass the effortful encoding processes essential for durable memory. For example, when information is readily available through search engines or AI tools, we are more likely to remember where to find information than the information itself—a phenomenon known as “transactive memory”3. This duality underscores the need to examine when and how cognitive offloading is most beneficial carefully.
Origins of Research in Cognitive Offloading
The study of cognitive offloading has a rich history, beginning with early explorations of external memory aids like note-taking and progressing to sophisticated investigations into digital tools and AI. Early experiments, such as the Pattern Copy Task4, provided insights into how human beings balance internal and external strategies for completing tasks. These studies revealed that people tend to offload more when external aids are easily accessible and the perceived costs of offloading are low. In other words, we ask ourselves where are the benefits and downsides of using this technology. Sometimes, this is an unconscious decision.
More recent research has focused on the role of digital technologies in offloading. The rise of smartphones, virtual assistants, and AI systems has transformed how cognitive tasks are distributed between internal and external resources. Studies by Gerlich (2024)5 emphasise the dual impact of AI: while it enhances task performance and decision-making, it also creates an over-reliance, which can erode critical thinking skills. These findings highlight the need for continued research into the cognitive trade-offs associated with technological advances.
Main findings from the 2025 study “AI Tools in Society: Impacts on Cognitive Offloading and the Future of Critical Thinking” by Michael Gerlich:
Negative Correlation Between AI Usage and Critical Thinking: The study found a significant negative correlation between frequent AI tool usage and critical thinking abilities. This means that higher usage of AI tools is associated with lower critical thinking skills.
Cognitive Offloading as a Mediator: Cognitive offloading, where individuals rely on AI tools to perform cognitive tasks, was identified as a mediating factor. Increased cognitive offloading due to AI tool usage reduces engagement in deep, reflective thinking, essential for critical thinking.
Age and Educational Differences: Younger participants showed higher dependence on AI tools and lower critical thinking scores than older participants. Additionally, individuals with higher educational attainment exhibited better critical thinking skills, regardless of their AI tool usage.
Educational Recommendations: The study emphasises the need for educational strategies that promote critical engagement with AI technologies. It suggests that fostering critical thinking skills is crucial in an AI-driven world to mitigate the cognitive costs of reliance on AI tools.
Why Do Humans Use Cognitive Offloading?
Cognitive offloading is driven by a natural human tendency to optimise mental resources. From an evolutionary perspective, humans have over many thousands of years developed strategies to manage working memory and attention limitations. External aids, such as writing or visual cues, have long extended the mind’s capabilities. Modern digital tools have amplified these possibilities, offering solutions that are faster, more precise, and more accessible. This becomes more pronounced and arguably more detrimental when productivity and efficiency in the workplace are emphasised. We forget that humans are not machines; our needs and requirements go much deeper than the commercial world demands.
Metacognition—the ability to think about thoughts, and to assess and regulate one’s cognitive processes, also plays a significant role in offloading. We often consciously offload tasks when we perceive our internal memory or problem-solving abilities to be inadequate. For instance, if you are like me, you may feel that remembering your wife’s birthday is impossible, so you create a reminder in your Google calendar. This conscious decision-making is about minimising the mental effort associated with remembering. However, research by Gilbert (2020)6 showed that people often overuse external reminders, even when their internal memory could suffice because they prefer to avoid cognitive effort. This phenomenon, termed “cognitive laziness,” reflects the growing reliance on technology to perform tasks that require mental engagement. While this reduces immediate cognitive strain, it raises questions about the long-term effects on internal cognitive abilities.
Benefits of Cognitive Offloading for Learning and Development
Cognitive offloading offers significant benefits, particularly in learning and productivity contexts. Reducing the cognitive load associated with routine tasks frees up mental resources for complex and creative thinking. For instance, adaptive learning platforms that tailor educational content to individual needs enable students to focus on higher-order skills like analysis and synthesis.
Moreover, offloading can make learning more accessible. Digital tools support learners with disabilities, allowing them to overcome challenges related to memory or attention. In resource-constrained environments, technology can bridge gaps in educational access, offering opportunities for self-paced and personalized learning. These applications illustrate how cognitive offloading can judiciously enhance individual and collective learning outcomes.
Negative Impacts of AI-Driven Cognitive Offloading
While the benefits of cognitive offloading are undeniable, the growing reliance on AI tools raises concerns about its long-term implications for cognitive development. One of the most significant risks is the erosion of critical thinking skills. Critical thinking requires active cognitive engagement, such as questioning assumptions, evaluating evidence, and synthesising diverse perspectives. However, where AI tools provide instantaneous, ready-made solutions, they discourage us from engaging in these deeper cognitive processes. We couldn’t be bothered! As machines and algorithms take over everyday living, art, creativity, walking the dog, and cleaning the house, what of human beings?
Is the ultimate goal of these technological conveniences that we can merely lay on the couch and order everything by mere thought? Do we not make ourselves redundant? Perhaps the old adage, “use it or lose it” is appropriate.
Memory retention is another area of concern. Studies by Grinschgl et al. (2021) show frequent offloading diminishes our ability to recall information independently. This effect is particularly pronounced when we rely on AI systems to store and retrieve information without actively processing it. Over time, this can lead to a superficial understanding of complex issues and a reduced capacity for independent thought. And when the battery dies on the iPad, you lose connection to your outsourced brain.
The societal implications are obviously troubling. Great for the power centres of global corporations, government, and finance, but not so much for people’s freedom. As AI tools become ubiquitous, we risk becoming more susceptible to misinformation and less capable of discerning credible sources. This risks undermining individual decision-making and challenges democratic processes that rely on informed and critically engaged citizens—or do they? the jury is out on that one.
The Ethical and Developmental Case for Doing the Work Yourself
Given these risks, finding a balanced approach to offloading our cognitive abilities is vitally important. Even things we take for granted, such as typing on a computer keyboard or tapping on a screen, might get things done quicker, but at a potentially significant cost to our cognitive function. I wrote about that here a few weeks ago. While external aids can enhance efficiency, we must also cultivate our internal cognitive capacities, especially in youth education. Engaging in effortful cognitive tasks promotes memory retention, critical thinking, and problem-solving skills. It is also a feature of doing things that are worthwhile in and of themselves. It is what Aristotle referred to in Nicomachean Ethics as “The Good Life7”. These abilities are essential for personal growth, professional success, and ethical decision-making.
Educators and policymakers have a vital role to play in this endeavour. Educational systems should integrate AI tools in ways that complement rather than replace traditional cognitive tasks. For example, students could be encouraged to use AI as a tool for exploration rather than as a definitive source of answers. Assignments could require them to critically evaluate AI-generated outputs and consider alternative perspectives, fostering more profound engagement with the material.
At an individual level, cultivating mindfulness about technology use can help mitigate risks of overreliance. Setting boundaries, such as limiting digital reminders or intentionally solving problems without external aids, can strengthen internal cognitive skills. These practices enhance personal development and contribute to a more resilient and adaptive society.
“The happy life is thought to be one of excellence; now an excellent life requires exertion, and does not consist in amusement. If Eudaimonia, or happiness, is activity in accordance with excellence, it is reasonable that it should be in accordance with the highest excellence; and this will be that of the best thing in us.”
Aristotle, The Nicomachean Ethics
Conclusion
Cognitive offloading can be an effective means to transform how we manage mental tasks, offering convenience and efficiency both inside and outside the workplace. However, its growing prevalence, particularly in the age of AI, demands careful consideration of its impact on learning, memory, and critical thinking skills. Who holds ultimate responsibility for the outcomes of our lives, and are we willing to abdicate our responsibility to machines? We’re doing it already—we are outsourcing our brains—so the question now is, to what ultimate outcome?
I guess it’s a product of this always-on world we live in where the demands on our attention are incessant. Everyone wants a piece of us, and work has become so much more demanding. John Maynard Keynes said in 1930 that we would be working only 15 hours per week, and machines would be doing the laborious work8. What happened to that promise? I’ll tell you…The time and efficiency that technology created went into the pockets of CEOs.
Ok, hold the rant…
To finish, we need to balance the use of external aids and foster internal cognitive engagement to harness the benefits of offloading without compromising our intellectual growth. This balanced approach is essential for personal development and building a society capable of navigating the complexities of this dramatically changing world of work.
References
Clark, A., & Chalmers, D. J. (1998). The extended mind. Analysis, 58(1), 7–19.
Grinschgl, S., Papenmeier, F., & Meyerhoff, H. S. (2021). Consequences of cognitive offloading: Boosting performance but diminishing memory. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 74(9), 1477–1496.
Argote, L., & Guo, J. M. (2016). Routines and transactive memory systems: Creating, coordinating, retaining, and transferring knowledge in organizations. Research in organizational behavior, 36, 65-84.
Gray, W. D., Sims, C. R., Fu, W. T., & Schoelles, M. J. (2006). The soft constraints hypothesis: a rational analysis approach to resource allocation for interactive behavior. Psychological review, 113(3), 461.
Gerlich, M. (2024). Balancing Excitement and Cognitive Costs: Trust in AI and the Erosion of Critical Thinking Through Cognitive Offloading. Available at SSRN 4994204.
Gilbert, S. J. (2020). Excessive use of reminders: Metacognition and effort-minimisation in cognitive offloading. Consciousness and Cognition, 85, 103024.
Rowe, C. J., & Broadie, S. (Eds.). (2002). Nicomachean ethics. Oxford University Press, USA.
Keynes, J. M. (1930). Economic possibilities for our grandchildren. In Essays in persuasion (pp. 321-332). London: Palgrave Macmillan UK.