#cognitivedebt — Public Fediverse posts
Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #cognitivedebt, aggregated by home.social.
-
DATE: July 15, 2026 at 04:00PM
SOURCE: PSYPOST.ORG** Research quality varies widely from fantastic to small exploratory studies. Please check research methods when conclusions are very important to you. **
-------------------------------------------------TITLE: Is AI making us stupid through cognitive offloading? New review explores the evidence
A new theoretical review published in Trends in Cognitive Sciences explores whether relying on artificial intelligence compromises human intelligence. The paper suggests that while outsourcing mental tasks to algorithms can erode specific learned skills, our foundational cognitive abilities are likely more resilient. The impact of these tools largely depends on how people choose to interact with them.
Humans regularly use external tools to reduce the mental effort required to complete tasks. This behavior is known as cognitive offloading. Common examples include using a calculator for arithmetic or relying on a satellite navigation system for directions.
The recent explosion of generative artificial intelligence has brought the concept of cognitive offloading back into the spotlight. Generative artificial intelligence refers to computer programs that can instantly create text, solve problems, or analyze data based on massive amounts of existing information. Because these platforms can synthesize complex ideas in seconds, many worry that human intellect will suffer.
Trent N. Cash, Megan O. Kelly, Brooke N. Macnamara, and Evan F. Risko authored the new review to untangle the nuanced ways these programs affect the human mind. They separate human cognition into two distinct categories to better understand the risks. The first category includes specific skills, which are learned behaviors improved through practice, like flying an airplane or solving algebra. The second category involves basic cognitive abilities, which are foundational mental capacities, like working memory and attention.
Losing Skills Through Lack of Practice
When people offload their thinking to an automated tool, they skip the practice required to acquire and maintain specific skills. Cash and his colleagues argue that bypassing this necessary mental friction almost certainly compromises skill development. Without regular practice, acquired skills tend to decay because the brain loses the defense against forgetting. For example, physicians might lose their diagnostic sharpness if they overly rely on an automated imaging system without reviewing the underlying data.
This concept was recently demonstrated in a high school mathematics experiment in Turkey. Students were divided into groups and asked to complete practice problems using either their own knowledge, an unrestricted chatbot, or a highly guarded chatbot designed to act as a tutor. Students who used the unrestricted artificial intelligence scored high on the practice round but performed worse on a subsequent independent exam compared to peers who used no technology at all. The unrestricted software provided direct answers, which allowed students to bypass the productive struggle needed to understand the material.
“The effects are non-trivial and move in opposite directions depending on what you measure,” Alp Sungu, a co-author of the math study, previously told PsyPost. “With AI access, students scored 48% higher on practice problems, but once that access was removed, the same students scored 17% lower on exams than those who never had AI at all.” He added that using these systems merely as answer machines hurts actual learning.
Shallower Learning and the Illusion of Competence
Similarly, college students who used a chatbot to research a presentation remembered significantly less information about the topic forty-five days later than students who used traditional study methods. Traditional studying forces the brain to retrieve and connect information, a process psychologists call desirable difficulties. This mental exertion builds stronger memory pathways and secures long-term retention. Relying on an automated summary creates an illusion of competence, where students feel they know the material better than they actually do.
“There is an abysmal difference between delivering a piece of work and understanding the process of its creation,” researcher André Barcaui explained to PsyPost. He noted that without the mental friction of reading and writing, people lose the ability to articulate complex ideas and question information.
The ease of getting instant summaries also tends to result in shallower knowledge acquisition. In a series of experiments involving thousands of participants, people who learned about a topic using chatbot syntheses developed a weaker understanding of the subject than those who used a standard internet search. The researchers designed simulated environments where the core facts provided to both groups were completely identical. Despite receiving the exact same information, participants who read the automated summaries exerted less effort and reported feeling a lower sense of ownership over the knowledge.
Bypassing this self-guided exploration prevents users from developing deep, original knowledge structures. When participants in these experiments were asked to write advice based on what they had learned, the chatbot users wrote shorter, less factual, and less original responses. Recipients of this advice consistently rated the text generated by the chatbot users as less helpful and less trustworthy.
Critical Thinking and Cognitive Surrender
This passive consumption of information provides evidence of a broader decline in critical thinking. A recent survey combined with in-depth interviews found that individuals who heavily rely on algorithmic tools perform worse on critical thinking assessments. The effect is particularly pronounced among younger users, who often accept computer-generated recommendations without questioning their accuracy. On the other hand, individuals with higher education levels tended to maintain their analytical skills by cross-checking information across multiple sources.
“The findings reveal a strong negative correlation between frequent AI tool usage and critical thinking abilities, mediated by cognitive offloading,” researcher Michael Gerlich previously told PsyPost. He noted that this pattern suggests reliance on automated tools reduces opportunities for deep, reflective thinking.
Psychologists refer to this uncritical acceptance of algorithmic output as cognitive surrender. Rather than using the software as an assistant, users entirely relinquish mental control and adopt the machine’s judgment as their own. To explain this, scientists have proposed a Tri-System Theory of Cognition, which adds an external, artificial reasoning system to the human brain’s natural instinct and deliberate logic networks.
In laboratory puzzles, participants who had access to a chatbot frequently submitted incorrect answers simply because the software confidently presented flawed advice. Even when researchers offered financial bonuses for correct answers, a large portion of participants continued to accept the faulty algorithmic output. This indicates a high level of misplaced trust in technology.
The psychological experiments on cognitive surrender also revealed that certain personality traits offer a degree of protection. Participants with high fluid intelligence, which is the ability to solve unfamiliar problems, showed more resistance to blindly accepting algorithmic output. Additionally, individuals who naturally enjoy engaging in deep, effortful thinking were better at recognizing and rejecting incorrect answers. However, time constraints and the engaging, conversational nature of modern software still pushed many users toward uncritical reliance.
“People are not just asking AI for information; they are often letting it structure their thoughts, explanations, and decisions,” Steven Shaw, who studies human reasoning, explained to PsyPost. He suggested that people slip into cognitive surrender without realizing it, which shifts their intellectual agency over to the machine.
The Risk of Cognitive Debt
Other experts warn that treating technology as a cognitive prosthesis could stunt higher-order executive functions over time. Executive functions are the complex mental processes that enable planning, problem-solving, and decision-making. By allowing a computer to generate complete plans from start to finish, users miss out on the mental exercises necessary to develop these advanced capabilities.
“Just as one cannot become skilled at basketball without actually playing the game, the development of complex intellectual abilities requires active participation and cannot solely rely on technological assistance,” Umberto León Domínguez previously told PsyPost. He stressed that cognitive effort remains an absolute requirement for success in modern life.
This lack of active participation creates what psychiatrist Søren Dinesen Østergaard calls a cognitive debt. He argues that outsourcing scientific reasoning to machines threatens the fundamental skills required for academic discovery. Recent brain imaging studies provide evidence for this concern, showing that people utilizing algorithmic assistance display significantly lower brain activation in networks usually engaged during mental tasks.
Østergaard highlights the developers of AlphaFold, a protein-structure prediction program that won a Nobel Prize, as a prime example of rigorous human reasoning. He questions whether those scientists would have achieved such breakthroughs if automated systems had done their thinking for them during their formative education. Scientific reasoning is not an innate talent, but rather a skill sharpened through the tedious practice of reading, thinking, and revising.
Basic Abilities Resilient Despite Risks
Despite these alarming trends, Cash and his co-authors point out that basic cognitive abilities appear stubbornly resistant to change. Foundational capacities, like working memory, generally do not shrink or expand drastically based on task-specific training. While people might lose their proficiency in long division or spelling, the underlying mental hardware supporting those tasks will likely remain intact. A dystopian future where humanity loses its fundamental capacity to think seems unlikely.
Cash and his colleagues note that many questions remain unanswered about long-term interactions with these tools. Scientists still need to uncover how prolonged use affects metacognitive skills, which involve monitoring and understanding one’s own thought processes. There is a risk that users might experience source monitoring errors, misattributing computer-generated ideas as arising from their own cognition. The researchers also question whether exposure to automated assistance during critical developmental phases, such as early childhood, poses unique hazards.
The researchers emphasize that the specific design and application of these technologies will dictate their cognitive impact. When software is programmed to act as a collaborative tutor, providing hints rather than direct answers, skill acquisition is preserved. In the high school math study, students who used the restricted software performed just as well on the final exam as those who used textbooks.
If people remain actively engaged in the cognitive loop, they can mitigate the risks of offloading while leveraging the benefits of automated assistance. Users can structure their interactions with these tools to boost learning, such as asking for feedback on an original idea instead of demanding a fully formed solution. Engaging in a thoughtful partnership with technology provides a path forward that preserves human intellect.
As Cash and his co-authors concluded: “In sum, there is clearly a risk that AI can make us ‘stupid’ by compromising our skills (and knowledge) if we completely offload them to AI. However, AI may be less likely to diminish the foundational cognitive capacities that underpin our ability to be smart, rather than ‘stupid’, in the first place.”
The study, “Is AI making us stupid?,” was authored by Trent N. Cash, Megan O. Kelly, Brooke N. Macnamara, and Evan F. Risko.
The study, “Experimental evidence of the effects of large language models versus web search on depth of learning,” was authored by Shiri Melumad and Jin Ho Yun.
The study, “Generative AI without guardrails can harm learning: Evidence from high school mathematics,” was authored by Hamsa Bastani, Osbert Bastani, Alp Sungu, Haosen Ge, Özge Kabakcı, and Rei Mariman.
The study, “AI Tools in Society: Impacts on Cognitive Offloading and the Future of Critical Thinking,” was authored by Michael Gerlich.
The study, “Thinking Fast, Slow, and Artificial: How AI is Reshaping Human Reasoning and the Rise of Cognitive Surrender,” was authored by Steven D Shaw and Gideon Nave.
The study, “ChatGPT as a cognitive crutch: Evidence from a randomized controlled trial on knowledge retention,” was authored by André Barcaui.
The study, “Potential cognitive risks of generative transformer-based AI chatbots on higher order executive functions,” was authored by Umberto León Domínguez.
The study, “Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) and the Outsourcing of Scientific Reasoning: Perils of the Rising Cognitive Debt in Academia and Beyond,” was authored by Søren Dinesen Østergaard.
-------------------------------------------------
Private, vetted email list for mental health professionals: https://www.clinicians-exchange.org
Unofficial Psychology Today Xitter to toot feed at Psych Today Unofficial Bot @PTUnofficialBot
-------------------------------------------------
#psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist @psychotherapists @psychology @socialpsych @socialwork @psychiatry #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #AIandcognition #cognitiveoffloading #AIlearningimpact #criticalthinking #digitalstupidity #higherorderthinking #cognitiveskills #generativeAI #educationAI #cognitivedebt
-
DATE: July 15, 2026 at 04:00PM
SOURCE: PSYPOST.ORG** Research quality varies widely from fantastic to small exploratory studies. Please check research methods when conclusions are very important to you. **
-------------------------------------------------TITLE: Is AI making us stupid through cognitive offloading? New review explores the evidence
A new theoretical review published in Trends in Cognitive Sciences explores whether relying on artificial intelligence compromises human intelligence. The paper suggests that while outsourcing mental tasks to algorithms can erode specific learned skills, our foundational cognitive abilities are likely more resilient. The impact of these tools largely depends on how people choose to interact with them.
Humans regularly use external tools to reduce the mental effort required to complete tasks. This behavior is known as cognitive offloading. Common examples include using a calculator for arithmetic or relying on a satellite navigation system for directions.
The recent explosion of generative artificial intelligence has brought the concept of cognitive offloading back into the spotlight. Generative artificial intelligence refers to computer programs that can instantly create text, solve problems, or analyze data based on massive amounts of existing information. Because these platforms can synthesize complex ideas in seconds, many worry that human intellect will suffer.
Trent N. Cash, Megan O. Kelly, Brooke N. Macnamara, and Evan F. Risko authored the new review to untangle the nuanced ways these programs affect the human mind. They separate human cognition into two distinct categories to better understand the risks. The first category includes specific skills, which are learned behaviors improved through practice, like flying an airplane or solving algebra. The second category involves basic cognitive abilities, which are foundational mental capacities, like working memory and attention.
Losing Skills Through Lack of Practice
When people offload their thinking to an automated tool, they skip the practice required to acquire and maintain specific skills. Cash and his colleagues argue that bypassing this necessary mental friction almost certainly compromises skill development. Without regular practice, acquired skills tend to decay because the brain loses the defense against forgetting. For example, physicians might lose their diagnostic sharpness if they overly rely on an automated imaging system without reviewing the underlying data.
This concept was recently demonstrated in a high school mathematics experiment in Turkey. Students were divided into groups and asked to complete practice problems using either their own knowledge, an unrestricted chatbot, or a highly guarded chatbot designed to act as a tutor. Students who used the unrestricted artificial intelligence scored high on the practice round but performed worse on a subsequent independent exam compared to peers who used no technology at all. The unrestricted software provided direct answers, which allowed students to bypass the productive struggle needed to understand the material.
“The effects are non-trivial and move in opposite directions depending on what you measure,” Alp Sungu, a co-author of the math study, previously told PsyPost. “With AI access, students scored 48% higher on practice problems, but once that access was removed, the same students scored 17% lower on exams than those who never had AI at all.” He added that using these systems merely as answer machines hurts actual learning.
Shallower Learning and the Illusion of Competence
Similarly, college students who used a chatbot to research a presentation remembered significantly less information about the topic forty-five days later than students who used traditional study methods. Traditional studying forces the brain to retrieve and connect information, a process psychologists call desirable difficulties. This mental exertion builds stronger memory pathways and secures long-term retention. Relying on an automated summary creates an illusion of competence, where students feel they know the material better than they actually do.
“There is an abysmal difference between delivering a piece of work and understanding the process of its creation,” researcher André Barcaui explained to PsyPost. He noted that without the mental friction of reading and writing, people lose the ability to articulate complex ideas and question information.
The ease of getting instant summaries also tends to result in shallower knowledge acquisition. In a series of experiments involving thousands of participants, people who learned about a topic using chatbot syntheses developed a weaker understanding of the subject than those who used a standard internet search. The researchers designed simulated environments where the core facts provided to both groups were completely identical. Despite receiving the exact same information, participants who read the automated summaries exerted less effort and reported feeling a lower sense of ownership over the knowledge.
Bypassing this self-guided exploration prevents users from developing deep, original knowledge structures. When participants in these experiments were asked to write advice based on what they had learned, the chatbot users wrote shorter, less factual, and less original responses. Recipients of this advice consistently rated the text generated by the chatbot users as less helpful and less trustworthy.
Critical Thinking and Cognitive Surrender
This passive consumption of information provides evidence of a broader decline in critical thinking. A recent survey combined with in-depth interviews found that individuals who heavily rely on algorithmic tools perform worse on critical thinking assessments. The effect is particularly pronounced among younger users, who often accept computer-generated recommendations without questioning their accuracy. On the other hand, individuals with higher education levels tended to maintain their analytical skills by cross-checking information across multiple sources.
“The findings reveal a strong negative correlation between frequent AI tool usage and critical thinking abilities, mediated by cognitive offloading,” researcher Michael Gerlich previously told PsyPost. He noted that this pattern suggests reliance on automated tools reduces opportunities for deep, reflective thinking.
Psychologists refer to this uncritical acceptance of algorithmic output as cognitive surrender. Rather than using the software as an assistant, users entirely relinquish mental control and adopt the machine’s judgment as their own. To explain this, scientists have proposed a Tri-System Theory of Cognition, which adds an external, artificial reasoning system to the human brain’s natural instinct and deliberate logic networks.
In laboratory puzzles, participants who had access to a chatbot frequently submitted incorrect answers simply because the software confidently presented flawed advice. Even when researchers offered financial bonuses for correct answers, a large portion of participants continued to accept the faulty algorithmic output. This indicates a high level of misplaced trust in technology.
The psychological experiments on cognitive surrender also revealed that certain personality traits offer a degree of protection. Participants with high fluid intelligence, which is the ability to solve unfamiliar problems, showed more resistance to blindly accepting algorithmic output. Additionally, individuals who naturally enjoy engaging in deep, effortful thinking were better at recognizing and rejecting incorrect answers. However, time constraints and the engaging, conversational nature of modern software still pushed many users toward uncritical reliance.
“People are not just asking AI for information; they are often letting it structure their thoughts, explanations, and decisions,” Steven Shaw, who studies human reasoning, explained to PsyPost. He suggested that people slip into cognitive surrender without realizing it, which shifts their intellectual agency over to the machine.
The Risk of Cognitive Debt
Other experts warn that treating technology as a cognitive prosthesis could stunt higher-order executive functions over time. Executive functions are the complex mental processes that enable planning, problem-solving, and decision-making. By allowing a computer to generate complete plans from start to finish, users miss out on the mental exercises necessary to develop these advanced capabilities.
“Just as one cannot become skilled at basketball without actually playing the game, the development of complex intellectual abilities requires active participation and cannot solely rely on technological assistance,” Umberto León Domínguez previously told PsyPost. He stressed that cognitive effort remains an absolute requirement for success in modern life.
This lack of active participation creates what psychiatrist Søren Dinesen Østergaard calls a cognitive debt. He argues that outsourcing scientific reasoning to machines threatens the fundamental skills required for academic discovery. Recent brain imaging studies provide evidence for this concern, showing that people utilizing algorithmic assistance display significantly lower brain activation in networks usually engaged during mental tasks.
Østergaard highlights the developers of AlphaFold, a protein-structure prediction program that won a Nobel Prize, as a prime example of rigorous human reasoning. He questions whether those scientists would have achieved such breakthroughs if automated systems had done their thinking for them during their formative education. Scientific reasoning is not an innate talent, but rather a skill sharpened through the tedious practice of reading, thinking, and revising.
Basic Abilities Resilient Despite Risks
Despite these alarming trends, Cash and his co-authors point out that basic cognitive abilities appear stubbornly resistant to change. Foundational capacities, like working memory, generally do not shrink or expand drastically based on task-specific training. While people might lose their proficiency in long division or spelling, the underlying mental hardware supporting those tasks will likely remain intact. A dystopian future where humanity loses its fundamental capacity to think seems unlikely.
Cash and his colleagues note that many questions remain unanswered about long-term interactions with these tools. Scientists still need to uncover how prolonged use affects metacognitive skills, which involve monitoring and understanding one’s own thought processes. There is a risk that users might experience source monitoring errors, misattributing computer-generated ideas as arising from their own cognition. The researchers also question whether exposure to automated assistance during critical developmental phases, such as early childhood, poses unique hazards.
The researchers emphasize that the specific design and application of these technologies will dictate their cognitive impact. When software is programmed to act as a collaborative tutor, providing hints rather than direct answers, skill acquisition is preserved. In the high school math study, students who used the restricted software performed just as well on the final exam as those who used textbooks.
If people remain actively engaged in the cognitive loop, they can mitigate the risks of offloading while leveraging the benefits of automated assistance. Users can structure their interactions with these tools to boost learning, such as asking for feedback on an original idea instead of demanding a fully formed solution. Engaging in a thoughtful partnership with technology provides a path forward that preserves human intellect.
As Cash and his co-authors concluded: “In sum, there is clearly a risk that AI can make us ‘stupid’ by compromising our skills (and knowledge) if we completely offload them to AI. However, AI may be less likely to diminish the foundational cognitive capacities that underpin our ability to be smart, rather than ‘stupid’, in the first place.”
The study, “Is AI making us stupid?,” was authored by Trent N. Cash, Megan O. Kelly, Brooke N. Macnamara, and Evan F. Risko.
The study, “Experimental evidence of the effects of large language models versus web search on depth of learning,” was authored by Shiri Melumad and Jin Ho Yun.
The study, “Generative AI without guardrails can harm learning: Evidence from high school mathematics,” was authored by Hamsa Bastani, Osbert Bastani, Alp Sungu, Haosen Ge, Özge Kabakcı, and Rei Mariman.
The study, “AI Tools in Society: Impacts on Cognitive Offloading and the Future of Critical Thinking,” was authored by Michael Gerlich.
The study, “Thinking Fast, Slow, and Artificial: How AI is Reshaping Human Reasoning and the Rise of Cognitive Surrender,” was authored by Steven D Shaw and Gideon Nave.
The study, “ChatGPT as a cognitive crutch: Evidence from a randomized controlled trial on knowledge retention,” was authored by André Barcaui.
The study, “Potential cognitive risks of generative transformer-based AI chatbots on higher order executive functions,” was authored by Umberto León Domínguez.
The study, “Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) and the Outsourcing of Scientific Reasoning: Perils of the Rising Cognitive Debt in Academia and Beyond,” was authored by Søren Dinesen Østergaard.
-------------------------------------------------
Private, vetted email list for mental health professionals: https://www.clinicians-exchange.org
Unofficial Psychology Today Xitter to toot feed at Psych Today Unofficial Bot @PTUnofficialBot
-------------------------------------------------
#psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist @psychotherapists @psychology @socialpsych @socialwork @psychiatry #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #AIandcognition #cognitiveoffloading #AIlearningimpact #criticalthinking #digitalstupidity #higherorderthinking #cognitiveskills #generativeAI #educationAI #cognitivedebt
-
AI and Cognitive Delegation: The Hidden Cost of AI That Works Too Well, by (not on Mastodon or Bluesky):
-
AI and Cognitive Delegation: The Hidden Cost of AI That Works Too Well, by (not on Mastodon or Bluesky):
-
What I’m Hearing About #CognitiveDebt (So Far)
https://margaretstorey.com/blog/2026/02/18/cognitive-debt-revisited/
-
What I’m Hearing About #CognitiveDebt (So Far)
https://margaretstorey.com/blog/2026/02/18/cognitive-debt-revisited/
-
Software #Developers Say #AI Is Rotting Their Brains
by Emanuel Maiberg, May 13, 2026
Excerpt: "The developers I talked to found AI useful for some tasks. Several developers said that it was good for experimentation, allowing them to quickly prototype an idea or to implement something in a domain they’re unfamiliar with. One developer said it was a good information interface. Specifically, he said, the AI helped him find where on the server a certain request is handled, summarize logs, or find documentation related to code changes.
"The problem all the developers I talked to agreed on is that the more they relied on AI to code, the more the skills they’ve honed for years deteriorated. This is by now a well studied phenomenon sometimes referred to as '#CognitiveDebt' or '#CognitiveAtrophy.' The idea is that people who use AI to automate certain parts of their job lose the ability to do those tasks well, therefore #DeSkilling themselves." 'I had some issues where I forgot how to implement a Laravel API and it scared the shit out of me. I went to university for this, I've been a software engineer for many years now and it feels like I am back before I ever wrote a single line of code,' the software developer at a small web design firm told me.
" 'It's making me dumber for sure,' the fintech software developer told me. “It's like when we got #cellphones and stopped remembering phone numbers, but it's grown to me mentally outsourcing ‘thinking’ in general. I feel my critical thinking and ability to sit and reason about a problem or a design has degraded because the all-knowing-dalai-llama is just a question away from giving me his take. And supposedly I tell myself ill just use it for inspiration but it ends up being my only thought. It gives you the illusion of productivity and expertise but at the end of the day you are more divorced from the output you submit than before.'
" 'When I was using it for code generation, I found myself having a lot of trouble building and maintaining a #MentalModel of the code I was working with,' the software engineer at the FAANG told me. 'Another aspect is that I joined late last year and [the company’s] codebase is massive. As a new hire, part of my job is to learn how to navigate the codebase and use the established conventions, but I think the AI push really hampered my ability to do that. '"
Read more:
https://www.404media.co/software-developers-say-ai-is-rotting-their-brains/Archived version:
https://archive.ph/2vjJm#AISucks #DumbingUsDown #BrainRot #AIBrainRot #MentalMaps #CriticalThinkingSkills #UseYourBrain #UseItOrLoseIt
-
Software #Developers Say #AI Is Rotting Their Brains
by Emanuel Maiberg, May 13, 2026
Excerpt: "The developers I talked to found AI useful for some tasks. Several developers said that it was good for experimentation, allowing them to quickly prototype an idea or to implement something in a domain they’re unfamiliar with. One developer said it was a good information interface. Specifically, he said, the AI helped him find where on the server a certain request is handled, summarize logs, or find documentation related to code changes.
"The problem all the developers I talked to agreed on is that the more they relied on AI to code, the more the skills they’ve honed for years deteriorated. This is by now a well studied phenomenon sometimes referred to as '#CognitiveDebt' or '#CognitiveAtrophy.' The idea is that people who use AI to automate certain parts of their job lose the ability to do those tasks well, therefore #DeSkilling themselves." 'I had some issues where I forgot how to implement a Laravel API and it scared the shit out of me. I went to university for this, I've been a software engineer for many years now and it feels like I am back before I ever wrote a single line of code,' the software developer at a small web design firm told me.
" 'It's making me dumber for sure,' the fintech software developer told me. “It's like when we got #cellphones and stopped remembering phone numbers, but it's grown to me mentally outsourcing ‘thinking’ in general. I feel my critical thinking and ability to sit and reason about a problem or a design has degraded because the all-knowing-dalai-llama is just a question away from giving me his take. And supposedly I tell myself ill just use it for inspiration but it ends up being my only thought. It gives you the illusion of productivity and expertise but at the end of the day you are more divorced from the output you submit than before.'
" 'When I was using it for code generation, I found myself having a lot of trouble building and maintaining a #MentalModel of the code I was working with,' the software engineer at the FAANG told me. 'Another aspect is that I joined late last year and [the company’s] codebase is massive. As a new hire, part of my job is to learn how to navigate the codebase and use the established conventions, but I think the AI push really hampered my ability to do that. '"
Read more:
https://www.404media.co/software-developers-say-ai-is-rotting-their-brains/Archived version:
https://archive.ph/2vjJm#AISucks #DumbingUsDown #BrainRot #AIBrainRot #MentalMaps #CriticalThinkingSkills #UseYourBrain #UseItOrLoseIt
-
🧠🤯 Ah, the internet's latest buzzword: "Cognitive Debt"—because "confusion" wasn't hip enough! 🤓 The author's noble quest to enlighten us is as clear as mud, with enough #jargon to make even the most seasoned #buzzword #bingo player weep tears of bewilderment. 🙄
https://margaretstorey.com/blog/2026/02/18/cognitive-debt-revisited/ #CognitiveDebt #Confusion #Enlightenment #HackerNews #ngated -
🧠🤯 Ah, the internet's latest buzzword: "Cognitive Debt"—because "confusion" wasn't hip enough! 🤓 The author's noble quest to enlighten us is as clear as mud, with enough #jargon to make even the most seasoned #buzzword #bingo player weep tears of bewilderment. 🙄
https://margaretstorey.com/blog/2026/02/18/cognitive-debt-revisited/ #CognitiveDebt #Confusion #Enlightenment #HackerNews #ngated -
What I'm Hearing About Cognitive Debt (So Far)
https://margaretstorey.com/blog/2026/02/18/cognitive-debt-revisited/
#HackerNews #CognitiveDebt #MentalHealth #Productivity #Awareness #Learning
-
What I'm Hearing About Cognitive Debt (So Far)
https://margaretstorey.com/blog/2026/02/18/cognitive-debt-revisited/
#HackerNews #CognitiveDebt #MentalHealth #Productivity #Awareness #Learning
-
Martin Fowler: Technical, Cognitive, and Intent Debt
https://martinfowler.com/fragments/2026-04-14.html
#HackerNews #MartinFowler #TechnicalDebt #CognitiveDebt #IntentDebt #SoftwareEngineering
-
Martin Fowler: Technical, Cognitive, and Intent Debt
https://martinfowler.com/fragments/2026-04-14.html
#HackerNews #MartinFowler #TechnicalDebt #CognitiveDebt #IntentDebt #SoftwareEngineering
-
@alastor8472.bsky.social
thank you. That is an excellent article about #claude and #CognitiveDebt. I am surprised that more people are not talking about this and no one is talking about the solution to this. -
@alastor8472.bsky.social
thank you. That is an excellent article about #claude and #CognitiveDebt. I am surprised that more people are not talking about this and no one is talking about the solution to this. -
New one from Cal Newport. New research shows that using #AI increases shallow efforts while decreasing the amount of time spent on tasks that move the needle. It follows history or other productivity tools that haven't necessarily produced stronger work or a better work environment.
-
New one from Cal Newport. New research shows that using #AI increases shallow efforts while decreasing the amount of time spent on tasks that move the needle. It follows history or other productivity tools that haven't necessarily produced stronger work or a better work environment.
-
#Development #Explainers
Cognitive debt · “It’s not technical debt, it’s worse.” https://ilo.im/16b227_____
#AI #CognitiveDebt #TechDebt #Workflows #WebDev #Frontend #Backend -
#Development #Explainers
Cognitive debt · “It’s not technical debt, it’s worse.” https://ilo.im/16b227_____
#AI #CognitiveDebt #TechDebt #Workflows #WebDev #Frontend #Backend -
#Development #Analyses
How to kill the code review · What if no one has to read the code at all? https://ilo.im/16b2il_____
#AI #Engineering #Coding #CodeReviews #CognitiveDebt #Specifications #Trust #WebDev #Frontend #Backend -
#Development #Analyses
How to kill the code review · What if no one has to read the code at all? https://ilo.im/16b2il_____
#AI #Engineering #Coding #CodeReviews #CognitiveDebt #Specifications #Trust #WebDev #Frontend #Backend -
Cognitive Debt: When Velocity Exceeds Comprehension
https://www.rockoder.com/beyondthecode/cognitive-debt-when-velocity-exceeds-comprehension/
#HackerNews #CognitiveDebt #VelocityExceedsComprehension #TechInsights #SoftwareDevelopment #MentalModels
-
Cognitive Debt: When Velocity Exceeds Comprehension
https://www.rockoder.com/beyondthecode/cognitive-debt-when-velocity-exceeds-comprehension/
#HackerNews #CognitiveDebt #VelocityExceedsComprehension #TechInsights #SoftwareDevelopment #MentalModels
-
#Development #Pitfalls
Rely on AI and get left behind · Who will fix code no one understands anymore? https://ilo.im/16atf5_____
#Business #Engineering #Programming #Coding #AI #Dependencies #CognitiveDebt #WebDev #Frontend #Backend -
#Development #Pitfalls
Rely on AI and get left behind · Who will fix code no one understands anymore? https://ilo.im/16atf5_____
#Business #Engineering #Programming #Coding #AI #Dependencies #CognitiveDebt #WebDev #Frontend #Backend -
#Development #Explorations
From technical debt to cognitive debt · “Velocity without understanding is not sustainable.” https://ilo.im/16anlc_____
#Programming #Coding #AI #CognitiveDebt #TechDebt #Terminology #WebDev #Frontend #Backend -
#Development #Explorations
From technical debt to cognitive debt · “Velocity without understanding is not sustainable.” https://ilo.im/16anlc_____
#Programming #Coding #AI #CognitiveDebt #TechDebt #Terminology #WebDev #Frontend #Backend -
*It turns out that "Artificial Intelligence" is an *inherently hallucinatory technology,* and that's not the dismissive summary, that is the *initial premise* #ZeroGravityMindset #cognitivedebt #bubble
-
#AIagents: As #generativeAI and #agenticAI are adopted, #cognitivedebt, the accumulation of knowledge and understanding lost due to #rapiddevelopment, becomes a greater threat than #technicaldebt. This debt, residing in developers’ minds, can hinder progress and understanding of software systems. http://margaretstorey.com/blog/2026/02/09/cognitive-debt/?eicker.news #tech #media #news
-
#AIagents: As #generativeAI and #agenticAI are adopted, #cognitivedebt, the accumulation of knowledge and understanding lost due to #rapiddevelopment, becomes a greater threat than #technicaldebt. This debt, residing in developers’ minds, can hinder progress and understanding of software systems. http://margaretstorey.com/blog/2026/02/09/cognitive-debt/?eicker.news #tech #media #news
-
The scientist who predicted AI psychosis has issued another dire warning
https://www.psypost.org/the-scientist-who-predicted-ai-psychosis-has-issued-another-dire-warning/
#tech #technology #psychology #cognitivescience #neuroscience #ai #artificialintelligence #psychiatry #cognitivedebt #academia #colleges #schools #education
-
The scientist who predicted AI psychosis has issued another dire warning
https://www.psypost.org/the-scientist-who-predicted-ai-psychosis-has-issued-another-dire-warning/
#tech #technology #psychology #cognitivescience #neuroscience #ai #artificialintelligence #psychiatry #cognitivedebt #academia #colleges #schools #education
-
Warning signs your PKM isn't ready for advanced AI integration:
• Uncomfortable writing without AI nearby
• Notes starting to sound generic
• Accepting AI suggestions without questioning
• Relying on AI to find connections
• Skipping the thinking process to reach "answers"These signs matter at every level—not just when considering progression. That's why I review my AI use quarterly. Cognitive offloading is an ever-present temptation.
-
Brain on ChatGPT: Accumulation of Cognitive Debt When Using an AI Assistant
https://www.media.mit.edu/publications/your-brain-on-chatgpt/
#HackerNews #BrainOnChatGPT #CognitiveDebt #AIUsage #TechnologyEthics #DigitalMind
-
Brain on ChatGPT: Accumulation of Cognitive Debt When Using an AI Assistant
https://www.media.mit.edu/publications/your-brain-on-chatgpt/
#HackerNews #BrainOnChatGPT #CognitiveDebt #AIUsage #TechnologyEthics #DigitalMind
-
RE: https://mastodon.green/@gerrymcgovern/115650272749921009
One of this article's many great points: Using #GenAI is a "metacognitive mirage".
> When participants used #ChatGPT to draft essays, brain scans revealed [-47%] in neural connectivity across regions associated with memory, language, and critical reasoning. Their brains worked less, but they felt just as engaged
> Students aren’t just learning less; their brains are learning not to learn.#cognitiveDebt #StochasticParrots #MRI #brainDevelopment
#Chatversity replaces learning with cheating.
-
RE: https://mastodon.green/@gerrymcgovern/115650272749921009
One of this article's many great points: Using #GenAI is a "metacognitive mirage".
> When participants used #ChatGPT to draft essays, brain scans revealed [-47%] in neural connectivity across regions associated with memory, language, and critical reasoning. Their brains worked less, but they felt just as engaged
> Students aren’t just learning less; their brains are learning not to learn.#cognitiveDebt #StochasticParrots #MRI #brainDevelopment
#Chatversity replaces learning with cheating.
-
Will AI Bury Future Generations in Cognitive Debt? https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/ai-destroying-traditional-career-automating-learning-by-doing-by-bertrand-badre-and-florian-ingen-housz-2025-10
"As companies seek to automate repetitive tasks in the name of cost-cutting, they should consider the longer-term implications. If we transfer all codified knowledge to machines, we will bequeath to future generations a world where it will be ever harder to learn by doing, to achieve mastery, and thus to aspire to creative freedom.…Emerging markets and developing economies, which are leapfrogging straight to native, widespread #AI adoption, may view things differently. The #cognitiveDebt that we are leaving for younger people in advanced economies may be their opportunity. It will be our duty to pay attention. For now, though, acknowledging that the debt exists, and will grow, is the first step toward addressing it."
#economics -
Will AI Bury Future Generations in Cognitive Debt? https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/ai-destroying-traditional-career-automating-learning-by-doing-by-bertrand-badre-and-florian-ingen-housz-2025-10
"As companies seek to automate repetitive tasks in the name of cost-cutting, they should consider the longer-term implications. If we transfer all codified knowledge to machines, we will bequeath to future generations a world where it will be ever harder to learn by doing, to achieve mastery, and thus to aspire to creative freedom.…Emerging markets and developing economies, which are leapfrogging straight to native, widespread #AI adoption, may view things differently. The #cognitiveDebt that we are leaving for younger people in advanced economies may be their opportunity. It will be our duty to pay attention. For now, though, acknowledging that the debt exists, and will grow, is the first step toward addressing it."
#economics -
Part two of a three part series of the Artefacts newsletter - what does an LLM look like, and how does that help us think about how we use them?
-
Part two of a three part series of the Artefacts newsletter - what does an LLM look like, and how does that help us think about how we use them?