#cognitiveskills — Public Fediverse posts
Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #cognitiveskills, aggregated by home.social.
-
Brain Teasers and Twisters
Keep your brain working to avoid dementia and old age...
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLM1kyOAO_kDb7_POXB52cAlZ-qTnqCsT0&si=M8CHtqGfaZtOJMyB&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=mastodon
#BrainTeasers #MindTwisters #MentalHealth #CognitiveSkills #DementiaPrevention #AgeWell #StaySharp #HealthyMind #BrainExercises #FunAndLearning -
Brain Teasers and Twisters
Keep your brain working to avoid dementia and old age...
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLM1kyOAO_kDb7_POXB52cAlZ-qTnqCsT0&si=M8CHtqGfaZtOJMyB&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=mastodon
#BrainTeasers #MindTwisters #MentalHealth #CognitiveSkills #DementiaPrevention #AgeWell #StaySharp #HealthyMind #BrainExercises #FunAndLearning -
Brain Teasers and Twisters
Keep your brain working to avoid dementia and old age...
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLM1kyOAO_kDb7_POXB52cAlZ-qTnqCsT0&si=M8CHtqGfaZtOJMyB&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=mastodon
#BrainTeasers #MindTwisters #MentalHealth #CognitiveSkills #DementiaPrevention #AgeWell #StaySharp #HealthyMind #BrainExercises #FunAndLearning -
Brain Teasers and Twisters
Keep your brain working to avoid dementia and old age...
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLM1kyOAO_kDb7_POXB52cAlZ-qTnqCsT0&si=M8CHtqGfaZtOJMyB&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=mastodon
#BrainTeasers #MindTwisters #MentalHealth #CognitiveSkills #DementiaPrevention #AgeWell #StaySharp #HealthyMind #BrainExercises #FunAndLearning -
DATE: July 22, 2026 at 06:00AM
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: Specific cognitive skills rival general intelligence in predicting socioeconomic success
A recent study published in Intelligence Cognitive Abilities suggests that specific mental skills, such as technical knowledge or math and verbal abilities, play a significant role in predicting a person’s future income, education, and career path. The research provides evidence that these specific cognitive abilities are at least a third as important as general intelligence in shaping a person’s social and economic standing. This implies that educational and career guidance programs might benefit from looking beyond overall intelligence scores to help people find paths suited to their unique strengths.
Tobias Edwards, a postdoctoral scholar in behavioral genetics and individual differences at the University of Minnesota, explained the motivation behind the research. “Intelligence is multidimensional,” Edwards said. “There is your overall performance on cognitive ability tests, known as general intelligence, and then there are your relative strengths and weaknesses, known as specific abilities.”
To illustrate this concept, Edwards noted that mental profiles can vary widely among individuals. “For example, someone who generally scores average, but shows strong performance in verbal abilities can be said to have high verbal specific ability, but an average level of general intelligence,” he said. General intelligence represents an individual’s overall capacity to solve problems, reason, and learn.
Psychologists often estimate this underlying capacity using a standardized metric known as an Intelligence Quotient, or IQ score. An IQ score is derived from cognitive tests and serves as a practical measure of a person’s general intelligence. Higher IQ scores consistently predict higher socioeconomic status. Socioeconomic status refers to a person’s class standing, usually measured by a combination of education level, income, and job prestige.
Standard cognitive tests also capture specific abilities, such as how fast someone processes information, their vocabulary, or their mechanical knowledge. Early intelligence research noticed that performance on all cognitive tests tends to be positively correlated. If someone does well on a math test, they tend to do well on a vocabulary test. This phenomenon implies the existence of a general factor of intelligence that influences performance across all mental tasks. However, test scores also capture domain-specific abilities that operate independently of general intelligence.
The authors of the new study argue that past research looking at specific abilities frequently used flawed mathematical methods. These prior studies often relied on calculating the difference between two test scores, such as subtracting a person’s verbal score from their math score. This difference is known as a tilt. The researchers assert that the tilt approach makes it impossible to know which specific ability is actually driving a person’s life outcomes.
The researchers note that the tilt method also fails to properly separate the influence of overall general intelligence from the specific skill being measured. Because of these methodological issues, many experts assumed that specific abilities offered almost no extra predictive power beyond general intelligence. “There is a common perception among intelligence researchers that general intelligence matters a lot more than specific abilities in predicting life outcomes,” Edwards said.
“I wanted to put that view to the test, at least with regard to socioeconomic outcomes: income, occupation, and education,” Edwards said. “I found that, collectively, specific abilities are roughly a third to a half as predictive as general intelligence for predicting these outcomes.” The authors aimed to precisely quantify the importance of specific abilities using more advanced statistical models to understand how cognitive strengths guide occupational choices.
The researchers analyzed data from two large, nationally representative samples in the United States. They used the National Longitudinal Surveys of Youth from the years 1979 and 1997. The 1979 group included 11,914 participants aged 14 to 22 at the start, and the 1997 group included 7,008 participants aged 12 to 16. Both groups completed the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery, a multiple-choice test used by the military to assess mental skills and guide career placement.
This battery includes ten subtests that measure areas like arithmetic reasoning, paragraph comprehension, general science, and knowledge of electronics or auto repair. The researchers adjusted all test scores to account for differences in sex, self-identified ethnicity, and the age at which participants took the test. The scientists then used a statistical technique called factor analysis. This process allowed them to isolate overall general intelligence from three specific abilities, which they labeled as tech, speed, and a combined math-verbal factor.
The tech ability involved practical vocational skills, measured by tests of auto, shop, and electronics knowledge. The speed ability measured how fast individuals completed simple mental tasks, such as translating numbers into letters. The math-verbal factor captured relative performance between mathematical and language-based tests. To track life outcomes, the authors looked at the participants’ highest level of education completed and their self-reported income over many years.
The researchers also calculated the prestige of the participants’ occupations. They assigned each job a socioeconomic index score, which is a weighted average of the typical income and education levels of people working in that occupation. The data included information on family relationships, allowing the authors to identify full siblings. By comparing siblings who grew up in the same household, the researchers could control for the effects of shared family upbringing and parental background.
The scientists found that specific abilities are highly relevant to predicting long-term socioeconomic status. They calculated that specific abilities have between 30 percent and 57 percent of the importance of general intelligence in predicting education, income, and job prestige. These associations remained even when comparing siblings. This suggests that shared family environments do not completely explain the link between specific mental skills and life outcomes.
The influence of these cognitive abilities changed over the lifespan. Before the age of 25, general intelligence had a very small effect on a person’s income, but this effect grew substantially as people aged. The tech ability showed a reversed pattern, predicting positive income during a person’s early twenties before becoming neutral or negative later in life. Despite the shifting effects on income, the tech ability consistently predicted lower educational attainment and lower overall occupational prestige across both generations.
The effects of the tech ability on income also differed by sex. A higher tech ability tended to predict greater income in men, but lower income in women. The effects of the speed and math-verbal abilities were less consistent across the two different generations, showing varying associations with income and education. The math-verbal factor predicted higher education and job prestige in the 1979 group, but it only predicted higher income in the 1997 group.
The study also provided evidence that people group into specific occupations based on their cognitive strengths. The average abilities in different occupations generally aligned with common stereotypes. Mechanics, construction workers, and precision metal workers scored highly in tech ability. Lawyers, judges, and religious workers showed low tech ability.
Professions like engineering, medicine, and computer science were associated with a high level of math-verbal ability. Occupations heavily reliant on administrative tasks, such as secretaries and typists, showed high speed ability. Agricultural workers and cleaners tended to score lower on the speed ability.
The scientists calculated the degree to which occupations cluster around these cognitive abilities. The strongest clustering occurred for general intelligence, meaning jobs are highly sorted by overall brainpower. However, the clustering around specific abilities was also substantial. The clustering of men into specific jobs based on their tech ability was nearly 80 percent as strong as their clustering based on general intelligence.
The causal relationship between specific abilities and socioeconomic outcomes remains uncertain. “Our study could quantify prediction, but it could not determine causation,” Edwards said. “It is unclear to what extent specific abilities influence life outcomes.”
Other factors might explain the associations observed in the data. “An alternative explanation for our findings might be that our interests in youth, or the school subjects we like, could simultaneously affect our specific abilities as well as our careers,” Edwards said. An individual who likes cars might spend time learning about them, scoring higher on the automotive test primarily because of their pre-existing interests.
Another potential limitation is that the tests used heavily featured technical and mechanical questions. These topics are not usually found on standard intelligence assessments. This means the high predictive power of the tech ability might not appear in studies that rely exclusively on traditional cognitive tests. The statistical structure of the specific abilities also changed slightly between the 1979 and 1997 survey groups.
These changes suggest that specific mental categories might shift over time or vary between different formats of a test. Model misspecification could also be a factor, meaning the statistical categories created by the researchers might mix together slightly different underlying mental traits. If the categories are not perfectly accurate, the measured effects might be slightly distorted.
Future research needs to explore the causal links between personal interests, specific mental abilities, and later social status. Understanding exactly how different cognitive profiles interact with the economy could help educators tailor school curricula to develop the most useful skills for students.
The study, “More Than General Intelligence: Cognitive Abilities and Class Structure,” was authored by Tobias Edwards and Colin G DeYoung.
-------------------------------------------------
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 #SpecificAbilities #GeneralIntelligence #CognitiveSkills #SocioeconomicStatus #TechAbility #MathVerbalAbility #EducationPolicy #CareerGuidance #OccupationalClustering #IQandIncome
-
DATE: July 22, 2026 at 06:00AM
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: Specific cognitive skills rival general intelligence in predicting socioeconomic success
A recent study published in Intelligence Cognitive Abilities suggests that specific mental skills, such as technical knowledge or math and verbal abilities, play a significant role in predicting a person’s future income, education, and career path. The research provides evidence that these specific cognitive abilities are at least a third as important as general intelligence in shaping a person’s social and economic standing. This implies that educational and career guidance programs might benefit from looking beyond overall intelligence scores to help people find paths suited to their unique strengths.
Tobias Edwards, a postdoctoral scholar in behavioral genetics and individual differences at the University of Minnesota, explained the motivation behind the research. “Intelligence is multidimensional,” Edwards said. “There is your overall performance on cognitive ability tests, known as general intelligence, and then there are your relative strengths and weaknesses, known as specific abilities.”
To illustrate this concept, Edwards noted that mental profiles can vary widely among individuals. “For example, someone who generally scores average, but shows strong performance in verbal abilities can be said to have high verbal specific ability, but an average level of general intelligence,” he said. General intelligence represents an individual’s overall capacity to solve problems, reason, and learn.
Psychologists often estimate this underlying capacity using a standardized metric known as an Intelligence Quotient, or IQ score. An IQ score is derived from cognitive tests and serves as a practical measure of a person’s general intelligence. Higher IQ scores consistently predict higher socioeconomic status. Socioeconomic status refers to a person’s class standing, usually measured by a combination of education level, income, and job prestige.
Standard cognitive tests also capture specific abilities, such as how fast someone processes information, their vocabulary, or their mechanical knowledge. Early intelligence research noticed that performance on all cognitive tests tends to be positively correlated. If someone does well on a math test, they tend to do well on a vocabulary test. This phenomenon implies the existence of a general factor of intelligence that influences performance across all mental tasks. However, test scores also capture domain-specific abilities that operate independently of general intelligence.
The authors of the new study argue that past research looking at specific abilities frequently used flawed mathematical methods. These prior studies often relied on calculating the difference between two test scores, such as subtracting a person’s verbal score from their math score. This difference is known as a tilt. The researchers assert that the tilt approach makes it impossible to know which specific ability is actually driving a person’s life outcomes.
The researchers note that the tilt method also fails to properly separate the influence of overall general intelligence from the specific skill being measured. Because of these methodological issues, many experts assumed that specific abilities offered almost no extra predictive power beyond general intelligence. “There is a common perception among intelligence researchers that general intelligence matters a lot more than specific abilities in predicting life outcomes,” Edwards said.
“I wanted to put that view to the test, at least with regard to socioeconomic outcomes: income, occupation, and education,” Edwards said. “I found that, collectively, specific abilities are roughly a third to a half as predictive as general intelligence for predicting these outcomes.” The authors aimed to precisely quantify the importance of specific abilities using more advanced statistical models to understand how cognitive strengths guide occupational choices.
The researchers analyzed data from two large, nationally representative samples in the United States. They used the National Longitudinal Surveys of Youth from the years 1979 and 1997. The 1979 group included 11,914 participants aged 14 to 22 at the start, and the 1997 group included 7,008 participants aged 12 to 16. Both groups completed the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery, a multiple-choice test used by the military to assess mental skills and guide career placement.
This battery includes ten subtests that measure areas like arithmetic reasoning, paragraph comprehension, general science, and knowledge of electronics or auto repair. The researchers adjusted all test scores to account for differences in sex, self-identified ethnicity, and the age at which participants took the test. The scientists then used a statistical technique called factor analysis. This process allowed them to isolate overall general intelligence from three specific abilities, which they labeled as tech, speed, and a combined math-verbal factor.
The tech ability involved practical vocational skills, measured by tests of auto, shop, and electronics knowledge. The speed ability measured how fast individuals completed simple mental tasks, such as translating numbers into letters. The math-verbal factor captured relative performance between mathematical and language-based tests. To track life outcomes, the authors looked at the participants’ highest level of education completed and their self-reported income over many years.
The researchers also calculated the prestige of the participants’ occupations. They assigned each job a socioeconomic index score, which is a weighted average of the typical income and education levels of people working in that occupation. The data included information on family relationships, allowing the authors to identify full siblings. By comparing siblings who grew up in the same household, the researchers could control for the effects of shared family upbringing and parental background.
The scientists found that specific abilities are highly relevant to predicting long-term socioeconomic status. They calculated that specific abilities have between 30 percent and 57 percent of the importance of general intelligence in predicting education, income, and job prestige. These associations remained even when comparing siblings. This suggests that shared family environments do not completely explain the link between specific mental skills and life outcomes.
The influence of these cognitive abilities changed over the lifespan. Before the age of 25, general intelligence had a very small effect on a person’s income, but this effect grew substantially as people aged. The tech ability showed a reversed pattern, predicting positive income during a person’s early twenties before becoming neutral or negative later in life. Despite the shifting effects on income, the tech ability consistently predicted lower educational attainment and lower overall occupational prestige across both generations.
The effects of the tech ability on income also differed by sex. A higher tech ability tended to predict greater income in men, but lower income in women. The effects of the speed and math-verbal abilities were less consistent across the two different generations, showing varying associations with income and education. The math-verbal factor predicted higher education and job prestige in the 1979 group, but it only predicted higher income in the 1997 group.
The study also provided evidence that people group into specific occupations based on their cognitive strengths. The average abilities in different occupations generally aligned with common stereotypes. Mechanics, construction workers, and precision metal workers scored highly in tech ability. Lawyers, judges, and religious workers showed low tech ability.
Professions like engineering, medicine, and computer science were associated with a high level of math-verbal ability. Occupations heavily reliant on administrative tasks, such as secretaries and typists, showed high speed ability. Agricultural workers and cleaners tended to score lower on the speed ability.
The scientists calculated the degree to which occupations cluster around these cognitive abilities. The strongest clustering occurred for general intelligence, meaning jobs are highly sorted by overall brainpower. However, the clustering around specific abilities was also substantial. The clustering of men into specific jobs based on their tech ability was nearly 80 percent as strong as their clustering based on general intelligence.
The causal relationship between specific abilities and socioeconomic outcomes remains uncertain. “Our study could quantify prediction, but it could not determine causation,” Edwards said. “It is unclear to what extent specific abilities influence life outcomes.”
Other factors might explain the associations observed in the data. “An alternative explanation for our findings might be that our interests in youth, or the school subjects we like, could simultaneously affect our specific abilities as well as our careers,” Edwards said. An individual who likes cars might spend time learning about them, scoring higher on the automotive test primarily because of their pre-existing interests.
Another potential limitation is that the tests used heavily featured technical and mechanical questions. These topics are not usually found on standard intelligence assessments. This means the high predictive power of the tech ability might not appear in studies that rely exclusively on traditional cognitive tests. The statistical structure of the specific abilities also changed slightly between the 1979 and 1997 survey groups.
These changes suggest that specific mental categories might shift over time or vary between different formats of a test. Model misspecification could also be a factor, meaning the statistical categories created by the researchers might mix together slightly different underlying mental traits. If the categories are not perfectly accurate, the measured effects might be slightly distorted.
Future research needs to explore the causal links between personal interests, specific mental abilities, and later social status. Understanding exactly how different cognitive profiles interact with the economy could help educators tailor school curricula to develop the most useful skills for students.
The study, “More Than General Intelligence: Cognitive Abilities and Class Structure,” was authored by Tobias Edwards and Colin G DeYoung.
-------------------------------------------------
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 #SpecificAbilities #GeneralIntelligence #CognitiveSkills #SocioeconomicStatus #TechAbility #MathVerbalAbility #EducationPolicy #CareerGuidance #OccupationalClustering #IQandIncome
-
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
-
Brain Teasers and Twisters
Keep your brain working to avoid dementia and old age...
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLM1kyOAO_kDb7_POXB52cAlZ-qTnqCsT0&si=M8CHtqGfaZtOJMyB&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=mastodon
#BrainTeasers #MindTwisters #MentalHealth #CognitiveSkills #DementiaPrevention #AgeWell #StaySharp #HealthyMind #BrainExercises #FunAndLearning -
Brain Teasers and Twisters
Keep your brain working to avoid dementia and old age...
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLM1kyOAO_kDb7_POXB52cAlZ-qTnqCsT0&si=M8CHtqGfaZtOJMyB&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=mastodon
#BrainTeasers #MindTwisters #MentalHealth #CognitiveSkills #DementiaPrevention #AgeWell #StaySharp #HealthyMind #BrainExercises #FunAndLearning -
Brain Teasers and Twisters
Keep your brain working to avoid dementia and old age...
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLM1kyOAO_kDb7_POXB52cAlZ-qTnqCsT0&si=M8CHtqGfaZtOJMyB&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=mastodon
#BrainTeasers #MindTwisters #MentalHealth #CognitiveSkills #DementiaPrevention #AgeWell #StaySharp #HealthyMind #BrainExercises #FunAndLearning -
Brain Teasers and Twisters
Keep your brain working to avoid dementia and old age...
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLM1kyOAO_kDb7_POXB52cAlZ-qTnqCsT0&si=M8CHtqGfaZtOJMyB&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=mastodon
#BrainTeasers #MindTwisters #MentalHealth #CognitiveSkills #DementiaPrevention #AgeWell #StaySharp #HealthyMind #BrainExercises #FunAndLearning -
Brain Teasers and Twisters
Keep your brain working to avoid dementia and old age...
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLM1kyOAO_kDb7_POXB52cAlZ-qTnqCsT0&si=M8CHtqGfaZtOJMyB&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=mastodon
#BrainTeasers #MindTwisters #MentalHealth #CognitiveSkills #DementiaPrevention #AgeWell #StaySharp #HealthyMind #BrainExercises #FunAndLearning -
Brain Teasers and Twisters
Keep your brain working to avoid dementia and old age...
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLM1kyOAO_kDb7_POXB52cAlZ-qTnqCsT0&si=M8CHtqGfaZtOJMyB&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=mastodon
#BrainTeasers #MindTwisters #MentalHealth #CognitiveSkills #DementiaPrevention #AgeWell #StaySharp #HealthyMind #BrainExercises #FunAndLearning -
Difficulty Counting Backwards May Signal Neurodivergence
Is your child having trouble counting backwards? This difficulty by age 6-7 could be an early sign of neurodivergence, specialists suggest. Learn more.
#Neurodivergence, #ChildDevelopment, #EarlySigns, #CognitiveSkills, #Pediatrics
https://newsletter.tf/child-struggles-counting-backwards-neurodivergence-signs/
-
Some specialists are now looking at a child's ability to count backwards as a potential early sign of neurodivergent conditions. This is a new focus beyond just math skills.
#Neurodivergence, #ChildDevelopment, #EarlySigns, #CognitiveSkills, #Pediatrics
https://newsletter.tf/child-struggles-counting-backwards-neurodivergence-signs/ -
Brain Teasers and Twisters
Keep your brain working to avoid dementia and old age...
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLM1kyOAO_kDb7_POXB52cAlZ-qTnqCsT0&si=M8CHtqGfaZtOJMyB&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=mastodon
#BrainTeasers #MindTwisters #MentalHealth #CognitiveSkills #DementiaPrevention #AgeWell #StaySharp #HealthyMind #BrainExercises #FunAndLearning -
Brain Teasers and Twisters
Keep your brain working to avoid dementia and old age...
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLM1kyOAO_kDb7_POXB52cAlZ-qTnqCsT0&si=M8CHtqGfaZtOJMyB&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=mastodon
#BrainTeasers #MindTwisters #MentalHealth #CognitiveSkills #DementiaPrevention #AgeWell #StaySharp #HealthyMind #BrainExercises #FunAndLearning -
Intelligence as a Utility: The Specter of Cognitive Erosion
Does using AI make people think less critically? A new study shows a link between relying on AI and reduced critical thinking for workers and students.
#AICriticalThinking, #FutureOfWork, #AIandLearning, #CognitiveSkills, #TechImpact
https://newsletter.tf/ai-use-reduces-human-critical-thinking-skills/
-
Microsoft found that workers using AI tools for tasks showed less critical thinking than those who didn't. This means AI might be making us less sharp.
#AICriticalThinking, #FutureOfWork, #AIandLearning, #CognitiveSkills, #TechImpact
https://newsletter.tf/ai-use-reduces-human-critical-thinking-skills/ -
Brain Teasers and Twisters
Keep your brain working to avoid dementia and old age...
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLM1kyOAO_kDb7_POXB52cAlZ-qTnqCsT0&si=M8CHtqGfaZtOJMyB&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=mastodon
#BrainTeasers #MindTwisters #MentalHealth #CognitiveSkills #DementiaPrevention #AgeWell #StaySharp #HealthyMind #BrainExercises #FunAndLearning -
Brain Teasers and Twisters
Keep your brain working to avoid dementia and old age...
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLM1kyOAO_kDb7_POXB52cAlZ-qTnqCsT0&si=M8CHtqGfaZtOJMyB&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=mastodon
#BrainTeasers #MindTwisters #MentalHealth #CognitiveSkills #DementiaPrevention #AgeWell #StaySharp #HealthyMind #BrainExercises #FunAndLearning -
Brain Teasers and Twisters
Keep your brain working to avoid dementia and old age...
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLM1kyOAO_kDb7_POXB52cAlZ-qTnqCsT0&si=M8CHtqGfaZtOJMyB&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=mastodon
#BrainTeasers #MindTwisters #MentalHealth #CognitiveSkills #DementiaPrevention #AgeWell #StaySharp #HealthyMind #BrainExercises #FunAndLearning -
Brain Teasers and Twisters
Keep your brain working to avoid dementia and old age...
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLM1kyOAO_kDb7_POXB52cAlZ-qTnqCsT0&si=M8CHtqGfaZtOJMyB&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=mastodon
#BrainTeasers #MindTwisters #MentalHealth #CognitiveSkills #DementiaPrevention #AgeWell #StaySharp #HealthyMind #BrainExercises #FunAndLearning -
Brain Teasers and Twisters
Keep your brain working to avoid dementia and old age...
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLM1kyOAO_kDb7_POXB52cAlZ-qTnqCsT0&si=M8CHtqGfaZtOJMyB&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=mastodon
#BrainTeasers #MindTwisters #MentalHealth #CognitiveSkills #DementiaPrevention #AgeWell #StaySharp #HealthyMind #BrainExercises #FunAndLearning -
Brain Teasers and Twisters
Keep your brain working to avoid dementia and old age...
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLM1kyOAO_kDb7_POXB52cAlZ-qTnqCsT0&si=M8CHtqGfaZtOJMyB&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=mastodon
#BrainTeasers #MindTwisters #MentalHealth #CognitiveSkills #DementiaPrevention #AgeWell #StaySharp #HealthyMind #BrainExercises #FunAndLearning -
Brain Teasers and Twisters
Keep your brain working to avoid dementia and old age...
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLM1kyOAO_kDb7_POXB52cAlZ-qTnqCsT0&si=M8CHtqGfaZtOJMyB&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=mastodon
#BrainTeasers #MindTwisters #MentalHealth #CognitiveSkills #DementiaPrevention #AgeWell #StaySharp #HealthyMind #BrainExercises #FunAndLearning -
Brain Teasers and Twisters
Keep your brain working to avoid dementia and old age...
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLM1kyOAO_kDb7_POXB52cAlZ-qTnqCsT0&si=M8CHtqGfaZtOJMyB&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=mastodon
#BrainTeasers #MindTwisters #MentalHealth #CognitiveSkills #DementiaPrevention #AgeWell #StaySharp #HealthyMind #BrainExercises #FunAndLearning -
Brain Teasers and Twisters
Keep your brain working to avoid dementia and old age...
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLM1kyOAO_kDb7_POXB52cAlZ-qTnqCsT0&si=M8CHtqGfaZtOJMyB&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=mastodon
#BrainTeasers #MindTwisters #MentalHealth #CognitiveSkills #DementiaPrevention #AgeWell #StaySharp #HealthyMind #BrainExercises #FunAndLearning -
Brain Teasers and Twisters
Keep your brain working to avoid dementia and old age...
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLM1kyOAO_kDb7_POXB52cAlZ-qTnqCsT0&si=M8CHtqGfaZtOJMyB&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=mastodon
#BrainTeasers #MindTwisters #MentalHealth #CognitiveSkills #DementiaPrevention #AgeWell #StaySharp #HealthyMind #BrainExercises #FunAndLearning -
Ingenium, Ars, Sollertia – the Latin triad behind Grandomastery's philosophy. Raw creativity without craft is chaos. Technique without imagination is sterile. Resourcefulness without either is mere cleverness. True mastery emerges where all three converge – not as separate skills but as a continuous cognitive loop. Modern education fragments this unity, isolating talent from discipline, adaptability from depth.
https://grandomastery.com
#grandomastery #cognitiveskills #creativitytraining -
Memory Training Courses: Boost Recall for Students & Professionals
#Newsupturn #EduQuik #MemoryTraining #MemoryBoostingCourse #FocusAndRecall #LearningMadeEasy #NeuroscienceBasedLearning #StudySmart #MindTraining #MemoryTechniques #BrainPower #StudentSuccess #ProfessionalGrowth #ExamPreparation #CA #CS #CMA #UPSC #PCS #SkillDevelopment #OnlineLearning #SelfPacedCourse #Workshops #LifelongLearning #Mindfulness #CognitiveSkills
https://newsupturn.com/practical-memory-training-neuroscience-meets-learning/
-
Memory Training Courses: Boost Recall for Students & Professionals
#TycoonWorld #EduQuik #MemoryTraining #MemoryBoostingCourse #FocusAndRecall #LearningMadeEasy #NeuroscienceBasedLearning #StudySmart #MindTraining #MemoryTechniques #BrainPower #StudentSuccess #ProfessionalGrowth #ExamPreparation #CA #CS #CMA #UPSC #PCS #SkillDevelopment #OnlineLearning #SelfPacedCourse #Workshops #LifelongLearning #Mindfulness #CognitiveSkills #LearningEfficiency
https://tycoonworld.in/memory-training-courses-boost-recall-for-students-professionals/
-
The Effect of Teachers’ #CognitiveSkills on Students' Educational Achievements https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:boi:wpaper:2025.04&r=&r=neu
"… teachers' cognitive abilities—mainly those measured by #math matriculation scores—have clear and positive effects on both students' short-term matriculation test scores and several long-term measures of academic success, such as the probability of pursuing post-secondary studies at a research university and the probability of choosing a #STEM major subject. Additionally, teachers with higher cognitive abilities are shown to lead to higher gains, particularly among students with stronger aptitude and same-gender student-teacher matching. … These findings suggest that the benefits of having cognitively skilled teachers extend well beyond high school, indicating that teacher influence emerges not only from direct "active" teacher effects but also through implicit behaviors that enhance students' willingness to pursue post-secondary studies in the same fields. "
#LaborEcon -
The Effect of Teachers’ #CognitiveSkills on Students' Educational Achievements https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:boi:wpaper:2025.04&r=&r=neu
"… teachers' cognitive abilities—mainly those measured by #math matriculation scores—have clear and positive effects on both students' short-term matriculation test scores and several long-term measures of academic success, such as the probability of pursuing post-secondary studies at a research university and the probability of choosing a #STEM major subject. Additionally, teachers with higher cognitive abilities are shown to lead to higher gains, particularly among students with stronger aptitude and same-gender student-teacher matching. … These findings suggest that the benefits of having cognitively skilled teachers extend well beyond high school, indicating that teacher influence emerges not only from direct "active" teacher effects but also through implicit behaviors that enhance students' willingness to pursue post-secondary studies in the same fields. "
#LaborEcon -
How do you balance the benefits of AI with the need to protect your own cognitive abilities? I'm exploring this in my latest post. Let's discuss! #AI #DigitalErosion #CognitiveSkills
-
#EarlyChildhood education guidelines often prioritize #CognitiveSkills and personal effort, while #SocialSkills and structural factors like socio-economic background receive little attention: http://go.tum.de/106114
📷 iStock/ ASphotowed
-
#EarlyChildhood education guidelines often prioritize #CognitiveSkills and personal effort, while #SocialSkills and structural factors like socio-economic background receive little attention: http://go.tum.de/106114
📷 iStock/ ASphotowed
-
N-Back – A Minimal, Adaptive Dual N-Back Game for Brain Training
#HackerNews #NBack #BrainTraining #CognitiveSkills #GameDevelopment #AdaptiveLearning
-
N-Back – A Minimal, Adaptive Dual N-Back Game for Brain Training
#HackerNews #NBack #BrainTraining #CognitiveSkills #GameDevelopment #AdaptiveLearning
-
The phenomenon is frightening but this is such a great description: “laundering power through a trusted image”. 😐
I don’t know how (don’t have answers), but we’re all going to have to get on top of this & work out ways to deal with it across all levels of our societies.
#propaganda #CognitiveSkills #USPol #USMilitary #generativeAI #BadAI #education #PublicHealth #ReconnectingConsequencesToCauses
-
The phenomenon is frightening but this is such a great description: “laundering power through a trusted image”. 😐
I don’t know how (don’t have answers), but we’re all going to have to get on top of this & work out ways to deal with it across all levels of our societies.
#propaganda #CognitiveSkills #USPol #USMilitary #generativeAI #BadAI #education #PublicHealth #ReconnectingConsequencesToCauses
-
An insightful MIT study sheds light on potential concerns regarding large language models (LLMs), such as ChatGPT, and their impact on critical thinking. The research, which involved SAT essay writing, revealed that users of ChatGPT exhibited lower brain engagement and memory integration compared to those who used Google Search or no tools.
This study raises a crucial discussion point for educators and professionals alike: how can we leverage the power of AI to enhance learning without compromising essential cognitive skills? It’s imperative to explore balanced approaches to integrating technology into education and development.
I’d love to hear your thoughts on the implications of this study. Let’s discuss how we can ensure that AI truly augments, rather than diminishes, our intellectual capabilities.
🧠 MIT study on ChatGPT’s impact
📉 Lower neural engagement observed
💡 Balancing AI and critical thinking
📚 Shaping the future of education
https://time.com/7295195/ai-chatgpt-google-learning-school/#AIinEducation #ChatGPT #LifelongLearning #CognitiveSkills #FutureofWork
-
An insightful MIT study sheds light on potential concerns regarding large language models (LLMs), such as ChatGPT, and their impact on critical thinking. The research, which involved SAT essay writing, revealed that users of ChatGPT exhibited lower brain engagement and memory integration compared to those who used Google Search or no tools.
This study raises a crucial discussion point for educators and professionals alike: how can we leverage the power of AI to enhance learning without compromising essential cognitive skills? It’s imperative to explore balanced approaches to integrating technology into education and development.
I’d love to hear your thoughts on the implications of this study. Let’s discuss how we can ensure that AI truly augments, rather than diminishes, our intellectual capabilities.
🧠 MIT study on ChatGPT’s impact
📉 Lower neural engagement observed
💡 Balancing AI and critical thinking
📚 Shaping the future of education
https://time.com/7295195/ai-chatgpt-google-learning-school/#AIinEducation #ChatGPT #LifelongLearning #CognitiveSkills #FutureofWork
-
German economists 🇩🇪 in @scienceadvances debunk the myth: cognitive decline isn't inevitable – it depends on how often you use your skills!
📄 https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.ads1560
If you actively engage, your literacy & numeracy improve even after 40. 📈But if you’ve been outsourcing your thinking… well, let’s just say your brain follows the same curve as your ghostwritten papers. 😏
-
German economists 🇩🇪 in @scienceadvances debunk the myth: cognitive decline isn't inevitable – it depends on how often you use your skills!
📄 https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.ads1560
If you actively engage, your literacy & numeracy improve even after 40. 📈But if you’ve been outsourcing your thinking… well, let’s just say your brain follows the same curve as your ghostwritten papers. 😏
-
🔍 Apparently, the secret to maintaining cognitive skills is to spend eternity wrestling with #JavaScript and cookie settings. 🧠🍪 Who knew the real challenge was not losing your mind before the page loads? 🤯💻
https://www.science.org/doi/full/10.1126/sciadv.ads1560?af=R #cognitiveSkills #cookieSettings #webDevelopment #mindChallenge #HackerNews #ngated -
🔍 Apparently, the secret to maintaining cognitive skills is to spend eternity wrestling with #JavaScript and cookie settings. 🧠🍪 Who knew the real challenge was not losing your mind before the page loads? 🤯💻
https://www.science.org/doi/full/10.1126/sciadv.ads1560?af=R #cognitiveSkills #cookieSettings #webDevelopment #mindChallenge #HackerNews #ngated -
"Using AI as a tool to augment human abilities, rather than replace them, is the solution. Enabling that solution is a function of collaboration, communication and connection - three things that capitalize on human cognitive abilities.
For leaders and aspiring leaders, we have to create cultures and opportunities for higher-level thinking skills. The key to working more effectively with AI is in first understanding how to work independently of AI, according to the National Institute of Health. Researchers at Stanford point to the importance of explanations: where AI shares not just outputs, but insights. Insights into how the ultimate conclusion was reached, described in simple terms that invite further inquiry (and independent thinking).
Whether through collaborative learning, complex problem-solving, or creative thinking exercises, the goal should be to create spaces where human intelligence remains at the center. Does that responsibility fall on learning and development (L&D), or HR, or marketing, sales, engineering... or the executive team? The answer is: yes. A dedication to the human operating system remains vital for even the most technologically-advanced organizations. AI should serve as a complement to, rather than a substitute for, human cognitive skills."
#AI #GenerativeAI #Productivity #CriticalThinking #CognitiveSkills
-
"Using AI as a tool to augment human abilities, rather than replace them, is the solution. Enabling that solution is a function of collaboration, communication and connection - three things that capitalize on human cognitive abilities.
For leaders and aspiring leaders, we have to create cultures and opportunities for higher-level thinking skills. The key to working more effectively with AI is in first understanding how to work independently of AI, according to the National Institute of Health. Researchers at Stanford point to the importance of explanations: where AI shares not just outputs, but insights. Insights into how the ultimate conclusion was reached, described in simple terms that invite further inquiry (and independent thinking).
Whether through collaborative learning, complex problem-solving, or creative thinking exercises, the goal should be to create spaces where human intelligence remains at the center. Does that responsibility fall on learning and development (L&D), or HR, or marketing, sales, engineering... or the executive team? The answer is: yes. A dedication to the human operating system remains vital for even the most technologically-advanced organizations. AI should serve as a complement to, rather than a substitute for, human cognitive skills."
#AI #GenerativeAI #Productivity #CriticalThinking #CognitiveSkills
-
#TheMetalDogArticleList
#MetalSucks
Research Suggests Listening to Metal While Studying Makes You Dumberer
Put down the Sanguisugabogg and get back to summer school. The post Research Suggests Listening to Metal While Studying Makes You Dumberer appeared first on MetalSucks.#MetalMusic
#Education
#Intelligence
#Studying
#Research
#Correlation
#MusicGenre
#CognitiveSkills -
#TheMetalDogArticleList
#MetalSucks
Research Suggests Listening to Metal While Studying Makes You Dumberer
Put down the Sanguisugabogg and get back to summer school. The post Research Suggests Listening to Metal While Studying Makes You Dumberer appeared first on MetalSucks.#MetalMusic
#Education
#Intelligence
#Studying
#Research
#Correlation
#MusicGenre
#CognitiveSkills -
What dimensions of education matter for people’s chances of surviving young adulthood—cognitive skills, noncognitive skills, course-taking patterns, school social contexts?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33094163
@uncpopcenter #NICHDImpact #Adulthood #CognitiveSkills #Education #Learning #Mortality #Adolescence
-
Cognitive flexibility can make you adaptable to changing world. New research shows how brain learns new things 👇🧠💡
