Lead

Generative AI chatbots capable of writing emails and computer code, translating, organising a trip or coming up with gift ideas are now readily available, prompting some to ask whether human brainpower could suffer from lack of use. A simple natural-language prompt is usually enough to draw a useful response from a service like ChatGPT or Claude, with the effects making themselves felt in schools and universities, workplaces from offices to courtrooms and in personal lives. Recent scientific studies suggest there could be harmful consequences to farming out cognitive tasks to AI, highlighting memory, decision-making, and critical thinking as particularly at risk.

Coverage Comparison

Both Dawn and the South China Morning Post reported on the potential risks of generative AI with a neutral, informative tone. Their coverage focused on the possibility that over-reliance on AI for cognitive tasks could lead to diminished human abilities. Dawn’s reporting included expert recommendations on how to use AI responsibly, while the South China Morning Post’s account centred on the scientific studies and their findings. Neither outlet used sensational language, and both attributed their information to scientific studies and expert quotes.

Key Claims

  • Generative AI’s capabilities: The chatbots can perform a variety of tasks, such as writing emails and computer code, translating, organising a trip, or coming up with gift ideas, as noted in both reports.
  • Risk to cognitive functions: Studies suggest that using AI tools to solve cognitive tasks can have harmful consequences, particularly to memory, decision-making, and critical thinking.
  • Short-term gains, long-term losses: An American-British study of 1,222 people, still under peer review, found that using AI tools to solve arithmetic or reading comprehension exercises improved participants’ performance in the short term, but in the long run diminished their results and their willingness to keep trying when the tools were unavailable. The authors wrote that “persistence is foundational to skill acquisition and is one of the strongest predictors of long-term learning,” according to the South China Morning Post.
  • Expert advice: Experts recommend using AI in a way that encourages reflection and critical thinking, to mitigate the risk of cognitive offloading. Carnegie Mellon University doctoral student Grace Liu, the main author of the study, said AI “removes learning opportunities” from users, as reported by Dawn. She noted that “what makes AI particularly concerning is that it’s not a tool designated for one specific kind of activity. It’s something that can be used across pretty much any intellectual, reasoning, cognitive activity.”
  • Long-term impact unclear: The long-term impact of generative AI on the human brain remains unclear, due to a lack of large-scale, long-term studies, as highlighted in the South China Morning Post’s coverage.

Perspectives

Researchers and experts: Scientists and academics, such as Grace Liu, express concern that AI tools, by providing easy answers, remove learning opportunities and may undermine persistence and long-term learning. They call for careful use of AI to preserve critical thinking.

Users and broader society: While not a named party, the reports imply a societal reliance on AI across education and workplaces, with unknown consequences for human cognition over time.