CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 65Digital Media and PhilosophyArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationCybernetics and Technology in Society

Potential cognitive risks of generative transformer-based AI chatbots on higher order executive functions.

León-Domínguez, Umberto·2024·Neuropsychology
DOI 10.1037/neu0000948
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Chat generative retrained transformer (ChatGPT) represents a groundbreaking advancement in Artificial Intelligence (AI-chatbot) technology, utilizing transformer algorithms to enhance natural language processing and facilitating their use for addressing specific tasks. These AI chatbots can respond to questions by generating verbal instructions similar to those a person would provide during the problem-solving process. AIM: ChatGPT has become the fastest growing software in terms of user adoption in history, leading to an anticipated widespread use of this technology in the general population. Current literature is predominantly focused on the functional aspects of these technologies, but the field has not yet explored hypotheses on how these AI chatbots could impact the evolutionary aspects of human cognitive development. Thesis: The "neuronal recycling hypothesis" posits that the brain undergoes structural transformation by incorporating new cultural tools into "neural niches," consequently altering individual cognition. In the case of technological tools, it has been established that they reduce the cognitive demand needed to solve tasks through a process called "cognitive offloading." In this theoretical article, three hypotheses were proposed via forward inference about how algorithms such as ChatGPT and similar models may influence the cognitive processes and structures of upcoming generations. CONCLUSIONS: By forecasting the neurocognitive effects of these technologies, educational and political communities can anticipate future scenarios and formulate strategic plans to either mitigate or enhance the cognitive influence that these factors may have on the general population. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/neu0000948

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Still being checked.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
León-Domínguez, U.
Affiliations
University of Monterrey (MX)
Corresponding author
León-Domínguez, Umberto
ORCID
León-Domínguez, Umberto
Venue
Neuropsychology
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
2024-05
Volume
38
Issue
4
Pages
293-308
ISSN
  • 0894-4105 (ISSN-L)
  • 1931-1559
DOI
10.1037/neu0000948
OpenAlex
W4391433987
Cited by
65
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 31 · 2025: 28 · 2024: 6
FWCI
24.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Neuropsychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Digital Media and Philosophy
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Cybernetics and Technology in Society
Keywords
AI chatbots, ChatGPT, generative AI, executive function, cognitive offloading, cognitive development, future generations, human-AI interaction
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Artificial Intelligence, Cognition, Humans, Natural Language Processing, Problem Solving, Executive Function

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review