The Development and Maintenance of Thinking Processes and Learning Abilities in the Era of Artificial Intelligence
Abstract
Cognitive abilities of learners are predicted to be impacted by their use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools, although it is premature to determine long-term effects. However, learners’ perceptions remain relevant. The purpose of this study is to assess how learners perceive AI usage impacted their cognitive abilities.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Institutions have shifted toward alternative assessment methods, such as oral exams (viva voce), real-world reflective tasks, scaffolded assignments, reflective journals, Bloom's Taxonomy higher-order thinking questions, and interactive problem-solving tasks, which require direct student engagement and cannot be easily outsourced to AI.
“To achieve this, institutions have shifted toward alternative assessment methods, such as oral exams (viva voce), real-world reflective tasks, scaffolded assignments, reflective journals, use of Bloom's Taxonomy higher-order thinking questions, and interactive problemsolving tasks, which require direct student engagement and cannot be easily outsourced to AI [ 56, 65, 67, 70, 73, 79, 89, 94, 97-99”
From Redefining student assessment in AI-infused learning environments: a systematic review of challenges and strategies for academic integrity (2026) · cites this paper as [98]
Reliance on AI for tasks requiring cognitive engagement results in declining independent reasoning, writing abilities, critical thinking, and analytical skills, making students less prepared for real-world problem-solving.
“The reliance on AI for tasks requiring cognitive engagement results in declining independent reasoning, writing abilities, critical thinking, and analytical skills, making students less prepared for realworld problem-solving scenarios [ 60, 72, 93, 97, 98].”
From Redefining student assessment in AI-infused learning environments: a systematic review of challenges and strategies for academic integrity (2026) · cites this paper as [98]
Cites
Google Effects on Memory: Cognitive Consequences of Having Information at Our Fingertips
Sparrow, B., Liu, J., & Wegner, D. M. (2011) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1207745 · Cited by 1,762 · see citing works
Buçinca, Z., Malaya, M. B., & Gajos, K. Z. (2021) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2102.09692 · Cited by 1,124 · see citing works
Revolutionizing education with AI: Exploring the transformative potential of ChatGPT
Adiguzel, T., Kaya, M. H., & Cansu, F. K. (2023) · Contemporary Educational Technology · doi:10.30935/cedtech/13152 · Cited by 975 · see citing works
Huang, A. Y. Q., Lu, O. H. T., & Yang, S. J. H. (2023) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104684 · Cited by 605 · see citing works
What ChatGPT means for universities: Perceptions of scholars and students
(2023) · Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching · doi:10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.22 · Cited by 431 · see citing works
The influence of AI text generators on critical thinking skills in UK business schools
Essien, A., Bukoye, O. T., O’Dea, X., & Kremantzis, M. (2024) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075079.2024.2316881 · Cited by 252 · see citing works
Moybeka, A. M. S., Syariatin, N., Tatipang, D. P., Mushthoza, D. A., Dewi, N. P. J. L., & Tineh, S. (2023) · Edumaspul - Jurnal Pendidikan · doi:10.33487/edumaspul.v7i2.6669 · Cited by 118 · cited 1× · see citing works
“17 The same results were found in, 4,10,18,19 which similarly investigated the impact that AI has on motivation in students.”
Self-reported cognitive effects of AI applications on learning
Krsmanović, G., & Deek, F. P. (2025) · Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice · doi:10.33423/jhetp.v25i1.7563 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Ncube, P. D. N., Dzvapatsva, G. P., Matobobo, C., & Ranga, M. M. (2026) · AI and Ethics · doi:10.1007/s43681-025-00871-w · Cited by 31 · see citing works
- Authors
- Krsmanovic, G., Deek, R. A., & Deek, F. P.
- Affiliations
- New Jersey Institute of Technology (NJIT), Newark, NJ, USA
- University of Pittsburgh (US)
- New Jersey Institute of Technology (US)
- Venue
- Computer
- Published
- 2025-09
- Volume
- 58
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 80-90
- ISSN
- 0018-9162 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-0814
- OpenAlex
- W4413442567
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 8
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- Computer (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
- Keywords
- artificial intelligence in education, learner perceptions, cognitive ability, thinking process, learning ability, AI tools
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
