CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 165Artificial Intelligence in EducationEducation and Critical Thinking DevelopmentEducational Assessment and Pedagogy

Generative AI’s Impact on Critical Thinking: Revisiting Bloom’s Taxonomy

Open access
Gonsalves, Chahna·2026·Journal of Marketing Education
DOI 10.1177/02734753241305980
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The integration of generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools like ChatGPT in education has raised concerns that students may become dependent on AI-generated solutions, potentially stifling the development of critical thinking skills. Compounding this issue is the fact that Bloom’s Taxonomy—the widely used framework for designing educational goals—fails to address the cognitive demands of AI-assisted learning. This exploratory study presents a revised framework that incorporates AI-specific competencies, offering a more relevant model for nurturing critical thinking in an AI-driven environment. Using a conceptual approach supported by empirical evidence from MSc Marketing students’ interactions with AI tools over 4 weeks, the study found that AI can both enhance and challenge critical thinking across cognitive, affective, and metacognitive domains. Key elements such as melioration, ethical reasoning, collaboration, and reflective thinking were identified as critical for developing deeper engagement with AI-generated content. The framework proposes 12 propositions that inform future research and pedagogical strategies. This study outlines a research agenda for examining AI’s impact on cognitive development, serving as a resource for educators, policymakers, and researchers seeking to adapt teaching methods for AI-assisted education.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/02734753241305980

Cites

56 of 56 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • Gonsalves found that students moved fluidly across cognitive, affective, and metacognitive domains and identified 12 AI-specific competencies underpinning a revised Bloom's taxonomy.

    “Gonsalves [80] found that students moved fluidly across cognitive, affective, and metacognitive domains and identified 12 AI-specific competencies (e.g., melioration, ethical reasoning) underpinning a revised Bloom's taxonomy.”

    From A Systematic Literature Review on the Pedagogical Implications and Impact of GenAI on Students' Critical Thinking (2026) · cites this paper as [80]

  • Key moderating factors were identified, including proper instructional design.

    “Key moderating factors were identified, including proper instructional design, where integration of AI in education necessitates a revised framework that incorporates AIspecific competencies to effectively nurture CT [80].”

    From A Systematic Literature Review on the Pedagogical Implications and Impact of GenAI on Students' Critical Thinking (2026) · cites this paper as [80]

  • Overreliance on GenAI tools can lead to cognitive dependency, diminishing students' ability to formulate original arguments, critically assess alternative perspectives and decision-making processes.

    “Overreliance on GenAI tools can lead to cognitive dependency, diminishing students' ability to formulate original arguments, critically assess alternative perspectives and decision-making processes [33,80,100].”

    From A Systematic Literature Review on the Pedagogical Implications and Impact of GenAI on Students' Critical Thinking (2026) · cites this paper as [80]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Gonsalves, C.
Affiliations
King's College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Gonsalves, Chahna
ORCID
Gonsalves, Chahna
Venue
Journal of Marketing Education
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2024-12-23
Volume
48
Issue
1
Pages
4-19
ISSN
  • 0273-4753 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-6550
DOI
10.1177/02734753241305980
OpenAlex
W4405726304
Cited by
161
References
56
Citations by year
2026: 96 · 2025: 65
FWCI
60.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Marketing Education (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nd)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
  • Social Sciences › Education › Education and Critical Thinking Development
  • Social Sciences › Education › Educational Assessment and Pedagogy
Keywords
generative AI in education, ChatGPT, critical thinking, Bloom's taxonomy, AI-assisted learning, metacognition, melioration, moral reasoning, cooperative learning, reflective thinking, marketing education, AI dependency, cognitive development

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