Cognitive offload instruction with generative AI: a quasi-experimental study on critical thinking gains in English writing
Open accessAbstract
This study explores the impact of generative AI-enabled cognitive offload instruction on the development of critical thinking skills in English essay writing among first-year university students. A quasi-experimental design was employed, comparing traditional instruction with an AI-augmented pedagogy that delegated lower-order writing tasks to generative AI tools, allowing students to focus on analysis, evaluation, and reflection. Over 12 weeks, 240 participants engaged in structured writing cycles involving AI brainstorming, individual critique, peer-AI co-revision, and reflective journaling. Results revealed that the AI-enabled cognitive offload group demonstrated significantly greater improvements in standardized critical thinking assessments and produced higher-quality essays in terms of logical coherence, evidence use, and originality. Mediation analysis indicated that cognitive offloading behavior partially explained the relationship between AI use and critical thinking gains. The findings suggest that when generative AI is integrated into pedagogy through deliberate scaffolding, it can enhance rather than hinder higher-order thinking. This study highlights the importance of balancing technological efficiency with instructional strategies that promote active engagement, metacognitive reflection, and collaborative learning. It offers practical implications for educators seeking to incorporate AI tools without compromising the development of essential cognitive skills, proposing that structured cognitive offload instruction can serve as an effective approach to fostering critical thinking in second-language writing contexts.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
Iterative AI-mediated revision cycles make the writing process more visible and deliberate-students compare AI-generated alternatives against their own drafts, evaluate competing formulations, and make explicit accept-or-reject decisions that strengthen metacognitive awareness of compositional choices.
“Third, iterative AI-mediated revision cycles make the writing process more visible and deliberate—students compare AI-generated alternatives against their own drafts, evaluate competing formulations, and make explicit accept-or-reject decisions that strengthen metacognitive awareness of compositional choices (Chan et al., 2024; Hong et al., 2025; Nguyen et al., 2024).”
From From tool to scaffold: structured human–AI collaboration and its effects on academic writing and digital critical thinking among Saudi EFL learners (2026) · cites this paper as Hong et al., 2025
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
AI Tools in Society: Impacts on Cognitive Offloading and the Future of Critical Thinking
Gerlich, M. (2025) · Societies · doi:10.3390/soc15010006 · Cited by 1,248 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Gerlich identified a negative correlation between fre - quent, unstructured AI tool usage and critical thinking performance, attributing this decline to excessive delegation of cognitive tasks [21] .”
Collaborating with ChatGPT in argumentative writing classrooms
Su, Y., Lin, Y., & Lai, C. (2023) · Assessing Writing · doi:10.1016/j.asw.2023.100752 · Cited by 679 · see citing works
Facione, P. A. (1990) · PhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation) · Cited by 502 · see citing works
Zou, D., Xie, H., & Wang, F. L. (2022) · Journal of Computing in Higher Education · doi:10.1007/s12528-022-09337-y · Cited by 95 · see citing works
Excessive use of reminders: Metacognition and effort-minimisation in cognitive offloading
Sachdeva, C., & Gilbert, S. J. (2020) · Consciousness and Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.concog.2020.103024 · Cited by 72 · see citing works
Exploring EFL students’ prompt engineering in human–AI story writing: an activity theory perspective
Woo, D. J., Guo, K., & Susanto, H. (2024) · Interactive Learning Environments · doi:10.1080/10494820.2024.2361381 · Cited by 67 · see citing works
Huang, Y., & Zhang, L. J. (2022) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1036831 · Cited by 66 · see citing works
Woo, D. J., Wang, D., Yung, T., & Guo, K. (2025) · British Educational Research Journal · doi:10.1002/berj.70087 · Cited by 52 · see citing works
Learner experience in artificial intelligence-scaffolded argumentation
Kim, M. K., Kim, N. J., & Heidari, A. (2022) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2022.2042792 · Cited by 51 · see citing works
Gupta, A., & Shivers-McNair, A. (2024) · Computers & composition/Computers and composition · doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2024.102882 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
Wang, D., Liu, Y., Jing, X., Liu, Q., & Lu, Q. (2024) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-024-13209-6 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
AI-enhanced collaborative story writing in the EFL classroom
Emerson, N. (2024) · Technology in Language Teaching & Learning · doi:10.29140/tltl.v6n3.1764 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
Sato, T. (2022) · Language Testing in Asia · doi:10.1186/s40468-022-00159-4 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
Lu, R.-S., Lin, H.-C. K., Yang, Y.-C., & Chen, Y.-P. (2024) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su162411304 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
Artificial Intelligence-Augmented Brainstorming: How Humans and Ai Beat Humans AlonePreprint
Bouschery, S. G., Blažević, V., & Piller, F. T. (2024) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4724068 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
Kartika, S. (2024) · LinguaEducare Journal of English and Linguistic Studies · doi:10.63324/h6q1ak58 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Repurposing Text-Generating AI into a Thought-Provoking Writing TutorPreprint
Kim, T. W., & Tan, Q. (2023) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2304.10543 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Generative AI as a Collaborative Companion: Enhancing Peer Feedback in EFL Writing Classes
Wang, X., & Zhang, W. (2024) · Education, research and perspectives · doi:10.70953/erpv51.2412005 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Cultivating and Assessing Critical Thinkers through Second Language Writing
Chu, T. (2020) · Frontiers in Educational Research · doi:10.25236/fer.2020.030911 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 15
- Risko, E.F., Gilbert, S.J., 2016. Cognitive Offloading. Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 20(9), 676-688.
- Yang, K., Raković, M., Liang, Z., et al., 2025. Modi- fying AI, Enhancing Essays: How Active Engagement with Generative AI Boosts Writing Quality. In Pro- ceedings of the 15th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference, Dublin, Ireland, (3-7 March 2025); pp. 568-578.
- Yin, Y., Jiahao, Y., 2024. A Proposed Six-step Human-AI Hybrid Argumentative Writing Frame- work in Higher Education: Enhancing Students' Prompt Engineering Techniques and Critical Thinking Skills. In: O'Dea, X., Ng, D.T.K. (eds.). Effective Practices in AI Literacy Education: Case Studies and Reflections. Emerald Publishing Limited: Leeds, UK. pp. 169-177.
- Fan, Y., Tang, L., Le, H., et al., 2025. Beware of meta- cognitive laziness: Effects of generative artificial intelligence on learning motivation, processes, and performance. British Journal of Educational Tech- nology. 56(2), 489-530.
- Shum, S.B., 2024. Generative AI for Critical Analysis: Practical Tools, Cognitive Offloading and Human Agency. In Joint Proceedings of LAK 2024 Workshops, Tokyo, Japan, (18-22 March 2024); CEUR Workshop Proceedings: Aachen, Germany. pp. 205-213.
- Fan, Y., Tang, L., Le, H., et al., 2025. Beware of meta- cognitive laziness: Effects of generative artificial intelligence on learning motivation, processes, and per- formance. British Journal of Educational Technology. 56(2), 489-530.
- Gerlich, M., 2025. AI Tools in Society: Impacts on Cognitive Offloading and the Future of Critical Thinking. Societies. 15(1), 1-28.
- Yang, K., Raković, M., Liang, Z., et al., 2025. Modifying AI, Enhancing Essays: How Active Enga- gement with Generative AI Boosts Writing Quality. In Proceedings of the 15th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference,Dublin, Ireland, (3-7 March 2025). pp. 568-578.
- Bozkurt, A., Junhong, X., Lambert, S., et al., 2023. Speculative futures on ChatGPT and generative artificial intelligence (AI): A collective reflection from the educational landscape. Asian Journal of Distance Education. 18(1), 53-130.
- Lu, K., Zhu, J., Pang, F., et al., 2025. Understanding the relationship between colleges students' artificial intelligence literacy and higher order thinking skills using the 3P model: The mediating roles of behavioral engagement and peer interaction. Educational tech- nology research and development. 73(2), 693-716.
- Li, R., 2025. Critiquing ChatGPT Compositions: Collaborative Annotation as an Approach to Enhanc- ing Students' Metalinguistic Awareness of AI-Generated Writing. Thresholds in Education. 48(1), 7-24.
- Nguyen, A., Hong, Y., Dang, B., et al., 2024. Human- AI collaboration patterns in AI-assisted academic writing. Studies in Higher Education. 49(5), 847-864.
- Li, J., Huang, J., Wu, W., et al., 2024. Evaluating the role of ChatGPT in enhancing EFL writing as- sessments in classroom settings: A preliminary inve- stigation. Humanities and Social Sciences Communi- cations. 11(1), 1-9.
- Liu, Z.M., Hwang, G.J., Chen, C.Q., et al., 2024. Integrating large language models into EFL writing instruction: effects on performance, self-regulated learning strategies, and motivation. Computer Assi- sted Language Learning. 1-25. DOI: https://doi.org/1 0.1080/09588221.2024.2389923 · DOI · Paper page
- Carr, N., 2020. The Shallows: What the Internet Is Doing to Our Brains (10th anniversary ed.). W. W. Norton & Company: New York, NY, USA.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Alubthane, F. O. (2026) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1863931 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
AI-overdependence and human cognitive decline: Hazards, evidence, and mitigation strategies
Noorbehbahani, F., & Oyibo, K. (2026) · Computers in Human Behavior Reports · doi:10.1016/j.chbr.2026.101102 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Suazo Galdames, I. C., Santiesteban Velázquez, M., Saracostti, M., & Chaple Gil, A. M. (2026) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2026.1878665 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
Alshehri, O. A. O., Lamouchi, A., Abdellatif, M. S., Al-Dosari, M. N. A., Mekheimer, M., & Nemt-allah, M. A. (2026) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1830103 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Sugiarti, D. (2026) · Edukasi Lingua Sastra · doi:10.47637/elsa.v24i1.2634
Alamri, J. M., & Alhalafawy, W. S. (2026) · International Journal of Technology in Education · doi:10.46328/ijte.8779
- Authors
- Hong, H., Vate-U-Lan, P., & Viriyavejakul, C.
- Affiliations
- King Mongkut's Institute of Technology Ladkrabang (TH)
- Corresponding author
- Hong, Hui
- Vate-U-Lan, Poonsri
- Viriyavejakul, Chantana
- Venue
- Forum for Linguistic Studies
- Publisher
- Bilingual Publishing Group
- Published
- 2025-07-15
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 7
- ISSN
- 2705-0602 (ISSN-L)
- 2705-0610
- OpenAlex
- W4412470053
- Cited by
- 30
- References
- 19
- Citations by year
- 2026: 29 · 2025: 1
- FWCI
- 31.45
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Forum for Linguistic Studies (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
- Social Sciences › Education › Education and Critical Thinking Development
- Keywords
- generative AI in education, cognitive offloading, critical thinking, English essay writing, reflective journals, metacognitive reflection, higher-order thinking skills, second language writing, first-year students, scaffolding
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
