CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 59Digital Mental Health InterventionsEthics and Social Impacts of AIInnovative Human-Technology Interaction

Cognitive offloading or cognitive overload? How AI alters the mental architecture of coping

Open access
Chirayath, Ginto, Premamalini, K., Joseph, Jeena·2025·Frontiers in Psychology
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1699320PMC PMC12678390
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) has moved from being a specialized technological tool to an intimate presence in everyday life. Smart assistants organize our schedules, predictive systems anticipate our needs, and therapeutic chatbots promise to listen when no human is available (Zhang & Wang, 2024). The diffusion of AI into mental health care is often framed in highly optimistic terms: technologies that reduce stigma, democratize access, and provide affordable, always-on support (M & N, 2025;Sivasubramanian Balasubramanian, 2023). From meditation applications and emotion-tracking wearables to conversational agents offering cognitive-behavioral interventions, AI is marketed as an efficient and reliable partner in the pursuit of wellbeing (Balcombe, 2023).Beneath this enthusiasm lies a paradox. On one hand, AI enables cognitive offloading: the use of external aids to reduce mental effort and conserve resources for more meaningful activities (Grinschgl & Neubauer, 2022;Risko & Gilbert, 2016). This process can support adaptive coping, helping individuals regulate stress and sustain mental health. On the other hand, the same tools may create cognitive overload: an erosion of introspection, over-reliance on algorithmic feedback, and anxiety induced by hyper-monitoring and optimization (Grinschgl et al., 2021;Skulmowski, 2023). The question is not whether AI is good or bad for mental health but how it is reshaping the very architecture of coping (Gerlich, 2025). This article examines the psychology of this paradox. First, it places copings in mainstream psychological theory. Then it considers the promise of AI to lighten burdens through cognitive offloading. Next, it considers the risks of cognitive overload and theoretical insights that illuminate this conflict. Through practical illustrations, it demonstrates the double-sidedness of AI as copings partner on the one hand, yet destabilizer on the other. Finally, it identifies principles for design, clinical responses, and policy interventions required to ensure that AI complements, not undermines, human resilience.Coping is not a static trait but a dynamic process shaped by situational demands, personal resources, and social contexts (Depoorter et al., 2025). Historically, coping has always been supported by external aids. Religious rituals, cultural practices, and communal gatherings provided frameworks for resilience (Butler et al., 2025;Whitehead & Bergeman, 2020). Personal tools such as diaries, letters, or calendars extended introspection and memory, allowing individuals to regulate emotions and track personal growth.AI represents a profound shift in this lineage. Unlike static tools or human communities, AI systems are adaptive, predictive, and personalized. They do not merely offer neutral support; they actively reshape the environment in which coping occurs (Shi, 2025). A diary records what one chooses to write; a mood-tracking app interprets and quantifies feelings, often presenting its interpretation as more authoritative than subjective experience (Brandsema, 2023;L. Yang & Zhao, 2024). This transformation raises new questions. How does the delegation of introspection to machines affect selfawareness? Does reliance on algorithmic recommendations weaken intrinsic coping mechanisms? And can AI be designed to scaffold rather than substitute the human capacity for resilience?Cognitive offloading is a well-established phenomenon in cognitive science. It refers to the delegation of cognitive tasks to external resources in order to reduce mental demand. People use notebooks, calculators, and smartphones to extend memory and problem-solving capacities. AI magnifies this process dramatically, providing not only storage but active analysis and prediction (León-Domínguez, 2024). AI in Mental Health Tracking: Mental health applications now integrate biometric sensors and self-reporting tools to track sleep, exercise, and mood. By aggregating data and presenting trends, these apps reduce the burden of self-monitoring (Bakker & Rickard, 2018). Instead of recalling fluctuations over weeks, users can visualize emotional patterns instantly. Such tools facilitate problem-focused coping, allowing individuals to identify triggers, monitor progress, and adjust behaviors accordingly (Blease & Torous, 2023;Lopes et al., 2024). Therapeutic Chatbots: AI-driven conversational agents, such as Woebot and Wysa, deliver micro-interventions based on cognitive-behavioral therapy. They can prompt reappraisal, encourage behavioral activation, and provide coping strategies in real time (Beatty et al., 2022).For individuals facing barriers to traditional therapy-such as cost, stigma, or geographic isolation-these tools lower thresholds to care. They exemplify emotion-focused coping, offering comfort and strategies at the moment they are needed (Coghlan et al., 2023;Inkster et al., 2018). Guided Reflection: AI-guided meditation programs and journaling assistants scaffold introspection. By

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1699320

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Using automated systems is an adaptive coping approach to manage academic stress and maintain student well-being.

    “Using automated systems is an adaptive coping approach to manage academic stress and maintain student well-being ( Chirayath, Premamalini , & Joseph , Cognitive offloading or cognitive overload?How AI alters the mental architecture of coping, 2025)”

    From The Double-Edged Sword of Automation: Impact of Generative AI Adoption on Student's Critical Thinking Skills in Higher Education Considering Cognitive Offloading as a Mediator (2026) · cites this paper as Chirayath, Premamalini , & Joseph , 2025

    In “AI as a double-edged coping partner” (page unavailable), the paper says AI can encourage adaptive coping and reduce acute anxiety when it supports a person’s own coping skills. It does not establish this specifically for academic stress or student well-being, and it cautions that AI use can also undermine coping when it fosters dependence. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    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

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Lahlou S. (2025). Mitigating Societal Cognitive Overload in the Age of AI: Challenges and Directions (Version 1). arXiv [Preprint]. arXiv: 2501.12345. Available online at: https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.12345 · arXiv
  2. Martinez-Martin N. (2021). “Minding the AI: ethical challenges and practice for AI mental health care tools,” in Artificial Intelligence in Brain and Mental Health: Philosophical, Ethical and Policy Issues, eds. F. Jotterand and M. Ienca (Berlin: Springer International Publishing), 111– 125.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Chirayath, G., Premamalini, K., & Joseph, J.
Corresponding author
Joseph, Jeena
ORCID
Joseph, Jeena
Venue
Frontiers in Psychology
Publisher
Frontiers Media SA
Published
2025-11-21
Volume
16
Pages
1699320-1699320
ISSN
1664-1078 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1699320
PMC
PMC12678390
OpenAlex
W4416453399
Cited by
58
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 57 · 2025: 1
FWCI
46.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Frontiers in Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
Keywords
artificial intelligence, coping, cognitive offloading, cognitive overload, mental health, stress regulation, self-reflection, algorithmic feedback, therapeutic chatbots, resilience, well-being, AI design principles, mental health policy, human-AI relationship, self-regulation, emotion regulation, technology dependence, meditation apps, cognitive-behavioral intervention

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