CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 10Artificial Intelligence in EducationIntelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive LearningInnovative Teaching and Learning Methods

The DOI matches its DataCite record.

The Architecture of Cognitive Amplification: Enhanced Cognitive Scaffolding as a Resolution to the Comfort-Growth Paradox in Human-AI Cognitive Integration

Open access
Riva, Giuseppe·2025·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2507.19483arXiv 2507.19483
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

AI systems now function as cognitive extensions, evolving from tools to active cognitive collaborators within human-AI integrated systems. While these systems can amplify cognition - enhancing problem-solving, learning, and creativity - they present a fundamental "comfort-growth paradox": AI's user-friendly nature may foster intellectual stagnation by minimizing cognitive friction necessary for development. As AI aligns with user preferences and provides frictionless assistance, it risks inducing cognitive complacency rather than promoting growth. We introduce Enhanced Cognitive Scaffolding to resolve this paradox - reconceptualizing AI from convenient assistant to dynamic mentor. Drawing from Vygotskian theories, educational scaffolding principles, and AI ethics, our framework integrates three dimensions: (1) Progressive Autonomy, where AI support gradually fades as user competence increases; (2) Adaptive Personalization, tailoring assistance to individual needs and learning trajectories; and (3) Cognitive Load Optimization, balancing mental effort to maximize learning while minimizing unnecessary complexity. Research across educational, workplace, creative, and healthcare domains supports this approach, demonstrating accelerated skill acquisition, improved self-regulation, and enhanced higher-order thinking. The framework includes safeguards against risks like dependency, skill atrophy, and bias amplification. By prioritizing cognitive development over convenience in human-…

Overview

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

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2507.19483

Cites

Statistics

Verification

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Still being checked.

Research works printed but not linked: 22

  1. [3][3] A. Clark, Supersizing the mind: embodiment, action and cognitive extension, Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 2008. -
  2. [5][5] J. Hollan, E. Hutchins, D. Kirsh, Distributed cognition: toward a new foundation for humancomputer interaction research, ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact., 7(2) (2000) 174-196. -
  3. [7][7] D. Kahneman, Maps of Bounded Rationality: A Perspective on Intuitive Judgment and Choice, in: T. Frängsmyr (Ed.) The Nobel Prizes 2002, Nobel Foundation, Stockholm, 2002, pp. 449-489.
  4. [9][9] M. Vaccaro, A. Almaatouq, T. Malone, When combinations of humans and AI are useful: A systematic review and meta-analysis, Nature Human Behaviour, 8(12) (2024) 2293-2303.
  5. [10][10] G. Riva, Digital 'We': Human Sociality and Culture in the Era of Social Media and AI, American Psychologist, (in press).
  6. [11][11] M.H. Jarrahi, In the age of the smart artificial intelligence: AI's dual capacities for automating and informating work, Business Information Review, 36(4) (2019) 178-187.
  7. [12][12] M. Sharma, M. Tong, T. Korbak, D. Duvenaud, A. Askell, S.R. Bowman, N. Cheng, E. Durmus, Z. Hatfield-Dodds, S.R. Johnston, Towards understanding sycophancy in language models, arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.13548, (2023). · arXiv
  8. [13][13] T.-Y. Hou, Y.-C. Tseng, C.W. Yuan, Is this AI sexist? The effects of a biased AI's anthropomorphic appearance and explainability on users' bias perceptions and trust, International Journal of Information Management, 76 (2024) 102775.
  9. [15][15] L.S. Vygotsky, Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1978.
  10. [19][19] S. Ma, J. Wang, Y. Zhang, X. Ma, A.Y. Wang, DBox: Scaffolding Algorithmic Programming Learning through Learner-LLM Co-Decomposition, arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.19133, (2025). · arXiv
  11. [22][22] Z. Ivcevic, M. Grandinetti, Artificial intelligence as a tool for creativity, Journal of Creativity, 34(2) (2024) 100079.
  12. [24][24] T. Chandrasekera, Z. Hosseini, U. Perera, Can artificial intelligence support creativity in early design processes?, International Journal of Architectural Computing, 23(1) (2025) 122-136.
  13. [25][25] K. O'Toole, E.-Á. Horvát, Extending human creativity with AI, Journal of Creativity, 34(2) (2024) 100080.
  14. [33][33] M. Akgun, S. Toker, Evaluating the Effect of Pretesting with Conversational AI on Retention of Needed Information, arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.13487, (2024). · arXiv
  15. [34][34] K. Ouanes, N. Farhah, Effectiveness of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in clinical decision support systems and care delivery, Journal of Medical Systems, 48(1) (2024) 74.
  16. [35][35] P. Russo-Netzer, G.L. and Cohen, 'If you're uncomfortable, go outside your comfort zone': A novel behavioral 'stretch' intervention supports the well-being of unhappy people, The journal of positive psychology, 18(3) (2023) 394-410.
  17. [36][36] N.C. Wang, Scaffolding Creativity: Integrating Generative AI Tools and Real-world Experiences in Business Education, arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.06527, (2025). · arXiv
  18. [37][37] D. Onatayo, A. Onososen, A.O. Oyediran, H. Oyediran, V. Arowoiya, E. Onatayo, Generative AI Applications in Architecture, Engineering, and Construction: Trends, Implications for Practice, Education & Imperatives for Upskilling-A Review, Architecture, 4(4) (2024) 877-902.
  19. [38][38] G. Paludo, A. Montresor, Fostering metacognitive skills in programming: Leveraging ai to reflect on code, in: Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on Artificial Intelligence Systems in Education, CEUR Workshop Proceedings, Bolzano. Italy, 2024.
  20. [40][40] Y. Fan, L. Tang, H. Le, K. Shen, S. Tan, Y. Zhao, Y. Shen, X. Li, D. Gašević, Beware of metacognitive laziness: Effects of generative artificial intelligence on learning motivation, processes, and performance, British Journal of Educational Technology, 56(2) (2025) 489-530.
  21. [41][41] N. Spatscheck, S. Myriam, A. and Winkelmann, The effects of generative AI's human-like competencies on clinical decision-making, Journal of Decision Systems, 1-39.
  22. [45][45] C. Lim, DeBiasMe: De-biasing Human-AI Interactions with Metacognitive AIED (AI in - Education) Interventions, arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.16770, (2025). · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Metadata

Authors
Riva, G.
Corresponding author
Riva, Giuseppe
ORCID
Riva, Giuseppe
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2025
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2507.19483
arXiv
2507.19483
OpenAlex
W4410807100
Cited by
8
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 8
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Artificial Intelligence in Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
Keywords
cognitive amplification, cognitive scaffolding, progressive autonomy, adaptive personalization, intellectual stagnation, skill atrophy, AI dependency, bias amplification, self-regulation, higher-order thinking skills, AI ethics

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