A recent study raises a practical question for anyone using AI tools at work, school, or home: when does helpful assistance become a substitute for thinking? In a group of 666 participants, heavier AI use was linked with lower scores on a standardized critical thinking test, with the strongest pattern appearing among younger users.
What The Study Measured
Researcher Michael Gerlich at the Swiss Business School assessed participants with the Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment (HCTA). The test uses both multiple-choice and open-ended questions to evaluate several parts of critical thinking, including argument analysis and understanding probability.
The study then compared those results with how often participants said they used AI tools. That distinction matters: the critical thinking scores came from a standardized test, while AI usage was based on self-reporting by the participants.
Even with that limitation, the pattern described in the study was clear. Participants who used AI more frequently tended to score lower on critical thinking tests.
Cognitive Offloading Is The Core Concern
The researchers connect the pattern to “cognitive offloading,” which means handing mental work to a tool instead of doing it ourselves. AI can make information easier to reach and tasks faster to complete, but the study suggests that convenience may come with a tradeoff.
Critical thinking depends on effort: comparing claims, testing assumptions, weighing uncertainty, and working through a problem before accepting an answer. If AI is used mainly to skip those steps, the user may get the result without practicing the reasoning that produced it.
The study does not present the relationship as simple. Gerlich points out that many factors are involved. Still, the findings suggest that frequent reliance on AI may quietly reduce the amount of deeper analysis people do for themselves.
Younger Users Showed The Strongest Pattern
The study found that participants between 17 and 25 years old used AI tools the most and had the lowest critical thinking scores. By contrast, participants over 46 used AI less often and showed stronger critical thinking skills.
That age difference is one of the most important signals in the findings. Younger users may be encountering AI during years when habits around learning, research, and problem-solving are still being shaped. If AI becomes the default way to answer questions, the habit of slowing down and reasoning through a problem may get less practice.
Many participants were aware of the risk. One 25-year-old participant said, “It’s great to have all this information at my fingertips, but I sometimes worry that I’m not really learning or retaining anything. I rely so much on AI that I don’t think I’d know how to solve certain problems without it,”
Education May Help Users Resist Overdependence
The study also found that education appeared to make a difference. Participants with more advanced degrees kept stronger critical thinking skills even when they used AI regularly.
According to the source, these participants were more likely to question AI-generated information and think problems through more carefully. In other words, AI use itself was not the only issue. How people used AI, and whether they treated its output as something to examine, mattered too.
This points to a useful distinction. AI can support thinking when it is used as a tool for checking, exploring, or comparing ideas. It can weaken thinking when it becomes a shortcut that replaces the user’s own judgment.
What Schools Need To Get Right
The study recommends a balanced approach in education. The researcher suggests schools should avoid using AI mainly for passive tasks and should instead focus on active learning strategies that build critical thinking.
That means students need more than access to AI tools. They need guidance on when to use them, how to evaluate their output, and when to work through a problem without delegating the hard part.
The study also recommends teacher training so AI is used in ways that encourage student thinking rather than replace it. The goal is not simply to block AI or embrace it without limits, but to use it in ways that preserve cognitive effort.
Trust is another key factor. The more people trust AI systems, the more likely they are to hand thinking tasks over to them. That can create a cycle in which reliance grows and critical thinking gets less practice.
Gerlich says longer-term research is needed. The current findings offer a snapshot, but understanding how AI shapes thinking patterns will require following people for several years and tracking both AI use and cognitive development over time.