AI and your brain: new study reveals how ChatGPT may harm critical chinking

A new study has revealed a potential decline in critical thinking and problem-solving skills, raising questions about the true cost of convenience in the age of artificial intelligence.

OpenAI, led by Sam Altman, changed the world with the release of ChatGPT in late 2022.

It’s official. Using artificial intelligence tools makes us stupid.

That’s according to researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who have found using popular chatbots like OpenAI’s ChatGPT can “erode critical thinking and problem-solving skills”.

OpenAI’s release of ChatGPT in late 2022 has sparked a technological shift that has been touted as bigger than the launch of personal computing, the internet, smartphones and social media combined.

The federal government has forecast that mass AI adoption will inject up to an extra $600bn a year into the national economy by the end of the decade.

But, MIT’s study’s main author Nataliya Kosmyna said “like any other tool, it carries its own set of advantages and limitations”, affecting the way humans think.

A study led by MIT researcher Nataliya Kosmyna has discovered some concerning findings about the use of AI tools.

“As we stand at this technological crossroads, it becomes crucial to understand the full spectrum of cognitive consequences associated with LLM (large language model) integration in educational and informational contexts,” Dr Kosmyna wrote in the study.

“While these tools offer unprecedented opportunities for enhancing learning and information access, their potential impact on cognitive development, critical thinking, and intellectual independence demands a very careful consideration and continued research.”

The study involved 54 students aged 18-39 from Wellesley, Harvard, Tufts and Northeastern universities. It assessed those who used ChatGPT to help write essays against those which used search engines and those who used their “brain only”.

The study found students who used large language models or AI tools performed worse than their counterparts in the brain-only group at all levels: neural, linguistic, scoring.

“Brain‑only group exhibited the strongest, widest‑ranging networks, search engine group showed intermediate engagement, and LLM (large language model) assistance elicited the weakest overall coupling,” Dr Kosmyna said.

“The LLM group also fell behind in their ability to quote from the essays they wrote just minutes prior. As the educational impact of LLM use only begins to settle with the general population, in this study we demonstrate the pressing matter of a likely decrease in learning skills.

MIT researches say longitudinal studies are needed in order to understand the long-term impact of AI on the human brain before the technology is recognised as ‘something that is net positive for the humans’.

“We hope this study serves as a preliminary guide to understanding the cognitive and practical impacts of AI on learning environments.”

The use of generative AI — which can perform a range of tasks via basic verbal prompts — has surged across industry, business, education, health and the philanthropic sector. Doctors use Gen-AI to write their medical notes; firefighters use it to better detect blazes, while companies use AI to monitor inventory, and AI-dubbed films are now screening in cinemas.

The AI race has also reshuffled the order of the world’s most valuable companies. Apple, which has been perceived as being slow to adopt the technology, has shed about $US600bn from its market value this year and is now worth $US2.92 trillion.

Meanwhile, Microsoft — which has reportedly invested $US13bn in OpenAI — has surged 14 per cent since January and is now valued at $US3.55 trillion. Nvidia, the company that produces the powerful chips behind the AI boom, is close behind, worth $US3.52 trillion.

But Dr Kosmyna said: “Users might become good at using the tool but not at performing the task independently to the same standard”.

“Our neurophysiological data provides the initial support for this process, showing concrete changes in brain connectivity that mirror that shift.”

She said “longitudinal studies” are needed in order to understand the long-term impact of the LLMs on the human brain, before the technology is recognised as “something that is net positive for the humans”.

Originally published as AI and your brain: new study reveals how ChatGPT may harm critical chinking