The new generation of digital assistance programs, including generative artificial intelligence (GenAI), is increasingly shifting from information retrieval to the generation of explanations, arguments, code, abstracts, and solutions. The extent to which GenAI support of human cognition can extend human capacity versus supplant critical cognitive processes underlying knowledge and skill formation has been a longstanding psychological question. This narrative review focuses on foundational research on cognitive offloading and on peer-reviewed studies of GenAI published through September 05, 2026. A structured narrative search for experimental, meta-analytic, and mixed-methods studies on memory, learning, critical thinking, creativity, perceived effort, trust, and dependence on GenAI was complemented by a search of cross sectional and qualitative studies that provided early characterization of emerging constructs ofdependence on GenAI. Evidence does not support a simple positive or negative effect of GenAI on human cognition. GenAI-supported offloading of cognitive functions such as memory retrieval, processing, and learning can reduce the required cognitive capacity and support high performance across a variety of tasks, including memory-based and GenAI-supported academic tasks. However, the same cognitive offloading can, in some cases, reduce the quality of subsequent encoding, and recent studies on GenAI show a consistent performance-learning dissociation. While support that enables high performance when support is available can carry over to later unsupported performance, the gain is typically small, nonexistent, or even negative. Studies of support provided under instructional control indicate that retaining learner-generated nodes or restricting direct-answer substitutes for generators can support later independent performance better than unlimited support. It remains to be determined what the independent contribution of explanation, verification, revision, and fading support is. Nevertheless, findings from emerging dependence research correlate with indicators of academic stress, performance expectations, anxiety, and self-efficacy. However, currently available evidence does not support claims of irreversible cognitive decline. A key finding of this review is that whether GenAI is used at all is less critical than which functions are offloaded, which are maintained, and the extent to which users remain epistemically responsible for the resulting output. Implications are developed for education, knowledge work, tool design, and longitudinal research.

References

 Baethge, C., Goldbeck-Wood, S., & Mertens, S. (2019). SANRA: A scale for the quality assessment of narrative review articles. Research Integrity and Peer Review, 4, 5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-019 0064-8

 Bansal, G., Wu, T., Zhou, J., Fok, R., Nushi, B., Kamar, E., Ribeiro, M. T., & Weld, D. S. (2021). Does the whole exceed its parts? The effect of AI explanations on complementary team performance. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Article 81, pp. 1 16). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445717

 Barcaui, A. (2025). ChatGPT as a cognitive crutch: Evidence from a randomized controlled trial on knowledgeretention.SocialSciences&HumanitiesOpen,12,102287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2025.102287

 Bastani, H., Bastani, O., Sungu, A., Ge, H., Kabakcı, Ö., & Mariman, R. (2025). Generative AI without guardrails can harm learning: Evidence from high school mathematics. Proceedings of the NationalAcademy of Sciences United States of America, 122(26), e2422633122. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2422633122

 Buçinca, Z., Malaya, M. B., & Gajos, K. Z. (2021). To trust or to think: Cognitive forcing functions can reduce overreliance on AI in AI-assisted decision-making. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 5(CSCW1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1145/3449287

 Burnett, L. K., & Richmond, L. L. (2026). Meta-analytic investigations of the effect of cognitive offloading on memory-based task performance and interindividual variability. Memory & Cognition, 54(1), 144–168. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-025-01743-8

 Chen, S., & Cheung, A. C. K. (2025). Effect of generative artificial intelligence on university students learning outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 49, 100737. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2025.100737

 Chi, M. T. H., De Leeuw, N., Chiu, M.-H., & Lavancher, C. (1994). Eliciting self-explanations improves understanding. Cognitive Science, 18(3), 439–477. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1803_3

 Deng, R., Jiang, M., Yu, X., Lu, Y., & Liu, S. (2025). Does ChatGPT enhance student learning? A systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental studies. Computers & Education, 227, 105224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2024.105224

 Essel, H. B., Vlachopoulos, D., Essuman, A. B., & Amankwa, J. O. (2024). ChatGPT effects on cognitive skills of undergraduate students: Receiving instant responses from AI-based conversational large language models (LLMs). Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 6, 100198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100198

 Farhat, Z. (2026). When AI thinks for us: Unveiling the cognitive and social toll of ChatGPT over reliance. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 40(3), e70205. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.70205

 Fiorella, L., & Mayer, R. E. (2016). Eight ways to promote generative learning. Educational Psychology Review, 28(4), 717–741. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9348-9

 Fisher, M., Goddu, M. K., & Keil, F. C. (2015). Searching for explanations: How the Internet inflates estimates of internal knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 144(3), 674–687. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000070

 Gilbert, S. J. (2015). Strategic offloading of delayed intentions into the external environment. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68(5), 971–992. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2014.972963

 Gilbert, S. J., Bird, A., Carpenter, J. M., Fleming, S. M., Sachdeva, C., & Tsai, P.-C. (2020). Optimal use of reminders: Metacognition, effort, and cognitive offloading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 149(3), 501–517. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000652

 Grinschgl, S., Papenmeier, F., & Meyerhoff, H. S. (2021). Consequences of cognitive offloading: Boosting performance but diminishing memory. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 74(9), 1477–1496. https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218211008060

 Jain, P., Shajit, D., Maini, A., Shahin, Y., & Panda, A. (2026). Cognitive offloading, critical thinking and attitudes towards artificial intelligence in the era of ChatGPT: A comparative study of artificial intelligence-assisted and manual task performance in young adults. Cognitive Processing. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-026-01375-z

 Kelly, M. O., & Risko, E. F. (2022). Study effort and the memory cost of external store availability. Cognition, 228, 105228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2022.105228

 Klingbeil, A., Grützner, C., & Schreck, P. (2024). Trust and reliance on AI: An experimental study on the extent and costs of overreliance on AI. Computers in Human Behavior, 160, 108352. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2024.108352

 Lee, H.-P. (H.), Sarkar, A., Tankelevitch, L., Drosos, I., Rintel, S., Banks, R., & Wilson, N. (2025). The impact of generative AI on critical thinking: Self-reported reductions in cognitive effort and confidence effects from a survey of knowledge workers. In Proceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Article 1121, pp. 1–22). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3706598.3713778

 Liu, X., Liu, Y., Dai, Y., & Fu, J. (2026). Academic stress and university students’ dependency on generative artificial intelligence: A multiple mediation model using PLS-SEM. BMC Psychology, 14, 216. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-026-03986-9

 Lu, X., Kelly, M. O., & Risko, E. F. (2020). Offloading information to an external store increases false recall. Cognition, 205, 104428. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2020.104428

 Mehrotra, S., Degachi, C., Vereschak, O., Jonker, C. M., & Tielman, M. L. (2024). A systematic review on fostering appropriate trust in human-AI interaction: Trends, opportunities and challenges. ACM Journal on Responsible Computing, 1(4), Article 26, 1–45. https://doi.org/10.1145/3696449

 Parasuraman, R., & Riley, V. (1997). Humans and automation: Use, misuse, disuse, abuse. Human Factors, 39(2), 230–253. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872097778543886

 Risko, E. F., & Gilbert, S. J. (2016). Cognitive offloading. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20(9), 676–688. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2016.07.002

 Roediger, H. L., III, & Karpicke, J. D. (2006). Test-enhanced learning: Taking memory tests improves long-term retention. Psychological Science, 17(3), 249–255. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467 9280.2006.01693.x

 Soderstrom, N. C., & Bjork, R. A. (2015). Learning versus performance: An integrative review. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(2), 176–199. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691615569000

 Sparrow, B., Liu, J., & Wegner, D. M. (2011). Google effects on memory: Cognitive consequences of havinginformationatour fingertips. Science, 333(6043), 776–778. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1207745

 Storm, B. C., & Stone, S. M. (2015). Saving-enhanced memory: The benefits of saving on the learning and remembering of new information. Psychological Science, 26(2), 182–188. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614559285

 Wang, W., Wu, Y., Fang, J., Yang, C., & Wen, L. (2026). When cognitive offloading becomes dependence: How AI dependence mediates the pathway from academic stress to burnout and anxiety. BMC Psychology, 14, 1125. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-026-04911-w

 Wong, S. S. H., & Qiu, S. X. (2026). Think first, ChatGPT later: Guiding human-AI collaboration for learning gains in independent human creativity. Educational Psychology Review, 38, 45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-026-10118-7

 Zhang, S., Zhao, X., Zhou, T., & Kim, J. H. (2024). Do you have AI dependency? The roles of academic self-efficacy, academic stress, and performance expectations on problematic AI usage behavior. International Journal of Educational https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00467-0 Technology www.ijmsrt.com in Higher Education, 21, 465 34.