AI Insight
This study examined how different critical thinking dispositions relate to two ways students use generative AI (cognitive offloading and cognitive enhancement) and the perceived gap between AI-assisted performance and independent ability. Among 797 Chinese university students, inquisitiveness strongly predicted both AI usage patterns, while open-mindedness and systematicity showed weaker associations with cognitive enhancement only. Both types of AI interaction were associated with students perceiving a larger gap between their AI-supported and independent competence.
Why it matters
The findings suggest that students' thinking dispositions shape how they engage with AI tools in learning, and that AI use correlates with awareness of dependency on such support. This has implications for designing educational interventions that help students use AI productively while developing genuine competence rather than perceived skill inflation.
Understand the Science
BackgroundGenerative artificial intelligence (GenAI) can support academic performance while also creating a perceived gap between AI-supported task completion and independently available competence. This study examined how multidimensional critical thinking dispositions are associated with cognitive offloading, cognitive enhancement, and perceived support-dependence discrepancy (PSD) in GenAI-assisted learning.MethodsA cross-sectional survey was administered through Wenjuanxing from March 15 to May 20, 2026, using stratified purposive sampling across six Chinese universities. Of 990 submitted questionnaires, 797 eligible and complete responses were retained. The hypothesized pathways were tested using structural equation modeling, with a separate observed-score moderation analysis for academic stress and additional robustness and measurement-model assessments.ResultsInquisitiveness was positively associated with cognitive enhancement (β = 0.515, p < 0.001) and cognitive offloading (β = 0.270, p < 0.001). Open-mindedness (β = 0.091, p = 0.039) and systematicity (β = 0.096, p = 0.029) showed small positive associations with cognitive enhancement, whereas analyticity and truth-seeking were not significantly associated with either interaction pathway. Cognitive offloading (β = 0.448, p < 0.001) and cognitive enhancement (β = 0.207, p < 0.001) were positively associated with PSD. The Academic Stress × Cognitive Offloading interaction was not significant (β = 0.048, p = 0.123; delta R-squared = 0.002). Alternative CFA specifications, a common-method-factor analysis, and reliability sensitivity analyses yielded broadly consistent focal conclusions, while the HTMT assessment provided qualified evidence of discriminant validity.ConclusionCritical thinking dispositions showed heterogeneous associations with GenAI interaction pathways, and both offloading and enhancement were associated with perceived support-dependent competence gaps. Because the outcome was measured with a single self-report item and the design was cross-sectional, the findings indicate statistical associations rather than objectively verified overconfidence, calibration bias, or causal effects.