Human-Computer Interaction

Generative AI in Tools for Thought: Theory, Design & Assessment

The concept of “tools for thought,” i.e., technologies designed to extend and amplify human cognitive abilities, has deep roots in Human Computer Interaction, Artificial Intelligence, and Cognitive Sciences. This tradition draws from Engelbart’s vision of augmenting human intellect, Hutchins’ Distributed Cognition Framework, and a wide range of contemporary research on cognitive offloading and scaffolding.

Generative AI (GenAI) capabilities afford a new class of such tools with the ability to respond to an extremely heterogenous range of tasks through natural human language inputs and outputs. As such, it is radically transforming cognitive activities across domains, from creative writing and artistic practice to scientific reasoning and knowledge production.

However, their integrations into human cognitive workflows also raises fundamental questions about whether these tools will enhance or diminish human cognitive capacities. While they may support rapid exploration of idea spaces and provide personalized cognitive scaffolds, they may also foster over-reliance, reduce critical thinking, and create cognitive dependencies that weaken essential human skills. This tension demands urgent attention from interdisciplinary scholars to offer perspectives and solutions about how GenAI (should) support human cognitive workflows and how to design them responsibly.

This special issue aims to critically examine the implications of integrating GenAI within human cognitive workflows and to explore design principles and methodologies that enhance human cognitive abilities while protecting cognitive agency.

We invite submissions and voices from academia and industry that address the following interconnected themes:

Understanding cognitive impacts: Contributions in this category provide empirically grounded insights into GenAI’s impact on human cognitive workflows. They may include controlled experiments examining specific cognitive processes, longitudinal field studies tracking cognitive changes over time, or even ethnographic investigations of GenAI’s adoption in domain-specific workflows. We particularly welcome research that addresses both beneficial transformations, such as enhanced creativity, critical reflection, and learning, as well as potential detriments, including cognitive dependency and reduced critical engagement.

Theoretical Frameworks: We encourage submissions that leverage and extend historical and contemporary theories of cognition to characterize the impact of GenAI and guide the design of tools for thought. Contributions may include theoretical papers that extend existing cognitive frameworks to account for human-AI collaboration, conceptual analyses that identify gaps in current theory, or empirical work that tests theoretical predictions about cognitive augmentation.

Design principles and practices: We invite empirical studies and design case studies that showcase innovative approaches to creating GenAI tools, with the explicit aim of augmenting and protecting cognitive functions. Contributions may include design research papers that document the development and comprehensive evaluation of novel interaction paradigms, case studies of provocative designs that foster reflective and critical thinking, or reports on adaptive systems tailored to support specific cognitive tasks.

Evaluation methods: We welcome submissions on novel methodological approaches for studying the interplay between human cognition and GenAI. Contributions may include papers proposing new assessment frameworks that capture both immediate performance and long-term cognitive development outcomes, methodological innovations for conducting longitudinal studies that track cognitive changes over extended periods, or approaches that combine behavioral measures with neurophysiological or process-tracing data. We particularly encourage submissions that address the challenges of ecological validity in studying human-AI cognitive collaboration, propose techniques for separating cognitive enhancement from performance artifacts, or develop methods for assessing cognitive transfer and skill retention in GenAI-augmented environments.

Ethical and societal implications: We seek analyses of the broader ethical considerations surrounding the deployment of GenAI, particularly in relation to autonomy, accountability, and intentionality. Contributions may include philosophical analyses of cognitive agency in human-AI systems, empirical studies on how GenAI affects user autonomy and decision-making, or design research papers that address how interface design can mitigate potential harms and maximize beneficial outcomes. Cross-cultural perspectives on cognitive augmentation and considerations of equity in access to cognitive enhancement technologies are especially valued.

Questions, issues, and/or subtopics that successful submission will address, include but are not limited to:

Understanding Cognitive Impacts:

• What is the impact of GenAI on cognition (e.g., creativity, critical thinking, problem solving)  at the individual and society levels?

• How does GenAI impact and transform the workflows we use to think?

• What are exemplar cases of user research in scenarios that look at GenAI protecting, or augmenting cognition?

Theoretical Frameworks:

• How do existing theories (e.g.,  distributed cognition, sensemaking, information foraging, metacognitive theories) need to be extended to account for GenAI as tools for thought?

• What new theoretical frameworks do we need to understand the contexts, settings, and tasks in which GenAI diminishes or enhances cognition?

Design Principles and Practices:

• What are examples of systems that go beyond the incremental use of GenAI for cognition and present a transformational way for people and AI to think together?  Think of ideas that can stand the test of time and not fade out in this fast-moving space?

• What new design approaches, principles, and frameworks are essential for GenAI to be a genuine thinking partner that both protects and amplifies our cognition?How do current theories inform and assist in the development of solutions that protect and augment cognition in meaningful ways? What are the gaps where new theories are needed?

Evaluation Methods:

• What measures best capture cognitive engagement versus performance improvements in GenAI-assisted tasks?

• What measures best capture the scope for cognitive skill transfer from AI-assisted to AI-unassisted contexts, in the near term and long term?

• What measures best capture whether work-related behavioral change can stem from engaging with AI, in the near term and long term?

Ethical and Societal Implications:

• How do different GenAI designs affect user autonomy, decision-making agency, and cognitive diversity?

• What are the equity implications of GenAI cognitive tools across educational and professional contexts?