Jul 2026· 2026 International Conference on Intelligent and Sustainable AI Systems (ICOSAAS)· pp. 544-550· 0 citations· 17 references
Abstract
Artificial intelligence now shapes much of how information reaches people, who read it, and what they make of it. The environments it creates are probabilistic, often fluent without being grounded, and curated by systems whose workings stay hidden. Most research on this shift has gone to AI literacy, explainability, and the mechanics of human–AI interaction. Far less has gone to a prior question: how does human cognition itself change to cope? The paper addresses that question with the Human Cognitive Adaptation Framework (HCAF). One hundred thirty-one adults who use AI-generated and algorithmically curated content daily completed a 25-item, six-point inventory covering five facets—orientation, dimensional literacy, ambiguity tolerance, coherence recognition and critique, and relational navigation. The research examined reliability, the correlations among facets, and dimensionality. The full scale was highly reliable (α = .902) and the data factored cleanly (KMO = .841). One factor dominated: its eigenvalue of 7.93 carried 31.7% of the variance, and parallel analysis retained a single factor. The facets correlated strongly with one another (r = .46 to .69), which reads as one adaptive response rather than five separate skills. Within that single capacity, people recognized synthetic coherence more readily than they tolerated the uncertainty recognition exposes, so adaptation is not uniform across its parts. The research used these results to develop the HCAF, which treats adaptation as the work of staying oriented, judging coherence, and holding up under instability, and draws out what follows for human-centered AI, AI literacy, education, and the design of AI-supported decision environments.
Evaluating LLMs in interaction with humans and designing support for selective deference that preserves independent reasoning motivate evaluating LLMs in interaction with humans.
Robin Welsch, Michelle Rausch, Pascal Knierim et al.· 0 citations
This open-ended, mixed-methods study with computational text analysis of millions of AI-related newspaper articles and social media posts grounded in 57 semi-structured interviews with AI professionals shows how AI professionals use frames to address significant cognitive challenges, such as assigning responsibility fo...
Jacy Reese Anthis, Erik Brynjolfsson, James A. Evans· Proceedings of the ACM on Hu...· 1 citation
If AI is to support human cognitive growth, design must move beyond answer provision and efficiency maximization toward the organization of productive human-AI relations: relations that challenge users’ initial assumptions while providing support appropriate to the task and the user's level of expertise.
Xiaokun Wu, Min Chen, Giancarlo Fortino· Big Data and Cognitive Compu...· 0 citations
This article clarifies the concept definitions and evaluation criteria of understanding in cognitive psychology by combining classic theories and experimental evidence, and uses these criteria as the analytical framework for the performance of “similar understanding” in contemporary artificial intelligence systems.
Ruo Qin· Journal of Language, Culture...· 0 citations
The model generates the intuitive errors elicited by the bat-and-ball problem and explains why these errors can be seen as byproducts of adaptive cognition, and shows how such judgments can be understood as rational adaptations to the learning environment.
The Intellect-Emotion-Action Profile (IEAP), a purpose-built lexical framework featuring an inductively constructed dictionary from AI-generated text that decomposes any response into the proportional usage of intellectual, affective, and action words, is introduced.
William C. Kouns· Frontiers in Artificial Inte...· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.