What happens to our brains when we outsource too much of our critical thinking? And how can HR help protect the workforces’ unique human capabilities?

While much of the AI-related discourse has been centred around efficiency and growth in the past, a more fundamental question is being overlooked: what happens to the human brain when we outsource too much of our thinking to machines?

“AI can be wonderful,” says Amy Brann, applied neuroscience expert, keynote speaker and founder of Synaptic Potential. “However, I am concerned because of what we know about Hebbian theory – cells that fire together, wire together – and we’ve known this for 70 years.”

The brain strengthens what it practices and sheds what it doesn’t. Brann uses a physical analogy to explain what’s at stake.

“When I learned to play the saxophone, I would press a key and hear the note. Now, when I hear a saxophone, I can identify it instantly; I’ve built a neural trace. But I’ve never learned to ski, so putting me on a ski slope would be a terrible idea.

“If we don’t practise these skills, our brains don’t develop the neural capability to do them.”

That becomes problematic when AI tools quietly replace the very activities that build core cognitive skills in the workplace, such as restructuring or editing a report, deeply researching a topic or going back and forth with a pedantic colleague to finesse the language used for a piece of internal communications.

A wide range of capabilities are now at risk of erosion if we default our first-stage thinking to AI, rather than use it strategically to enhance our foundational skills, says Brann.

Multiple skills could be at risk, she says, such as: critical thinking, problem solving and reasoning, memory and recall, cognitive flexibility, creativity, attention and deep focus, communication and interpersonal skills, writing feedback, social fluency, self-regulation, metacognition, persistence, effort and tolerance. 

While the proliferation of AI tools over the past few years will undoubtedly lead to much-needed productivity gains, in many instances, when used without intention, it creates capability risk.

When cognitive effort is offloaded to machines and algorithms, we risk developing a generation of workers who are slowly eroding their critical human skills over time – at a time where organisations most need them.

Join this virtual 90-minute session to cut through the noise and learn what you need to do keep your HR practices compliant and future-ready. 

What critical thinking really demands from the brain

Critical thinking is not a single skill, says Brann. It is the coordinated activity of multiple brain systems.

“We need to actively use our critical thinking skills, which requires toggling between the executive control network and the default mode network. These two systems work together to support critical thinking.”

At a neurological level, she says, analytical tasks and inhibition activate the prefrontal cortex, while the anterior cingulate cortex helps detect conflict – recognising when something doesn’t feel right or authentic. 

Parietal regions contribute to reasoning, and the default mode network enables perspective-taking, reflection on past experiences and imagining future possibilities.

“That ability to ask ‘What could happen?’ or ‘What might this look like?’ is central to critical thinking – and it’s not something AI typically supports.”

The salience network also plays a crucial role by helping the brain decide on what matters, she says. When AI does that filtering on our behalf, we risk losing the ability to distinguish relevance from noise.

“That’s particularly concerning for people with predisposing cognitive vulnerabilities. Diminished filtering capacity can have mental health implications,” says Brann.

When people can’t filter or compartmentalise information, overload becomes more likely – whether that’s from constant news exposure or workplace demands – and that contributes to more negative emotional outcomes over time.

Effort, reward and the muted brain

One of the less visible risks of over-reliance on AI is its impact on motivation.

“If we rely on AI throughout the day, we’re less likely to experience the variability and reward responses generated by our neurochemical systems,” says Brann.

“The sense of accomplishment is reduced, along with the dopamine response that comes from effort and mastery. Over time, that can leave people feeling more muted.”

When that happens, it’s possible that fewer people are then willing to expend the extra energy required to sit with difficulty, challenge themselves and genuinely stretch their thinking.

“It’s not so much what AI is doing,” she says. “It’s how much we’re allowing it to do. The real question is whether we’re still in the driving seat.”

“That ability to ask ‘What could happen?’ or ‘What might this look like?’ is central to critical thinking – and it’s not something AI typically supports.” – Amy Brann

Spotting and remedying cognitive decline

A challenge for HR practitioners, managers and leaders is that skill atrophy is often difficult to see.

“Whether or not someone has the skills is only one component of whether they can demonstrate them,” says Brann. “Even when people have the skills, the environment may prevent them from using them.

“[For example], if we stop generating ideas and exposing ourselves to lateral thinking, we get worse at it. Over time, there’s less original thinking to feed into AI systems – which are ultimately built on human input.”

Brann isn’t saying organisations shouldn’t use AI. She’s simply highlighting the importance of being intentional about finding other ways to exercise these human skills, so they don’t atrophy.

What might that look like in a work context? Examples include:

• Scheduling consistent ‘curiosity’ sessions with your team, where you pose questions, think deeply and spark conversation on relevant topics without the aid of technology.
  
• Embed AI-free days, or AI-free tasks throughout your day, to avoid overreliance
  
• Instill processes in your team’s AI use, such as ‘no AI for first drafts’.
  
• Use prompts that involve multiple, dramatically different, view points to generate different ideas to your own. Explain the AI’s findings to a colleague and put forward the opposite argument yourself.

In an article she wrote for Harvard Business Review, Brann suggests running what she calls a cognitive audit.

“In order to do a cognitive audit, you want to make sure that you reflect on how your state influenced what you were doing. How did you feel? Were you sleepy? Did you take a nap? Were you energised? Did you do star jumps, or had you drunk a lot of coffee? Were you curious? Were you asking yourself lots of ‘what if’ questions?

“Review your day so far and think about what different brain processes you’ve utilised. Have you done deep focus? Have you done surface scanning, task switching, mind wandering? Make sure you’ve got a variety of things happening, and that you’re understanding how you’re triggering each of those in your normal day.”

Why cognitive variety matters

Another important remedy to skills atrophy and cognitive overload is ensuring cognitive variety in the design of the average work day or week.

“You wouldn’t go to the gym and only work your biceps all day, every day,” says Brann. “We’re not designed to do anything constantly.”

Sustained demand on the executive function network depletes attention, overloads working memory and narrows perspective, she says. Over time, decision-making quality declines and unhelpful biases creep in.

“In response, the brain defaults to more habitual and emotional systems, which creates its own problems.”

Cognitive variety – deliberately engaging different modes of thinking – allows memory consolidation, protects dopamine regulation and reduces the risk of burnout.

“People who move back-to-back between prompts don’t step away long enough for memories to form,” says Brann. “Without that consolidation, information is unlikely to be retained.”

The human skills worth doubling down on

Research Brann conducted a few years ago identified eight hallmarks of high-performing teams. Three, she says, are particularly critical in the age of AI.

The first is being an inspiring narrator – strong verbal and non-verbal communication, influence and persuasion.

“Inspiring others requires humans to have discerned what is most wise to draw attention to – and then simplify the complexity to invite people into a better future.”

The second is being a prosocial diplomat.

“This is about understanding others, building trust and adapting through self-awareness. There’s a strong evidence base for how critical prosocial behaviours are – yet they’re rarely embedded into how work is designed.”

The third is being an innovative navigator – actively practising curiosity, creative thinking and future-focused problem solving.

“This is so vital today because we, as humans, hold the context and know the biggest challenges that require solving.”

“The evidence for these supporting cognitive capacity and capability is really strong.”

Brann remains optimistic about AI use in the workplace – if organisations choose to use this technology intentionally.

“I’m hopeful we’ll move towards a future where AI is used wisely – one that protects our remarkable brains and allows them to perform even better than before.”

Sign up to AHRI’s course ‘AI & HR’: What you need to know to stay compliant.