How to Use Generative AI to Boost Your Brain, Not Cause 'Brain Rot'

Generative AI (genAI) has rapidly integrated itself into our daily lives, becoming a ubiquitous tool for everything from writing emails and drafting reports to generating creative content and solving complex problems. Platforms like ChatGPT and Google Gemini are now widely used, with millions relying on them to write, create, and even think. While the efficiency gains are undeniable, a growing body of research is raising concerns about the potential negative impacts of this reliance on our cognitive abilities. The human brain, like a muscle, operates on a 'use-it-or-lose-it' principle. If we delegate too much of our thinking, problem-solving, and creative tasks to AI, are we inadvertently causing our own mental faculties to atrophy? This article explores the emerging evidence of 'genAI brain rot' and, more importantly, reveals a powerful strategy to leverage AI not as a crutch, but as a tool to enhance your intelligence and creativity.

brain computer AI — Credit: Pixabay via Computerworld

The Science Behind GenAI's Potential Cognitive Toll

The concerns about genAI's impact on our minds are not merely speculative; they are increasingly supported by empirical studies investigating how our brains and behaviors change when interacting with these powerful tools. Two key areas of concern highlighted by recent research are the potential harm to creativity and the phenomenon of cognitive offloading.

Creativity Under Threat: The Fixation Effect

Creativity is often seen as a uniquely human trait, involving divergent thinking, novel idea generation, and the ability to connect seemingly unrelated concepts. However, studies are beginning to show that relying on external sources, including AI, can hinder this process. Research published by Carnegie Mellon University provides compelling evidence of this. The study compared the outcomes of brainstorming sessions between groups who had access to Google Search and those who did not. The results were striking: groups using Google Search generated fewer creative ideas. Furthermore, the ideas they did produce were often similar across different Search groups, and even the order in which ideas were presented showed similarities, strongly suggesting that the search results were replacing genuine creative thought.

The researchers termed this phenomenon a “fixation effect.” This occurs when exposure to a limited set of examples or ideas – such as those presented in search results or AI outputs – causes individuals to become fixated on those specific examples. This fixation makes it difficult to break free from the initial frame of reference and explore alternative or more novel possibilities. For instance, if prompted to list things you can 'spread' and you first see 'butter' and 'jam' from an external source, your subsequent ideas are likely to remain within the domain of food items, making it harder to think of abstract concepts like 'rumors' or 'disease'. This effect is particularly concerning in creative fields where originality and divergent thinking are paramount.

Adding another layer to the creativity concern, a study published in The Journal of Creative Behavior explored the impact of AI on “creative self-beliefs.” This research focused on how using AI affects a person's confidence in their own creative abilities. The findings indicated that most participants felt *less* creative when working with genAI compared to working without it. This decline in creative self-confidence was more pronounced in individuals who already harbored doubts about their creative skills, but even those who typically felt highly creative experienced a dip when using genAI. While viewing AI as a helpful tool could mitigate this feeling to some extent, the sense of lost creativity persisted for many. This is significant because creative self-belief is strongly linked to actual creative output and achievement. If AI use erodes this confidence, it could have long-term implications for individual and collective creativity.

Cognitive Offloading: Letting AI Do the Thinking

Perhaps the most direct evidence of genAI's potential to diminish cognitive engagement comes from studies examining brain activity during AI use. A recent study from MIT’s Media Lab provided a unique window into the brain's state while writing with and without AI assistance. Using EEG caps to track real-time neural activity, researchers observed college students writing essays under three conditions: unaided, using a search engine, and using OpenAI’s GPT-4o chatbot.

The results painted a clear picture. Students who wrote their essays without any external help exhibited the highest levels of brain activity, particularly in areas associated with memory, creativity, and semantic processing – the complex work of understanding and processing language and meaning. Those who used search engines showed less activity than the unaided group but still demonstrated more neural engagement than the group using the AI chatbot. The ChatGPT group showed the lowest brain activity overall, with a significant reduction – up to 55% – in neural connectivity compared to the unaided group. This connectivity was measured using Dynamic Directed Transfer Function, a technique that tracks information flow between brain regions and is considered a reliable indicator of executive function, attention, and semantic processing.

The study also revealed negative consequences beyond just reduced brain activity. When asked to recall or summarize what they had written, students who used genAI remembered less of the content and reported feeling less ownership over their work. This suggests that the AI was doing the heavy lifting of content generation, bypassing the cognitive processes necessary for deep encoding and personal connection to the material. The long-term effects were also evident: in a subsequent session where students who had previously used AI were asked to write without it, their performance and brain engagement lagged behind those who had consistently worked unaided. This points to a “cognitive offloading” effect, where individuals become accustomed to relying on the AI to perform tasks they would otherwise handle themselves, potentially leading to a decline in their own mental capabilities over time.

However, the MIT study also offered a crucial nuance. Students who switched from working unaided to using genAI showed an *increase* in brain connectivity when using the tool, but *only* when they already possessed a strong understanding of the topic. This suggests that the timing and context of AI use are critical. Using AI *after* you have already engaged deeply with a subject – after your brain has done the initial work of processing, structuring, and generating ideas – can be beneficial, potentially helping to refine or expand upon existing knowledge. But allowing the AI to take the lead from the outset appears to short-circuit the essential learning and cognitive effort required for genuine understanding and skill development.

The fundamental takeaway from this research is that there is a tangible trade-off between the immediate convenience offered by external AI support and the lasting cognitive benefits derived from internal mental effort. Consistently choosing the path of least cognitive resistance by relying on AI from the start may lead to a gradual erosion of our own intellectual capacities.

The Echo Chamber Effect: GenAI and Groupthink

Beyond individual cognitive decline, an over-reliance on genAI and search tools also poses a risk to originality and independent thought on a broader scale. Technology has always shaped human cognition and behavior, from the way the printing press standardized knowledge to how personal computers changed information processing. Generative AI is no different; it is actively influencing how we think, feel, and interact with the world and each other.

We see a related phenomenon in the way social media platforms utilize AI algorithms. These algorithms curate the content we see based on engagement metrics, often prioritizing posts that align with our existing preferences or trigger strong emotional responses. This algorithmic filtering can lead to “preference crystallization,” where our interests and beliefs become narrower over time, reinforced by a constant stream of similar content. Instead of encountering a diverse range of perspectives, we are often confined to digital echo chambers that validate our existing viewpoints.

This constant exposure to attention-grabbing, emotionally charged content can also contribute to “emotional dysregulation,” making it harder to maintain focus or emotional equilibrium. Our understanding of the world becomes less a product of independent exploration and critical evaluation, and more a reflection of what the algorithms deem most engaging. AI on social platforms doesn't just show us content; it shapes how we learn from others by controlling the social behaviors we witness and even alters our memory by serving as an external repository of information we no longer feel the need to retain internally.

A similar effect can manifest when individuals use genAI-based chatbots unskillfully. When you query a chatbot like ChatGPT or Google Gemini, the responses are generated based on patterns and information gleaned from the vast dataset they were trained on – essentially, an aggregation of human-generated content from the internet. The output often represents a consensus, an average, or the most statistically probable answer based on this data. While this can be useful for quickly accessing information, it inherently lacks true originality or unique perspective. If billions of people are consistently turning to these chatbots for answers and content generation, the risk of converging on similar ideas and expressions – a form of digital groupthink – becomes significant. This widespread reliance on AI-generated consensus could lead to a homogenization of thought, where genuinely novel or unconventional ideas are less likely to emerge or gain traction.

The Secret to Brain-Boosting AI Use: Effort First

Given the potential pitfalls of over-reliance, how can we harness the power of generative AI without sacrificing our cognitive vitality and creative independence? The key lies in a fundamental shift in *when* and *how* we engage with these tools. The secret to using AI to boost your brain, rather than diminish it, is simple yet profound: **Engage deeply with the task or topic yourself first, and only then turn to AI as a tool for enhancement.**

This means that when you are faced with a task – whether it's writing an essay, solving a problem, brainstorming ideas, or learning a new subject – your initial approach should be to tackle it using your own knowledge, skills, and cognitive effort. Resist the immediate urge to open a chatbot and ask for the answer or a draft. Instead:

**For writing:** Start by outlining your ideas, drafting paragraphs, and structuring your argument based on your own understanding and research (using traditional methods like reading books, articles, and primary sources). Push yourself to articulate your thoughts and develop your unique voice.
**For problem-solving:** Analyze the problem, brainstorm potential solutions, and attempt to work through the steps using your own analytical and critical thinking skills.
**For learning:** Read the source material, take notes, summarize concepts in your own words, and try to explain them to yourself or others *before* asking an AI to explain it to you.
**For creative tasks:** Generate initial ideas, sketches, outlines, or concepts entirely from your own imagination and knowledge base. Explore different directions without external influence.

Only after you have invested significant personal effort – after your brain has actively engaged in the processes of recall, analysis, synthesis, and creation – should you introduce generative AI into your workflow. At this stage, AI can become a powerful accelerator and enhancer, rather than a replacement for your own thinking. Here's how you can use AI effectively *after* the initial effort:

**Refinement and Editing:** Use AI to proofread your writing, suggest grammatical improvements, or refine sentence structure. This leverages AI's strength in language processing without outsourcing the core act of composition.
**Expansion and Exploration:** Once you have a solid draft or set of ideas, use AI to explore related concepts, ask challenging questions about your work, or generate alternative phrasing. This can help you see blind spots or expand upon your initial thoughts, building upon your existing foundation rather than creating one for you.
**Summarization and Synthesis (Post-Engagement):** After reading a complex document or article, try to summarize it yourself first. Then, use AI to generate an alternative summary or extract key points. Compare the AI's output to your own to check your understanding and identify anything you missed.
**Brainstorming Aid (After Initial Ideas):** After generating a list of ideas on your own, feed them into an AI and ask it to suggest variations, related concepts, or entirely different approaches. This uses AI as a brainstorming partner to extend your own creative output, not initiate it.
**Fact-Checking and Verification:** Use AI to quickly check facts or find supporting data for claims you've already formulated. However, always cross-reference AI-provided information with credible sources.
**Learning Reinforcement:** After studying a topic, use AI to generate quizzes, explain concepts in a different way, or provide examples. This reinforces your learning rather than replacing the initial study.

This 'effort-first' approach ensures that your brain remains the primary engine of thought, creativity, and learning. By tackling tasks independently, you strengthen the neural pathways associated with critical thinking, memory, problem-solving, and creativity. You develop a deeper understanding of the subject matter because you are actively processing and structuring the information yourself. You build confidence in your own abilities, which, as the research on creative self-beliefs shows, is crucial for sustained high performance.

When you introduce AI *after* this initial effort, you are using it as a sophisticated tool to augment your capabilities. You are leveraging its speed and access to vast information to refine, expand, and check your work, much like a skilled craftsman uses advanced tools to perfect their creation after laying the fundamental groundwork by hand. This is using AI to make you smarter, not dumber.

It is also crucial to be mindful of where you get your initial information. Relying solely on social media feeds or chatbot summaries for foundational knowledge can expose you to the risks of preference crystallization and groupthink discussed earlier. Instead, prioritize learning from high-quality, curated sources like reputable books, academic papers, and established journalistic outlets. Only after building a solid understanding from these traditional sources should you engage with the same topics on social media or through chatbots, allowing you to critically evaluate the information presented through the lens of your already developed knowledge base.