A new MIT study raises critical questions about how AI writing tools like ChatGPT affect student thinking and creativity. Published in June 2025, the research suggests that using AI writing aids can blunt brain activity and produce more formulaic essays. The findings spark a global conversation, including in Thailand, about how to balance digital tools with foundational skills in classrooms.
The study followed 54 college students who wrote SAT-style essays on philosophical topics, such as the desirability of a perfect society and the moral obligations of the fortunate to help others. Participants were assigned to three conditions: using ChatGPT, using Google Search, or writing without digital help. Researchers tracked brain activity with EEG across 32 brain regions during the writing tasks.
Results indicated that ChatGPT users showed substantially lower brain engagement—up to 55% less—than those composing without AI assistance. The Google Search group sat between these two extremes. All groups with digital assistance demonstrated lower neural activity than the control group. Additionally, AI-assisted writers often failed to recall their essay content, hinting at surface-level processing rather than deep comprehension.
A striking finding occurred when participants switched tools. Those who previously used ChatGPT continued to show reduced neural engagement and produced vocabulary resembling AI-generated text even when writing without help. Researchers introduced the idea of “cognitive debt” to describe how habitual reliance on AI may erode critical thinking, creativity, and independent inquiry over time.
Authors warned that when readers do not engage deeply with topics, writing can appear biased or superficial. They emphasize that cognitive debt may reduce mental effort in the short term but carry long-term costs, including diminished inquiry, susceptibility to manipulation, and waning creativity.
Educators who reviewed the study noted that AI-generated essays, while technically accurate, often lacked personal voice and meaningful insight. A Bangkok-area English teacher observed that some AI-influenced essays sounded polished yet hollow, displaying standard ideas and phrasing without individual perspective.
Thai education leaders see a similar tension. As Thai schools explore AI writing tools, officials emphasize that while digital fluency is important for the future, core skills—critical thinking, creativity, and moral reasoning—must remain central. Thailand’s approach to education values well-rounded learners who balance analytical ability with empathy and civic awareness.
Thai policymakers often reference sufficiency economy principles, which advocate balanced and prudent development. The concern is that overreliance on AI could erode the reasoning and expressive abilities schools aim to cultivate, running counter to national development goals.
Thailand’s experience with educational technology offers a cautionary tale. Earlier initiatives promoting tablets and e-learning did not consistently improve literacy or critical thinking, leading educators to advocate blended approaches that combine traditional methods with selective technology use.
Globally, AI is reshaping higher education and many professions. UNESCO has noted that nations are navigating how to harness AI for personalized learning while protecting creativity and independent thought. The MIT study adds to this conversation, underscoring the need for careful policy that supports thinking skills alongside technological advances.
Moving forward, researchers suggest using AI writing tools as a supplement—primarily for grammar checks or information gathering—rather than as a replacement for problem solving and original composition. They stress age-sensitive integration, with younger students building foundational skills before heavy AI use. In Thailand, this aligns with national strategies prioritizing creative thinking, digital literacy, and civic consciousness.
Parents, teachers, and students are encouraged to reflect critically on the role of AI in assignments. Class activities should emphasize original thought, debate, and reflection, with digital tools serving as helpful assistants rather than crutches. Professional development for teachers in AI literacy could help identify and address cognitive debt in students’ work.
Ultimately, the MIT findings suggest technology should enhance human cognition, not supplant it. Local studies tailored to the Thai context will be important for guiding policy on AI in education and ensuring that new tools strengthen, rather than diminish, the imaginative and analytical foundations of learning.