From Consumption to Collaboration: Measuring Interaction Patterns to Augment Human Cognition in Open-Ended Tasks
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
The rise of Generative AI, and Large Language Models (LLMs) in particular, is fundamentally changing cognitive processes in knowledge work, raising critical questions about their impact on human reasoning and problem-solving capabilities. As these AI systems become increasingly integrated into workflows, they offer unprecedented opportunities for augmenting human thinking while simultaneously risking cognitive erosion through passive consumption of generated answers. This tension is particularly pronounced in open-ended tasks, where effective solutions require deep contextualization and integration of domain knowledge. Unlike structured tasks with established metrics, measuring the quality of human-LLM interaction in such open-ended tasks poses significant challenges due to the absence of ground truth and the iterative nature of solution development. To address this, we present a framework that analyzes interaction patterns along two dimensions: cognitive activity mode (exploration vs. exploitation) and cognitive engagement mode (constructive vs. detrimental). This framework provides systematic measurements to evaluate when LLMs are effective tools for thought rather than substitutes for human cognition, advancing theoretical understanding and practical guidance for developing AI systems that protect and augment human cognitive capabilities.
Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 13 of its 25 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 3 Apr 2025.
Builds on
13 of 25 references.
References · 13
- 2023The Metacognitive Demands and Opportunities of Generative AIcited by 87
- 2023Appropriate Reliance on AI Advice: Conceptualization and the Effect of Explanationscited by 83
- 2023Bridging the Gulf of Envisioning: Cognitive Design Challenges in LLM Interfacescited by 72
- 2023Evaluating Language Models for Mathematics through Interactionscited by 70
- 2023VISAR: A Human-AI Argumentative Writing Assistant with Visual Programming and Rapid Draft Prototypingcited by 46
- 2024Human-LLM Compound System for Scientific Ideation through Facet Recombination and Novelty Evaluationcited by 41
- 2022Explanations, Fairness, and Appropriate Reliance in Human-AI Decision-Makingcited by 25
- 2024Learning Agent-based Modeling with LLM Companions: Experiences of Novices and Experts Using ChatGPT & NetLogo Chatcited by 23
- 2023The Impact of Imperfect XAI on Human-AI Decision-Makingcited by 21
- 2023Generation Probabilities Are Not Enough: Uncertainty Highlighting in AI Code Completionscited by 20
- 2022On the Effect of Information Asymmetry in Human-AI Teamscited by 17
- 2024Don't be Fooled: The Misinformation Effect of Explanations in Human-AI Collaborationcited by 8
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 2; 2026: 1.
3 papers.
- 2025Understanding, Protecting, and Augmenting Human Cognition with Generative AI: A Synthesis of the CHI 2025 Tools for Thought Workshopcited by 7
- 2025Perspectra: Choosing Your Experts Enhances Critical Thinking in Multi-Agent Research Ideationcited by 4
- 2026Who Does What? Archetypes of Roles Assigned to LLMs During Human-AI Decision-Makingcited by 0
- 2026Who Does What? Archetypes of Roles Assigned to LLMs During Human-AI Decision-Making12 Feb 2026
- 2025Perspectra: Choosing Your Experts Enhances Critical Thinking in Multi-Agent Research Ideation24 Sep 2025
- 2025Understanding, Protecting, and Augmenting Human Cognition with Generative AI: A Synthesis of the CHI 2025 Tools for Thought Workshop28 Aug 2025