# Mitigating Societal Cognitive Overload in the Age of AI: Challenges and Directions

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.19990 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.19990/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 9 of its 76 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 28 Apr 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 9 of 9)

- [Language Models are Few-Shot Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.14165/) (2020)
- [DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.12948/) (2025)
- [Towards A Rigorous Science of Interpretable Machine Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1702.08608/) (2017)
- [Explanation in Artificial Intelligence: Insights from the Social Sciences](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.07269/) (2017)
- [A Survey Of Methods For Explaining Black Box Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1802.01933/) (2018)
- [DeepFakes and Beyond: A Survey of Face Manipulation and Fake Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2001.00179/) (2020)
- [Managing extreme AI risks amid rapid progress](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.17688/) (2023)
- [Gradual Disempowerment: Systemic Existential Risks from Incremental AI Development](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.16946/) (2025)
- [The Flaws of Policies Requiring Human Oversight of Government Algorithms](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.05067/) (2021)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Societal cognitive overload, driven by the deluge of information and complexity in the AI age, poses a critical challenge to human well-being and societal resilience. This paper argues that mitigating cognitive overload is not only essential for improving present-day life but also a crucial prerequisite for navigating the potential risks of advanced AI, including existential threats. We examine how AI exacerbates cognitive overload through various mechanisms, including information proliferation, algorithmic manipulation, automation anxieties, deregulation, and the erosion of meaning. The paper reframes the AI safety debate to center on cognitive overload, highlighting its role as a bridge between near-term harms and long-term risks. It concludes by discussing potential institutional adaptations, research directions, and policy considerations that arise from adopting an overload-resilient perspective on human-AI alignment, suggesting pathways for future exploration rather than prescribing definitive solutions.