mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

More AI Assistance Reduces Cognitive Engagement: Examining the AI Assistance Dilemma in AI-Supported Note-Taking

arXiv 2509.03392 ↗First posted 3 Sep 2025cs.HCcited by 7

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

As AI tools become increasingly embedded in cognitively demanding tasks such as note-taking, questions remain about whether they enhance or undermine cognitive engagement. This paper examines the "AI Assistance Dilemma" in note-taking, investigating how varying levels of AI support affect user engagement and comprehension. In a within-subject experiment, we asked participants (N=30) to take notes during lecture videos under three conditions: Automated AI (high assistance with structured notes), Intermediate AI (moderate assistance with real-time summary, and Minimal AI (low assistance with transcript). Results reveal that Intermediate AI yields the highest post-test scores and Automated AI the lowest. Participants, however, preferred the automated setup due to its perceived ease of use and lower cognitive effort, suggesting a discrepancy between preferred convenience and cognitive benefits. Our study provides insights into designing AI assistance that preserves cognitive engagement, offering implications for designing moderate AI support in cognitive tasks.

Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 3 Sep 2025.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 6.

7 papers.