# MetaCues: Enabling Critical Engagement with Generative AI for Information Seeking and Sensemaking

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.19634 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.19634/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 9 of its 30 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 20 Mar 2026.

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

- [Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1908.10084/) (2019)
- [UMAP: Uniform Manifold Approximation and Projection for Dimension Reduction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1802.03426/) (2018)
- [Evaluating the Social Impact of Generative AI Systems in Systems and Society](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05949/) (2023)
- [The Metacognitive Demands and Opportunities of Generative AI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.10893/) (2023)
- [Beware of Metacognitive Laziness: Effects of Generative Artificial Intelligence on Learning Motivation, Processes, and Performance](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.09315/) (2024)
- [Enhancing Critical Thinking in Education by means of a Socratic Chatbot](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.05511/) (2024)
- [Protecting Human Cognition in the Age of AI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.12447/) (2025)
- [Enhancing Critical Thinking in Generative AI Search with Metacognitive Prompts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.24014/) (2025)
- [Exploring the Potential of Metacognitive Support Agents for Human-AI Co-Creation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.12879/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Generative AI (GenAI) search tools are increasingly used for information seeking, yet their design tends to encourage cognitive offloading, which may lead to passive engagement, selective attention, and informational homogenization. Effective use requires metacognitive engagement to craft good prompts, verify AI outputs, and critically engage with information. We developed MetaCues, a novel GenAI-based interactive tool for information seeking that delivers metacognitive cues alongside AI responses and a note-taking interface to guide users' search and associated learning. Through an online study (N = 146), we compared MetaCues to a baseline tool without cues, across two broad search topics that required participants to explore diverse perspectives in order to make informed judgments. Preliminary findings regarding participants' search behavior show that MetaCues leads to increased confidence in attitudinal judgments about the search topic as well as broader inquiry, with the latter effect emerging primarily for the topic that was less controversial and with which participants had relatively less familiarity. Accordingly, we outline directions for future qualitative exploration of search interactions and inquiry patterns.