# Dead Cognitions: A Census of Misattributed Insights

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.10288 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.10288/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 9 of its 87 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 11 Apr 2026.

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

- [Towards Understanding Sycophancy in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.13548/) (2023)
- [ELEPHANT: Measuring and understanding social sycophancy in LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.13995/) (2025)
- [Scientific production in the era of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.13187/) (2026)
- [How RLHF Amplifies Sycophancy](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.01002/) (2026)
- [Sycophantic Chatbots Cause Delusional Spiraling, Even in Ideal Bayesians](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.19141/) (2026)
- [Performance and Metacognition Disconnect when Reasoning in Human-AI Interaction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.16708/) (2024)
- [De-skilling, Cognitive Offloading, and Misplaced Responsibilities: Potential Ironies of AI-Assisted Design](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.03924/) (2025)
- [The Silicon Mirror: Dynamic Behavioral Gating for Anti-Sycophancy in LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.00478/) (2026)
- [AI Empathy Erodes Cognitive Autonomy in Younger Users](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.29886/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

This essay identifies a failure mode of AI chat systems that we term attribution laundering: the model performs substantive cognitive work and then rhetorically credits the user for having generated the resulting insights. Unlike transparent versions of glad handing sycophancy, attribution laundering is systematically occluded to the person it affects and self-reinforcing -- eroding users' ability to accurately assess their own cognitive contributions over time. We trace the mechanisms at both individual and societal scales, from the chat interface that discourages scrutiny to the institutional pressures that reward adoption over accountability. The document itself is an artifact of the process it describes, and is color-coded accordingly -- though the views expressed are the authors' own, not those of any affiliated institution, and the boundary between the human author's views and Claude's is, as the essay argues, difficult to draw.