ECIS 2026 (2026) AI Processed
SUPPORT OR SUBSTITUTION: HOW CHATGPT AFFECTS COGNITIVE LOAD, OWNERSHIP, AND PERFORMANCE IN PROBLEM-SOLVING
This online between-subjects experiment (n = 136) examines how access to ChatGPT and additional prompting guidance affect task performance, cognitive load (mental and temporal demand), and psychological ownership in complex problem-solving tasks. The research analyzes whether integrating AI enhances productivity while introducing cognitive and motivational trade-offs.
Problem
While generative AI tools improve short-term productivity, their integration into knowledge work may undermine human agency and responsibility. It is critical to understand how performance gains are achieved at a cognitive and psychological level, particularly whether outsourcing tasks erodes workers' sense of authorship and motivation.
Outcome
- Both ChatGPT-only access and ChatGPT with a prompting guide significantly improved task performance compared to the control group (Supported).\n- ChatGPT access significantly reduced temporal demand, but neither ChatGPT condition significantly reduced mental demand, and there was no significant effect of cognitive load on task performance (Partially Supported).\n- Both experimental conditions significantly reduced psychological ownership of the task outcome (Supported).\n- Reduced psychological ownership did not significantly impair task performance in this study (Not Supported).\n- Higher AI literacy significantly moderated and weakened the negative effects of AI access on temporal demand, and partially weakened the negative effect of the prompting guide on psychological ownership (Partially Supported).\n- The study's limitations include a modest sample size of 136 participants, a single-session experimental setting, and a reliance on self-reported measures.
What it means for you
- CIO / IT Executive: Sign off on the procurement and scheduling of a mandatory 'AI Literacy and Collaborative Prompting' training program for all departments currently using generative AI, rather than just distributing licenses, to actively counter the erosion of psychological ownership and help staff manage cognitive load.
- IT Manager: Schedule a 30-minute team meeting to establish a 'Human-in-the-Loop' workflow review protocol, requiring team members to explicitly document, edit, and present their personal contributions to any ChatGPT-generated deliverables to re-establish psychological ownership over their outcomes.
- Business Strategist: Draft a proposal to revise departmental key performance indicators (KPIs), shifting the metrics of success from speed and volume (temporal savings) to qualitative, human-curated excellence to prevent employees from disengaging and treating their roles as outsourced, low-ownership tasks.
- Researcher: Write a research proposal for a multi-week longitudinal field study with a cohort of at least 250 participants to track whether the observed short-term reduction in psychological ownership from AI usage leads to long-term employee disengagement or performance declines over time.
- Policymaker: Publish a revised corporate governance policy that defines a 'Responsible Authorship' standard, mandating that the human employee remains 100% accountable for the accuracy and quality of AI-assisted outputs to prevent the dilution of organizational responsibility.
Transcript
Host: Welcome to A.I.S. Insights - Turning IS Research into Business Action. I am your host, Anna Ivy Summers. Today we are looking at a study presented at ECIS 2026 titled "SUPPORT OR SUBSTITUTION: HOW CHATGPT AFFECTS COGNITIVE LOAD, OWNERSHIP, AND PERFORMANCE IN PROBLEM-SOLVING." Joining me is our expert analyst, Alex Ian Sutherland. Alex, tell us briefly what this study is about.
Expert: Thanks, Anna. This study explores how having access to ChatGPT, along with prompting guidance, affects how people perform on complex problem-solving tasks. Specifically, the researchers look at the trade-offs between performance gains, cognitive load—meaning mental effort and time pressure—and psychological ownership, which is the feeling that you are the true author and owner of your work.
Host: This seems highly relevant given how quickly generative AI has been adopted. What is the core problem that businesses are facing here?
Expert: While tools like ChatGPT clearly help people produce work faster, there is a growing concern about what happens to human agency and responsibility in the process. If workers outsource their thinking and writing to an AI, they might start viewing themselves more as editors than authors. Over time, this shift could erode their sense of personal responsibility, engagement, and intrinsic motivation. Organizations need to understand how to balance these efficiency gains with worker commitment.
Host: To understand how this works, how did the researchers set up their study?
Expert: They conducted an online experiment with one hundred and thirty-six participants. These individuals were randomly assigned to one of three setups. The first was a control group with no ChatGPT access. The second group had access to ChatGPT-only. The third group had ChatGPT access plus a structured prompting guide containing seven step-by-step recommendations on how to prompt the AI effectively. Each participant had twelve minutes to complete a complex, open-ended task, such as drafting a communication strategy or planning an executive event.
Host: And what did they find when they analyzed the results?
Expert: First, both ChatGPT groups—with and without the prompting guide—performed significantly better on the tasks compared to the control group. Second, having access to ChatGPT significantly reduced temporal demand, meaning participants felt less time pressure. However, neither ChatGPT condition significantly reduced mental demand.
Host: That is interesting. You would think the AI would make the task feel less mentally demanding.
Expert: You would, but the results showed no significant effect of either condition on mental demand. One reason could be that even though the AI helps draft the content, the human user still has to evaluate, edit, and coordinate the interaction, which keeps the mental workload relatively high. Also, the study found that cognitive load did not have a significant direct effect on task performance in this setup.
Host: What about the psychological side of things? Did using AI make people feel less connected to their work?
Expert: Yes, it did. Both experimental groups experienced a significant reduction in psychological ownership of their task outcome. When the AI does a substantial portion of the work, users feel less personal investment in the creation. Interestingly, in this specific experiment, this reduction in psychological ownership did not significantly hurt performance. However, because this was a single-session experiment, the researchers caution that the long-term effects of losing ownership could lead to lower vigilance and passive acceptance of AI errors over time.
Host: Did they find any way to counteract this loss of ownership?
Expert: They found that AI literacy played a significant role. For participants with higher AI literacy, the negative effect of AI access on temporal demand was weaker. Furthermore, higher AI literacy partially weakened the negative effect of the prompting guide on psychological ownership.
Host: How can business professionals apply these findings in their organizations?
Expert: The key takeaway is that integrating AI is not just about giving employees access to a tool; it requires managing how they collaborate with it. Since AI access can erode a worker's sense of ownership, organizations should invest in AI literacy training. When employees understand how AI works and how to direct it, they are more likely to view the AI as a supportive extension of their own capabilities rather than a substitute. This helps them maintain a sense of control and authorship.
Host: Are there any limitations we should keep in mind when interpreting these findings?
Expert: Yes. The study was based on a modest sample size of one hundred and thirty-six participants and used a single-session experimental setting. In the real world, human-AI collaboration happens over longer periods, and reliance on self-reported measures can introduce some bias. Future research with larger and longitudinal setups will help clarify these long-term trends.
Host: Thank you, Alex, for breaking down this study. To summarize for our listeners: while ChatGPT improves performance and reduces time pressure, it also reduces a worker's sense of ownership over the output. Developing AI literacy within your teams is a practical way to help maintain human agency and responsibility. Thank you all for listening to A.I.S. Insights. We will see you next time.
Expert: Thanks, Anna. This study explores how having access to ChatGPT, along with prompting guidance, affects how people perform on complex problem-solving tasks. Specifically, the researchers look at the trade-offs between performance gains, cognitive load—meaning mental effort and time pressure—and psychological ownership, which is the feeling that you are the true author and owner of your work.
Host: This seems highly relevant given how quickly generative AI has been adopted. What is the core problem that businesses are facing here?
Expert: While tools like ChatGPT clearly help people produce work faster, there is a growing concern about what happens to human agency and responsibility in the process. If workers outsource their thinking and writing to an AI, they might start viewing themselves more as editors than authors. Over time, this shift could erode their sense of personal responsibility, engagement, and intrinsic motivation. Organizations need to understand how to balance these efficiency gains with worker commitment.
Host: To understand how this works, how did the researchers set up their study?
Expert: They conducted an online experiment with one hundred and thirty-six participants. These individuals were randomly assigned to one of three setups. The first was a control group with no ChatGPT access. The second group had access to ChatGPT-only. The third group had ChatGPT access plus a structured prompting guide containing seven step-by-step recommendations on how to prompt the AI effectively. Each participant had twelve minutes to complete a complex, open-ended task, such as drafting a communication strategy or planning an executive event.
Host: And what did they find when they analyzed the results?
Expert: First, both ChatGPT groups—with and without the prompting guide—performed significantly better on the tasks compared to the control group. Second, having access to ChatGPT significantly reduced temporal demand, meaning participants felt less time pressure. However, neither ChatGPT condition significantly reduced mental demand.
Host: That is interesting. You would think the AI would make the task feel less mentally demanding.
Expert: You would, but the results showed no significant effect of either condition on mental demand. One reason could be that even though the AI helps draft the content, the human user still has to evaluate, edit, and coordinate the interaction, which keeps the mental workload relatively high. Also, the study found that cognitive load did not have a significant direct effect on task performance in this setup.
Host: What about the psychological side of things? Did using AI make people feel less connected to their work?
Expert: Yes, it did. Both experimental groups experienced a significant reduction in psychological ownership of their task outcome. When the AI does a substantial portion of the work, users feel less personal investment in the creation. Interestingly, in this specific experiment, this reduction in psychological ownership did not significantly hurt performance. However, because this was a single-session experiment, the researchers caution that the long-term effects of losing ownership could lead to lower vigilance and passive acceptance of AI errors over time.
Host: Did they find any way to counteract this loss of ownership?
Expert: They found that AI literacy played a significant role. For participants with higher AI literacy, the negative effect of AI access on temporal demand was weaker. Furthermore, higher AI literacy partially weakened the negative effect of the prompting guide on psychological ownership.
Host: How can business professionals apply these findings in their organizations?
Expert: The key takeaway is that integrating AI is not just about giving employees access to a tool; it requires managing how they collaborate with it. Since AI access can erode a worker's sense of ownership, organizations should invest in AI literacy training. When employees understand how AI works and how to direct it, they are more likely to view the AI as a supportive extension of their own capabilities rather than a substitute. This helps them maintain a sense of control and authorship.
Host: Are there any limitations we should keep in mind when interpreting these findings?
Expert: Yes. The study was based on a modest sample size of one hundred and thirty-six participants and used a single-session experimental setting. In the real world, human-AI collaboration happens over longer periods, and reliance on self-reported measures can introduce some bias. Future research with larger and longitudinal setups will help clarify these long-term trends.
Host: Thank you, Alex, for breaking down this study. To summarize for our listeners: while ChatGPT improves performance and reduces time pressure, it also reduces a worker's sense of ownership over the output. Developing AI literacy within your teams is a practical way to help maintain human agency and responsibility. Thank you all for listening to A.I.S. Insights. We will see you next time.