An assistant drafts a response, ranks applications or proposes a course of action. A person approves it. The presence of that final click does not tell us how deeply the recommendation was examined.
THE DOCUMENTED EXAMPLE
A CHI 2025 survey of 319 knowledge workers linked greater confidence in generative AI with lower reported critical-thinking effort. [1]
WHAT THIS DOES NOT ESTABLISH
These are self-reported associations, not proof that AI inevitably reduces anyone’s ability to think.
THROUGH VERONOCRACY
For Veronocracy, the issue is whether a person can question the suggestion, seek other evidence and make a different choice. Human agency needs conditions that make judgment possible, beyond a formal approval step.
Responsibility should come with time, relevant information and a real ability to disagree. The question is how assistance can expand a person’s capacity to act without quietly replacing it.
If you approve the answer, have you also examined the question?