A RECENT MIT study titled “Your Brain on ChatGPT has been making waves lately, and for good reason. As Jenny Muir from Australia, my colleague at Global Alliance for Public Relations and Communication Management, states, “ChatGPT can harm an individual’s critical thinking over time.”
It suggests that students who rely on AI for writing may experience a decline in critical thinking skills over time, with their brains showing less activity. While the findings may sound alarming, I see it as a powerful call to action for all of us.
This isn’t a doomsday scenario, but a clear warning that we need to be more intentional about how we use these incredibly powerful tools.
The problem isn’t AI, but how we use it
Let’s be honest, the convenience of AI is seductive. It’s so quick and seemingly effortless that it’s easy to fall into a passive trap. But as a great thinker in this space, Tey Bannerman, puts it, ChatGPT is trained to be confident and agreeable, not necessarily truthful.
Think about it: the model is shaped by human feedback that rewards pleasant, helpful-sounding responses. This creates a “confidence bias” where it’s designed to tell you what you want to hear, rather than what you need to know.
This is a crucial distinction that has completely changed how I work. I no longer ask, “How should we approach this?” Instead, I challenge the AI with questions like, “What are all the reasons this could fail?” This simple shift in perspective moves the AI from being a source of validation to a true sparring partner. It helps me uncover blind spots and genuinely challenges my assumptions, leading to far better outcomes.
The human element remains indispensable
As the founder and CEO of ArdentComm and the AI Center of Excellence, my personal view has always been that AI won’t replace us, but those who don’t learn how to use it will be replaced.
The keyword here is “use.” We have to be cautious and responsible. This technology comes with immense power, and we have a collective duty to use it for good. This means we must not only embrace and master AI but also use it ethically and with great responsibility.
I wholeheartedly support my colleague Jenny Muir’s views on this as well. She points out that the conversation around AI is finally shifting from a focus on just technology to a more holistic view that includes change management, risk, reputation, trust, and human impact. As Bonnie Caver from the United States aptly puts it, “change management, risk, reputation, trust, fit for purpose, organizational vision, and human impact are now beginning to come into focus.”
This is exactly what we need. For too long, organizations have treated AI as a simple tooldeployment when in fact, it’s a profound transformation of how we do business and interact with society.
This is also why I’m proud to align with the Global Alliance’s “Venice Pledge.” The pledge, which outlines Responsible AI Guiding Principles for the PR and Communication Profession, is a call to action for the industry to embed responsible AI practices in all that we do. As a director for the Global Alliance, I have long advocated for the responsible integration of AI into PR practices.
The principles of the Venice Pledge emphasize that AI should be a tool to support, not replace, human judgment and creativity. My perspective is that the optimal synergy between humans and AI is one where human professionals bring their irreplaceable qualities of judgment, creativity, and ethical consideration, which AI can then augment but never fully replace.
The Venice Pledge provides a crucial framework for navigating these complexities, ensuring we prioritize transparency and integrity above all else.
The MIT study and the concerns from experts like Jenny are not about AI being inherently evil. They are “warning shots” about what happens when we use AI without guardrails and a deep understanding of its true nature. We, as humans, must get it right. Our profession is critical to this, and it’s up to us to activate our communities and lead the way toward a future where AI is a force for good.
Redesigning our approach to AI
The research from MIT, combined with our growing understanding of AI’s biases and the insights from experts like Jenny, presents a strategic imperative for leaders and organizations.
We can’t treat AI adoption as a simple technology deployment. It’s a fundamental change in how we think, how we make decisions, and how information flows.
To succeed, we need a proactive approach that prioritizes governance, literacy, and change management.
First, our AI governance must evolve. It’s not enough to just audit for accuracy; we must also audit for training biases. This means understanding the data the AI was trained on and the feedback loops that shaped its behavior.
Second, AI literacy must become a core organizational capability, not an afterthought delegated to the IT department. People need to understand not just how to use the tools, but how these tools are designed, what their limitations are, and how they can potentially reshape our decision-making over time.
Finally, and most critically, we need to treat AI strategy as a process of change management. We’re not just implementing a new software; we’re fundamentally altering our work culture. This requires a human-centric approach that prepares our teams for this new reality and helps them leverage AI as a co-pilot, not a replacement for their own critical thinking.
The MIT study’s findings are a powerful reminder that while AI offers immense benefits in terms of efficiency and productivity, it comes with a potential cognitive cost. It is up to us, as leaders and communicators, to ensure we are using these tools responsibly. By being mindful of AI’s inherent biases and designing for human oversight and critical engagement, we can harness its power while preserving and even strengthening our own unique human capabilities.
(Ana Pista is the Founder and CEO of Ardent Communications. She is also the CEO of AI Centre of Excellence.)
