Tinjauan Literatur: Dampak Dualistik Penggunaan ChatGPT terhadap Kemampuan Berpikir Kritis dan Keterampilan Membaca Akademik
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55606/jutiti.v6i1.7229Keywords:
ChatGPT, Critical Thinking, Dualistic Impact, Generative AI, Reading SkillsAbstract
The rapid integration of ChatGPT into higher education has generated significant debate regarding its dualistic impact on essential academic skills. This literature review aims to critically examine the paradoxical effects of ChatGPT usage on students' critical thinking abilities and academic reading skills. A systematic literature review method was employed, synthesizing empirical studies, theoretical papers, and systematic reviews published between 2021 and 2026. The analysis of 25 selected articles reveals a pronounced duality: strategic and educational integration of ChatGPT can enhance analytical reasoning, metacognitive monitoring, and critical autonomy by facilitating complex problem-solving and personalized scaffolding. However, uncritical and excessive reliance on the tool leads to cognitive offloading, diminished intrinsic cognitive engagement, and superficial information processing, manifested as "cognitive atrophy" and reduced reading comprehension. The findings indicate that the dual impact is not inherent to the technology itself but is contingent upon usage patterns, educational design, and individual learner characteristics. This review implies that educators must develop structured AI literacy frameworks and collaborative learning models that leverage ChatGPT’s benefits while actively mitigating the risks of cognitive dependency. Future research should focus on longitudinal studies to assess the long-term effects of ChatGPT on cognitive development across diverse disciplines.
Downloads
References
Aldamen, H., Almashour, M., Al-Deaibes, M., & Alsharefeen, R. (2026). Comparing AI-assisted and teacher-led reading strategy instruction in an EFL context: a quasi-experimental study. Frontiers in Education, Volume 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2026.1828564
Asim, T., Shaheen, N., Tasneem, A., & Yousuf, M. M. (2024). Navigating ChatGPT : Opportunities , Challenges , and Plagiarism in Student Writing. International Journal of English Literature and Social Sciences, 9(6), 393–405. https://doi.org/10.22161/ijels
Bhattarai, K. (2025). Mediating Role of Cognitive Offloading: Linkage Between Generative AI Usage and Critical Thinking. https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi-fe20251218121566
Choudhuri, R., Sanchez, C., Burnett, M., & Sarma, A. (2026). Thinking Less, Trusting More: GenAI’s Impacts on Students’ Cognitive Habits. ArXiv, 1(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2601.22430
Cong-lem, N., Soyoof, A., & Tsering, D. (2025). A Systematic Review of the Limitations and Associated Opportunities of ChatGPT. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 41(7), 3851–3866. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2024.2344142
Corbin, T. A., & Walton, J. (2025). The Missing Story of GenAI Summarisers : a Critical Research Agenda. Higher Education Research & Development, 44(7), 1655–1668. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2025.2486185
Darmawansah, D., Rachman, D., & Febiyani, F. (2024). Collaborative Argument Map-Based ChatGPT to Enhance EFL Students ’ Argumentation Complexity and Group Efficacy. Taiwan International ESP Journal, 15(2), 97–124. https://doi.org/10.6706/TIESPJ.202412
Dikilitas, K., Klippen, M. I. F., & Keles, S. (2024). A Systematic Rapid Review of Empirical Research on Students ’ Use of ChatGPT in Higher Education. Journal of Systematic Reviews in Education, 2, 103–125. https://doi.org/10.23865/njsre.v2.6227
Domínguez, H. G., Campo, L., Delgado, N., & Maza, M. S. de la. (2025). Relationship Between the Use of ChatGPT for Academic Purposes and Plagiarism: The Influence of Student-Related Variables on Cheating Behavior. Interactive Learning Environments, 33(6), 4047–4061. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2025.2457351
Etkin, H. K., Etkin, K. J., Carter, R. J., & Rolle, C. E. (2025). Differential Effects of GPT-Based Tools on Comprehension of Standardized Passages. Frontiers in Education, 10, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1506752
Farhat, Z. (2026). When AI Thinks for Us: Unveiling the Cognitive and Social Toll of ChatGPT Over-Reliance. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 40(3), e70205. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.70205
Jaroonchokanan, N., & Sirisathitkul, C. (2025). Implementing ChatGPT as Tutor , Tutee , and Tool in Physics and Chemistry. Substantia. An International Journal of the History of Chemistry, 9, 89–101. https://doi.org/10.36253/Substantia-2808
Kosmyna, N., Hauptmann, E., Yuan, Y. T., Situ, J., Liao, X.-H., Beresnitzky, A. V., Braunstein, I., & Maes, P. (2025). Your Brain on ChatGPT : Accumulation of Cognitive Debt when Using an AI Assistant for Essay Writing Task. ArXiv, 1–216. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2506.08872
Lin, C.-C., Lin, T.-H., & Tang, C.-K. (2025). Enhancing English Reading Comprehension, Learning Motivation and Attitude Through AI-Supported Pre-Reading Scaffolding. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 41(6), e70150. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.70150
Melford, M. A. P. O. B., & Gador, S. C. (2025). ChatGPT as a tool for Enhancing Explanation Letter Writing Skills. International Journal of English Literature and Social Sciences, 10(6), 102–112. https://doi.org/10.22161/ijels
Puppart, B., & Aru, J. (2025). Short-Term AI Literacy Intervention Does Not Reduce Over-Reliance on Incorrect ChatGPT Recommendations. ArXiv, 1–33. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2503.10556
Rahimi, M. (2025). Synergising Dialogic Teaching With Competencies-Trained GenAI Dialoguing for Critical Thinking and Communication Competencies. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 22(2). https://doi.org/10.53761/vaa8h214
Raitskaya, L., & Tikhonova, E. (2025). Enhancing Critical Thinking Skills in ChatGPT-Human Interaction : A Scoping Review. JOURNAL OF LANGUAGE & EDUCATION, 11(2), 5–19. https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2025. 27387
Singh, A., Guan, Z., & Rieh, S. Y. (2025). Enhancing Critical Thinking in Generative AI Search with Metacognitive Prompts. Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 62(1), 672–684. https://doi.org/10.1002/pra2.1287
Stadler, M., Bannert, M., & Sailer, M. (2024). Cognitive ease at a cost: LLMs reduce mental effort but compromise depth in student scientific inquiry. Computers in Human Behavior, 160(July), 108386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2024.108386
Tao, L., Qu, Y., & Bi, P. (2025). Longitudinal development of L2 learners’ linguistic complexity in reading-to-write argumentative tasks. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 75, 101502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2025.101502
Watkins, M. (2024). 7 . Automated Aid or Offloading Close Reading ? Student Perspectives on AI Reading Assistants. In Teaching and Generative AI: Pedagogical Possibilities and Productive Tensions (pp. 113–120).
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Jurnal Teknik Informatika dan Teknologi Informasi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
