Why 100% Reliance on Generative AI Could Be Your Biggest Mistake

Generative AI is increasing productivity and streamlining tasks, but relying on it for everything isn’t as effective as many assume.

1. Mistake #1: Believing AI is flawless

Hallucinations and inconsistencies
AI models sometimes output incorrect or made-up information with high confidence. A Stanford-backed study found that general-purpose chatbots give flawed answers in legal queries 58–82 percent of the time, and hallucinate frequently in legal tools as well. RAG (retrieval-augmented generation) systems reduce hallucination, but still err 17–33 percent of the time. In medicine and scholarly writing, AI citations are often fabricated, with 47 percent of references shown to be false.

These hallucinations can seriously damage credibility and trust. For example, lawyers have been sanctioned for citing cases that never existed.

2. Mistake #2: Losing your ability to think critically

Erosion of critical thinking
An MIT Media Lab study with 54 participants showed that those using ChatGPT to write essays had the weakest brain activity, poorest originality, lowest retention, and greatest reliance on copy-paste methods.

Time reports this “metacognitive laziness,” meaning that AI-supported writing doesn’t just speed things up it may be rewiring the brain for shortcuts over deep thinking.

FT reports in educational settings that 92 percent of UK undergraduates use generative AI, yet educators warn that reliance on AI can hinder development of essential skills.

3. Mistake #3: Automation bias

Users tend to trust AI outputs even without verification. This human tendency is called automation bias. It leads to commission errors (accepting wrong output) or omission errors (failing to check for errors) .

4. The trust paradox

The more fluent and human-like the AI, the more we trust it even when it hallucinates. That trust is part of the problem.


How to Use Generative AI Responsibly

  1. Treat AI as a helper, not a replacement. Always verify outputs with trusted sources.
  2. Ask AI to cite and provide sources. If references are absent or unverifiable, treat output skeptically.
  3. Use retrieval-augmented systems that reference factual databases to reduce hallucinations.
  4. Maintain human oversight. Critical thinking and domain knowledge remain essential, especially in high-stakes areas like medicine or law.

Conclusion

Generative AI can dramatically improve workflows and creativity, but:

  • It produces hallucinations that can mislead and harm credibility.
  • Over-reliance can dull critical thinking and memory.
  • We must develop systems and habits that balance AI’s speed with human judgment.

GenAI belongs in our toolkit but our brains should still remain in charge.

Back to blog