Published October 4, 2026 | Version v1
Preprint Open

Crivo Cognitivo: A Social Infrastructure for Lifelong Cognitive Development and Human–AI Collective Intelligence

Authors/Creators

Description

Societies maintain extensive infrastructures for the care of the body, whereas infrastructures explicitly designed for the continuous, lifelong cultivation of the mind, and for its use in collective problem-solving, are comparatively rare. The diffusion of generative artificial intelligence (AI) sharpens the question of what happens to human thinking when intellectual tasks can be delegated at almost no cost. Early evidence suggests that the answer depends on tool design: unrestricted AI assistance can raise immediate performance yet impair later unaided performance, while pedagogical safeguards mitigate this.

This article introduces Crivo Cognitivo, a social, educational and technological infrastructure for lifelong cognitive development and collective intelligence, mediated by AI under the principle “AI assists; humans decide.” We (i) give a canonical definition and a controlled vocabulary so that the concept can be cited, versioned and tested; (ii) position it against research on lifelong learning, learning with AI, collective intelligence and deliberation; (iii) specify its components and the Inbound Learning methodology and Virtual First project on which it builds; (iv) translate its principles into operational design rules and measurable constructs; and (v) pre-specify a protocol for a six-session, face-to-face, intergenerational pilot, with success criteria, an analysis plan and decision rules, together with the outline of a planned controlled study. The pilot tests feasibility and acceptability, not efficacy. Results will be reported in a subsequent article. The framework makes empirical claims that may fail; the protocol is designed so that they can.

Framework version 1.0. Conceptual article with a pre-specified study protocol (preprint).

Notes (English)

Framework version 1.0. Conceptual article with pre-specified pilot protocol (six-session intergenerational feasibility pilot); pilot results will be deposited as a separate record. Supplementary files (Portuguese, v1.1): six facilitator scripts, synthesis report template, consent form template and change log. Earlier working title of the framework: Cognitive Commons. English text prepared with AI assistance (Claude, Anthropic), including translation, under the author's direction. To cite the concept across versions use the concept DOI ("Cite all versions"); to cite this formulation use the version DOI.

Files

01_Guiao_Sessao_1_v1.1.pdf

Files (1.3 MB)

Name Size
md5:72fa632625006cca46c2e2ef755af149
91.2 kB Preview Download
md5:bd03f65a50bdfe3cee467f0b3abecaae
76.2 kB Preview Download
md5:ae41ea5e79a8c2aa2d78d515cf0ead9f
83.3 kB Preview Download
md5:0ab4ce635f8f18d859a6573f3b5b433f
75.6 kB Preview Download
md5:7896fe94a9cc8be806f0631f9df60cbe
79.8 kB Preview Download
md5:7963940b49c442e864186bca301026b5
81.1 kB Preview Download
md5:393fe666c0050ef8347459f049bef231
158.2 kB Preview Download
md5:beece208e8524c4dc5d7b65a4f534f75
57.6 kB Preview Download
md5:0514663bac81ba375303199fe9df13b7
58.1 kB Preview Download
md5:5b262897dba6e93877f35c1b064ba697
549.4 kB Preview Download

Additional details

Related works

Is cited by
Book chapter: 10.4018/978-1-6684-6701-5.ch017 (DOI)
Preprint: 10.5281/zenodo.22880726 (DOI)
Preprint: 10.5281/zenodo.22916386 (DOI)

References

  • Bastani, H., Bastani, O., Sungu, A., Ge, H., Kabakcı, Ö., & Mariman, R. (2025). Generative AI without guardrails can harm learning: Evidence from high school mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 122(26), e2422633122. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2422633122 Bjork, E. L., & Bjork, R. A. (2011). Making things hard on yourself, but in a good way: Creating desirable difficulties to enhance learning. In M. A. Gernsbacher, R. W. Pew, L. M. Hough, & J. R. Pomerantz (Eds.), Psychology and the real world (pp. 56–64). Worth Publishers. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., & Kao, C. F. (1984). The efficient assessment of need for cognition. Journal of Personality Assessment, 48(3), 306–307. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4803_13 Chen, B., Vansteenkiste, M., Beyers, W., et al. (2015). Basic psychological need satisfaction, need frustration, and need strength across four cultures. Motivation and Emotion, 39(2), 216–236. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-014-9450-1 Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The "what" and "why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01 Delbecq, A. L., & Van de Ven, A. H. (1971). A group process model for problem identification and program planning. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 7(4), 466–492. Delors, J., et al. (1996). Learning: The treasure within. Report to UNESCO of the International Commission on Education for the Twenty-first Century. UNESCO. Eldridge, S. M., Chan, C. L., Campbell, M. J., et al. (2016). CONSORT 2010 statement: Extension to randomised pilot and feasibility trials. BMJ, 355, i5239. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i5239 Faure, E., et al. (1972). Learning to be: The world of education today and tomorrow. UNESCO. Fishkin, J. S. (2009). When the people speak: Deliberative democracy and public consultation. Oxford University Press. Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906 Hart, S. G., & Staveland, L. E. (1988). Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of empirical and theoretical research. In P. A. Hancock & N. Meshkati (Eds.), Human mental workload (pp. 139–183). North-Holland. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4115(08)62386-9 Hertzog, C., Kramer, A. F., Wilson, R. S., & Lindenberger, U. (2008). Enrichment effects on adult cognitive development: Can the functional capacity of older adults be preserved and enhanced? Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9(1), 1–65. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6053.2009.01034.x Janis, I. L. (1972). Victims of groupthink. Houghton Mifflin. Kalyuga, S., Ayres, P., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2003). The expertise reversal effect. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 23–31. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3801_4 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 [Preprint]. arXiv:2506.08872. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2506.08872 Landemore, H. (2013). Democratic reason: Politics, collective intelligence, and the rule of the many. Princeton University Press. Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159–174. https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310 Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press. Lee, H.-P., Sarkar, A., Tankelevitch, L., Drosos, I., Rintel, S., Banks, R., & Wilson, N. (2025). The impact of generative AI on critical thinking: Self-reported reductions in cognitive effort and confidence effects from a survey of knowledge workers. In Proceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '25). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3706598.3713778 Lévy, P. (1997). Collective intelligence: Mankind's emerging world in cyberspace (R. Bononno, Trans.). Plenum Trade. Lima, Vitor (2026a). From Monotonic Complementarity to the Maximal Complementarity Zone: A Computational Test of the Relational Deficit Index. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22880726 Lima, Vitor (2026b). Informational Coupling Ratios: An Explicit Measurement Method for Reading PESTEL through the Informational Corpus. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22916386 Livingston, G., et al. (2024). Dementia prevention, intervention, and care: 2024 report of the Lancet standing Commission. The Lancet, 404(10452), 572–628. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(24)01296-0 Long, D., & Magerko, B. (2020). What is AI literacy? Competencies and design considerations. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '20). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376727 Nosek, B. A., Ebersole, C. R., DeHaven, A. C., & Mellor, D. T. (2018). The preregistration revolution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(11), 2600–2606. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1708274114 O'Brien, B. C., Harris, I. B., Beckman, T. J., Reed, D. A., & Cook, D. A. (2014). Standards for reporting qualitative research: A synthesis of recommendations. Academic Medicine, 89(9), 1245–1251. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000000388 Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 (General Data Protection Regulation). Official Journal of the European Union, L 119, 4.5.2016, 1–88. Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act). Official Journal of the European Union, L, 2024/1689, 12.7.2024. Regulation (EU) 2026/1744 (Digital Omnibus on AI), amending Regulation (EU) 2024/1689. Official Journal of the European Union, L, 24.7.2026. Risko, E. F., & Gilbert, S. J. (2016). Cognitive offloading. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20(9), 676–688. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2016.07.002 Samartinho, J., Carvalho, L. S. de, Pereira, P., & Lima, V. (2023). Virtual First: From ideation to implementation. In S. Rodrigues & J. Mourato (Eds.), The impact of HEIs on regional development: Facts and practices of collaborative work with SMEs (pp. 318–332). IGI Global Scientific Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-6684-6701-5.ch017 Schraw, G., & Dennison, R. S. (1994). Assessing metacognitive awareness. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19(4), 460–475. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1994.1033 Sharma, M., Tong, M., Korbak, T., et al. (2024). Towards understanding sycophancy in language models. In International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR 2024). arXiv:2310.13548. Simons, D. J., Boot, W. R., Charness, N., et al. (2016). Do "brain-training" programs work? Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 17(3), 103–186. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100616661983 Slamecka, N. J., & Graf, P. (1978). The generation effect: Delineation of a phenomenon. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 4(6), 592–604. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.4.6.592 Sparrow, B., Liu, J., & Wegner, D. M. (2011). Google effects on memory: Cognitive consequences of having information at our fingertips. Science, 333(6043), 776–778. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1207745 Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4 Thabane, L., Ma, J., Chu, R., et al. (2010). A tutorial on pilot studies: The what, why and how. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 10, 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-10-1 Vuorikari, R., Kluzer, S., & Punie, Y. (2022). DigComp 2.2: The Digital Competence Framework for Citizens. Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2760/115376 Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. Wilson, E. B. (1927). Probable inference, the law of succession, and statistical inference. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 22(158), 209–212. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1927.10502953 Woolley, A. W., Chabris, C. F., Pentland, A., Hashmi, N., & Malone, T. W. (2010). Evidence for a collective intelligence factor in the performance of human groups. Science, 330(6004), 686–688. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1193147