PofoliaShared via Pofolia

Discover Computing· 2026Q2

A dual path cognitive behavioural model of artificial intelligence assisted decision making for environmentally sustainable behaviour

Junchao Chen, Tinghong Huang

Short summary

A new cognitive-behavioral model explains how AI can either promote or undermine environmentally sustainable actions by influencing decision-making through mechanisms like simplified diagnostics and reinforced confidence, or conversely, through bias and over-reliance.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Key points

  • AI can enable sustainable behavior via diagnostic simplification, calibrated decision confidence, and self-regulatory reinforcement.
  • AI can hinder sustainable behavior through algorithmic bias, miscalibrated reliance, dependency, moral licensing, or rebound effects.
  • Calibrated reliance on AI is the critical factor, with underuse and overuse both detrimental.
  • Task complexity and user experience have asymmetric moderating effects on AI's impact.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) systems do more than alter choice architecture: they select, explain, personalise and repeatedly reinforce options. This conceptual paper develops a cognitive–behavioural pathway model explaining when AI-assisted decision-making may narrow the intention–behaviour gap in environmentally sustainable consumption, mobility, energy use and waste-related behaviour, and when the same assistance may become counterproductive. The model distinguishes three enabling mechanisms—diagnostic simplification, calibrated decision confidence and self-regulatory reinforcement—from three countervailing mechanisms—algorithmic and selection bias, miscalibrated reliance, and dependency, moral licensing or rebound. Calibrated reliance is positioned as the central boundary condition linking AI support to action: insufficient reliance produces underuse and algorithm aversion, whereas excessive reliance produces automation bias and reduced independent judgement. Task complexity and user experience are therefore expected to have asymmetric rather than uniformly beneficial moderating effects. The model also introduces bias migration, referring to the displacement of error from individual cognition to system data, filtering and human–AI interaction. The contribution lies in integrating positive and negative pathways within a temporally extended model that distinguishes immediate choice, repeated behaviour, net environmental impact and off-platform agency. The paper concludes with testable propositions and a three-stage empirical programme combining controlled experiments, longitudinal field evidence and algorithmic audits.

The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Discover Computing, 2026 · DOI ↗

TakeawaysPremium
Ask the paperFree account

Continue with a free account

Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.

Continue free on the web

Sign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.

On your phone:

Field: Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment

Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the EnvironmentEnergy