Dual Nature of GenAI: Catalyst or Barrier for Critical Thinking and Problem-Solving Skills? A Systematic Review

Aim/Purpose: This systematic literature review aims to comprehensively and critically synthesize the impacts of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools on students’ critical thinking (CT) and problem-solving (PS) skills. In addition, it seeks to identify key research gaps and contribute to the theoretical discussion of GenAI’s dual nature in education. Background: GenAI is increasingly integrated into educational contexts, prompting ongoing debate about its influence on CT and PS – essential 21st-century skills. Despite the rapid growth in interest in GenAI-supported learning, a clear synthesis of empirical evidence on its impact on these skills remains limited. Methodology: Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we conducted a systematic review of empirical studies published between 2022 and 2025 that examined the use of GenAI in relation to students’ CT and PS. In total, 173 records were included in the review. Contribution: This review advances a nuanced understanding of GenAI’s dual role in education by synthesizing current empirical evidence and providing a foundation for informed pedagogical, policy, and research decisions. Findings: Our systematic review has demonstrated that GenAI holds considerable potential to act as both a catalyst and a constraint in the development of students’ CT and PS. On one hand, GenAI can scaffold reflective inquiry, foster diverse perspectives, and support structured engagement with complex tasks. On the other hand, its widespread and often uncritical use raises concerns around dependency, superficial reasoning, and the erosion of independent PS and CT capacities. Recommendations for Practitioners: The findings highlight the importance of designing learning environments that cultivate AI literacy, understood not merely as technical proficiency, but as the capacity to interrogate, contextualize, and critically engage with AI-generated content. Embedding AI literacy across educational contexts may help protect CT and PS while enabling responsible use of GenAI. Recommendation for Researchers: The review identified three major research gaps: a strong regional imbalance favoring high-income contexts; a predominance of self-reported and cross-sectional designs over experimental approaches; and a disproportionate focus on university students compared to earlier educational stages. Impact on Society: The findings suggest that the key issue is not whether GenAI will shape education, but how educational systems will shape its use. Evidence-based and deliberate integration of GenAI is essential if it is to support, rather than undermine, the development of students’ CT and PS. Future Research: Future studies should employ robust longitudinal and experimental designs to examine the long-term cognitive and developmental impacts of sustained use of GenAI, particularly in underexplored educational contexts.