Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This study investigates software engineers' cognitive engagement when using agentic coding assistants, revealing a decline in engagement as tasks progress. The research highlights that current agentic coding assistant designs lack sufficient support for reflection, verification, and meaning-making. The authors propose design opportunities using richer interaction modalities and cognitive-forcing mechanisms to sustain engagement and promote deeper thinking in AI-assisted programming.
Software engineers using agentic coding assistants experience a steady decline in cognitive engagement, suggesting current tools risk promoting complacency rather than augmenting human reasoning.
Over-reliance on AI systems can undermine users' critical thinking and promote complacency, a risk intensified by the emergence of agentic AI systems that operate with minimal human involvement. In software engineering, agentic coding assistants are rapidly becoming embedded in everyday development workflows. Since software engineers create systems deployed across diverse and high-stakes real-world contexts, these assistants must function not merely as autonomous task performers but as Tools for Thought that actively support human reasoning and sensemaking. We conducted a formative study examining software engineers' cognitive engagement and sensemaking processes when working with an agentic coding assistant. Our findings reveal that cognitive engagement consistently declines as tasks progress, and that current agentic coding assistants' designs provide limited affordances for reflection, verification, and meaning-making. Based on these findings, e identify concrete design opportunities leveraging richer interaction modalities and cognitive-forcing mechanisms to sustain engagement and promote deeper thinking in AI-assisted programming.
