This is my takeaway:

Authors analyzed ~300 workers doing ~1000 tasks. They collected self-reported measure of using critical thinking [yes/no], and estimate of cognitive effort of doing the task. Authors also measured workers' confidence in themselves doing the task or the AI doing the task.

They found: if someone is confident that AI can do the task, they report using critical thinking less, even though they think the task is easy. When someone is confident in doing the task and in evaluating AI responses, they use critical thinking more, even though they think the task is harder.

I think the paper is saying: low-domain expertise (read: confidence) + unrestricted AI tooling can eliminate the human from the loop. The fallout is better automation or unreliable systems. We need to resolve this ambiguity.

The question is: should low-domain expertise be coupled with more restricted AI tooling as a critical thinking forcing function? Are schools/workplaces right in restricting AI so students/new workers can reach the point of high domain expertise?