Artificial intelligence and qualitative research: The promise and perils of large language model (LLM) ‘assistance’

IF 8.3 2区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS, FINANCE Critical Perspectives on Accounting Pub Date : 2024-02-22 DOI:10.1016/j.cpa.2024.102722
John Roberts, Max Baker, Jane Andrew
{"title":"Artificial intelligence and qualitative research: The promise and perils of large language model (LLM) ‘assistance’","authors":"John Roberts,&nbsp;Max Baker,&nbsp;Jane Andrew","doi":"10.1016/j.cpa.2024.102722","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>New large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT have the potential to change qualitative research by contributing to every stage of the research process from generating interview questions to structuring research publications. However, it is far from clear whether such ‘assistance’ will enable or deskill and eventually displace the qualitative researcher. This paper sets out to explore the implications for qualitative research of the recently emerged capabilities of LLMs; how they have acquired their seemingly ‘human-like’ capabilities to ‘converse’ with us humans, and in what ways these capabilities are deceptive or misleading. Building on a comparison of the different ‘trainings’ of humans and LLMs, the paper first traces the seemingly human-like qualities of the LLM to the human proclivity to project communicative intent into or onto LLMs’ purely imitative capacity to predict the structure of human communication. It then goes on to detail the ways in which such human-like communication is deceptive and misleading in relation to the absolute ‘certainty’ with which LLMs ‘converse’, their intrinsic tendencies to ‘hallucination’ and ‘sycophancy’, the narrow conception of ‘artificial intelligence’, LLMs’ complete lack of ethical sensibility or capacity for responsibility, and finally the feared danger of an ‘emergence’ of ‘human-competitive’ or ‘superhuman’ LLM capabilities. The paper concludes by noting the potential dangers of the widespread use of LLMs as ‘mediators’ of human self-understanding and culture. A postscript offers a brief reflection on what only humans can do as qualitative researchers.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48078,"journal":{"name":"Critical Perspectives on Accounting","volume":"99 ","pages":"Article 102722"},"PeriodicalIF":8.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1045235424000212/pdfft?md5=4996bb8fea4407c2873234cd74db3f50&pid=1-s2.0-S1045235424000212-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Perspectives on Accounting","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1045235424000212","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

New large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT have the potential to change qualitative research by contributing to every stage of the research process from generating interview questions to structuring research publications. However, it is far from clear whether such ‘assistance’ will enable or deskill and eventually displace the qualitative researcher. This paper sets out to explore the implications for qualitative research of the recently emerged capabilities of LLMs; how they have acquired their seemingly ‘human-like’ capabilities to ‘converse’ with us humans, and in what ways these capabilities are deceptive or misleading. Building on a comparison of the different ‘trainings’ of humans and LLMs, the paper first traces the seemingly human-like qualities of the LLM to the human proclivity to project communicative intent into or onto LLMs’ purely imitative capacity to predict the structure of human communication. It then goes on to detail the ways in which such human-like communication is deceptive and misleading in relation to the absolute ‘certainty’ with which LLMs ‘converse’, their intrinsic tendencies to ‘hallucination’ and ‘sycophancy’, the narrow conception of ‘artificial intelligence’, LLMs’ complete lack of ethical sensibility or capacity for responsibility, and finally the feared danger of an ‘emergence’ of ‘human-competitive’ or ‘superhuman’ LLM capabilities. The paper concludes by noting the potential dangers of the widespread use of LLMs as ‘mediators’ of human self-understanding and culture. A postscript offers a brief reflection on what only humans can do as qualitative researchers.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
人工智能与定性研究:大型语言模型(LLM)"协助 "的前景与危险
新的大型语言模型(LLMs),如 ChatGPT,有可能改变定性研究,因为它有助于研究过程的每个阶段,从生成访谈问题到构建研究出版物。然而,这种 "帮助 "是会使定性研究人员成为可能,还是会使定性研究人员变得乏味并最终取而代之,这一点还很不清楚。本文旨在探讨最近出现的法学硕士能力对定性研究的影响;他们是如何获得与我们人类 "对话 "的看似 "类人 "的能力的,以及这些能力在哪些方面具有欺骗性或误导性。通过比较人类和低地语言识别器的不同 "训练",本文首先追溯了低地语言识别器看似类似人类的特质,即人类倾向于将交流意图投射到低地语言识别器预测人类交流结构的纯粹模仿能力上。然后,文章详细阐述了这种类似人类的交流如何具有欺骗性和误导性,包括 LLMs "交谈 "的绝对 "确定性"、其 "幻觉 "和 "谄媚 "的内在倾向、"人工智能 "的狭隘概念、LLMs 完全缺乏道德感或责任能力,以及最后令人担忧的 "人类竞争 "或 "超人 "LLM 能力 "出现 "的危险。本文最后指出,广泛使用 LLM 作为人类自我认识和文化的 "中介 "具有潜在危险。后记对人类作为定性研究者所能做的事情进行了简要反思。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
7.80%
发文量
91
期刊介绍: Critical Perspectives on Accounting aims to provide a forum for the growing number of accounting researchers and practitioners who realize that conventional theory and practice is ill-suited to the challenges of the modern environment, and that accounting practices and corporate behavior are inextricably connected with many allocative, distributive, social, and ecological problems of our era. From such concerns, a new literature is emerging that seeks to reformulate corporate, social, and political activity, and the theoretical and practical means by which we apprehend and affect that activity. Research Areas Include: • Studies involving the political economy of accounting, critical accounting, radical accounting, and accounting''s implication in the exercise of power • Financial accounting''s role in the processes of international capital formation, including its impact on stock market stability and international banking activities • Management accounting''s role in organizing the labor process • The relationship between accounting and the state in various social formations • Studies of accounting''s historical role, as a means of "remembering" the subject''s social and conflictual character • The role of accounting in establishing "real" democracy at work and other domains of life • Accounting''s adjudicative function in international exchanges, such as that of the Third World debt • Antagonisms between the social and private character of accounting, such as conflicts of interest in the audit process • The identification of new constituencies for radical and critical accounting information • Accounting''s involvement in gender and class conflicts in the workplace • The interplay between accounting, social conflict, industrialization, bureaucracy, and technocracy • Reappraisals of the role of accounting as a science and technology • Critical reviews of "useful" scientific knowledge about organizations
期刊最新文献
Diversity, dialogic pedagogy and intersubjectivity in the classroom: Contributions from the Global South Mediating ESG: Mapping individual responses to a changing field Therapeutic governance: The art of mediating shame and blame and quasi-judicial pragmatic technologies in Indonesian government auditor-auditee engagements Environmental accounting: In communicating reality, do we construct reality? Director and shareholder interactions at shareholder meetings: Compromising accountability in the service of colonialism
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1