The AI of the Beholder: Intra‐Professional Sensemaking of an Epistemic Technology

IF 7 1区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS Journal of Management Studies Pub Date : 2024-03-16 DOI:10.1111/joms.13065
Harry Scarbrough, Yaru Chen, Gerardo Patriotta
{"title":"The AI of the Beholder: Intra‐Professional Sensemaking of an Epistemic Technology","authors":"Harry Scarbrough, Yaru Chen, Gerardo Patriotta","doi":"10.1111/joms.13065","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"New technologies are equivocal, triggering sensemaking responses from the individuals who encounter them. As an ‘epistemic technology’ AI poses new challenges to the expertise and jurisdictions of professionals. Such challenges may be interpreted quite differently, however, depending on the specialized role identities which develop within the wider professional domain. We explore the sensemaking responses of these intra‐professional groupings to the challenges posed by AI through an empirical study of professionals playing different roles (front‐line, hybrid and field‐level) in the field of radiology within NHS England. We found that these intra‐professional groupings sought to make sense of AI through a triadic view focused on the interplay of professional, client and technology. This sensemaking, arising from different jurisdictional contexts, led individual professionals to perceive that their agency was diminished, complemented or enhanced as a result of the introduction of AI. Our findings contribute to the literature on professions and AI by showing how intra‐professional differences affect sensemaking responses to AI as a jurisdictional contestant.","PeriodicalId":48445,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management Studies","volume":"16 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Management Studies","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.13065","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

New technologies are equivocal, triggering sensemaking responses from the individuals who encounter them. As an ‘epistemic technology’ AI poses new challenges to the expertise and jurisdictions of professionals. Such challenges may be interpreted quite differently, however, depending on the specialized role identities which develop within the wider professional domain. We explore the sensemaking responses of these intra‐professional groupings to the challenges posed by AI through an empirical study of professionals playing different roles (front‐line, hybrid and field‐level) in the field of radiology within NHS England. We found that these intra‐professional groupings sought to make sense of AI through a triadic view focused on the interplay of professional, client and technology. This sensemaking, arising from different jurisdictional contexts, led individual professionals to perceive that their agency was diminished, complemented or enhanced as a result of the introduction of AI. Our findings contribute to the literature on professions and AI by showing how intra‐professional differences affect sensemaking responses to AI as a jurisdictional contestant.
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
观察者的人工智能:认识论技术的专业内感知决策
新技术是模棱两可的,会引发接触者的感性反应。作为一种 "认识论技术",人工智能对专业人员的专业知识和管辖权提出了新的挑战。然而,这些挑战可能会有截然不同的解释,这取决于在更广泛的专业领域中形成的专业角色身份。我们通过对英国国家医疗服务体系(NHS)放射学领域中扮演不同角色(一线、混合和现场)的专业人员进行实证研究,探讨了这些专业内群体对人工智能带来的挑战的感知反应。我们发现,这些专业内部群体试图通过专业人员、客户和技术三者之间的相互作用来理解人工智能。这种感性认识产生于不同的司法背景,导致个别专业人员认为人工智能的引入削弱、补充或增强了他们的能动性。我们的研究结果表明了专业内部的差异如何影响对人工智能作为司法权竞争者的感性认识,从而为有关专业和人工智能的文献做出了贡献。
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
16.40
自引率
5.70%
发文量
99
期刊介绍: The Journal of Management Studies is a prestigious publication that specializes in multidisciplinary research in the field of business and management. With a rich history of excellence, we are dedicated to publishing innovative articles that contribute to the advancement of management and organization studies. Our journal welcomes empirical and conceptual contributions that are relevant to various areas including organization theory, organizational behavior, human resource management, strategy, international business, entrepreneurship, innovation, and critical management studies. We embrace diversity and are open to a wide range of methodological approaches and philosophical perspectives.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Issue Information - Notes for Contributors Issue Information Issue Information - Notes for Contributors Business, Conflict, and Peace: A Systematic Literature Review and Conceptual Framework
×
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