Does using artificial intelligence assistance accelerate skill decay and hinder skill development without performers' awareness?

IF 3.4 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Cognitive Research-Principles and Implications Pub Date : 2024-07-12 DOI:10.1186/s41235-024-00572-8
Brooke N Macnamara, Ibrahim Berber, M Cenk Çavuşoğlu, Elizabeth A Krupinski, Naren Nallapareddy, Noelle E Nelson, Philip J Smith, Amy L Wilson-Delfosse, Soumya Ray
{"title":"Does using artificial intelligence assistance accelerate skill decay and hinder skill development without performers' awareness?","authors":"Brooke N Macnamara, Ibrahim Berber, M Cenk Çavuşoğlu, Elizabeth A Krupinski, Naren Nallapareddy, Noelle E Nelson, Philip J Smith, Amy L Wilson-Delfosse, Soumya Ray","doi":"10.1186/s41235-024-00572-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Artificial intelligence in the workplace is becoming increasingly common. These tools are sometimes used to aid users in performing their task, for example, when an artificial intelligence tool assists a radiologist in their search for abnormalities in radiographic images. The use of artificial intelligence brings a wealth of benefits, such as increasing the efficiency and efficacy of performance. However, little research has been conducted to determine how the use of artificial intelligence assistants might affect the user's cognitive skills. In this theoretical perspective, we discuss how artificial intelligence assistants might accelerate skill decay among experts and hinder skill acquisition among learners. Further, we discuss how AI assistants might also prevent experts and learners from recognizing these deleterious effects. We then discuss the types of questions: use-inspired basic cognitive researchers, applied researchers, and computer science researchers should seek to answer. We conclude that multidisciplinary research from use-inspired basic cognitive research, domain-specific applied research, and technical research (e.g., human factors research, computer science research) is needed to (a) understand these potential consequences, (b) design artificial intelligence systems to mitigate these impacts, and (c) develop training and use protocols to prevent negative impacts on users' cognitive skills. Only by answering these questions from multidisciplinary perspectives can we harness the benefits of artificial intelligence in the workplace while preventing negative impacts on users' cognitive skills.</p>","PeriodicalId":46827,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Research-Principles and Implications","volume":"9 1","pages":"46"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11239631/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive Research-Principles and Implications","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-024-00572-8","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Artificial intelligence in the workplace is becoming increasingly common. These tools are sometimes used to aid users in performing their task, for example, when an artificial intelligence tool assists a radiologist in their search for abnormalities in radiographic images. The use of artificial intelligence brings a wealth of benefits, such as increasing the efficiency and efficacy of performance. However, little research has been conducted to determine how the use of artificial intelligence assistants might affect the user's cognitive skills. In this theoretical perspective, we discuss how artificial intelligence assistants might accelerate skill decay among experts and hinder skill acquisition among learners. Further, we discuss how AI assistants might also prevent experts and learners from recognizing these deleterious effects. We then discuss the types of questions: use-inspired basic cognitive researchers, applied researchers, and computer science researchers should seek to answer. We conclude that multidisciplinary research from use-inspired basic cognitive research, domain-specific applied research, and technical research (e.g., human factors research, computer science research) is needed to (a) understand these potential consequences, (b) design artificial intelligence systems to mitigate these impacts, and (c) develop training and use protocols to prevent negative impacts on users' cognitive skills. Only by answering these questions from multidisciplinary perspectives can we harness the benefits of artificial intelligence in the workplace while preventing negative impacts on users' cognitive skills.

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
使用人工智能辅助是否会在表演者毫无察觉的情况下加速技能衰减并阻碍技能发展?
人工智能在工作场所的应用越来越普遍。这些工具有时用于协助用户完成任务,例如,人工智能工具可以协助放射科医生搜索放射图像中的异常情况。人工智能的使用带来了很多好处,比如提高工作效率和效能。然而,对于人工智能助手的使用会如何影响用户的认知能力,却鲜有研究。在这一理论视角中,我们将讨论人工智能助手可能如何加速专家的技能衰减,并阻碍学习者的技能习得。此外,我们还讨论了人工智能助手可能如何阻止专家和学习者认识到这些有害影响。然后,我们讨论了使用启发基础认知研究人员、应用研究人员和计算机科学研究人员应该回答的问题类型。我们的结论是,需要从使用启发的基础认知研究、特定领域的应用研究和技术研究(如人为因素研究、计算机科学研究)开展多学科研究,以便:(a) 了解这些潜在后果;(b) 设计人工智能系统以减轻这些影响;(c) 制定培训和使用协议以防止对用户认知技能的负面影响。只有从多学科角度回答这些问题,我们才能在工作场所利用人工智能的好处,同时防止对用户认知技能的负面影响。
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
6.80
自引率
7.30%
发文量
96
审稿时长
25 weeks
期刊最新文献
Fixation durations on familiar items are longer due to attenuation of exploration. Different facets of age perception in people with developmental prosopagnosia and "super-recognisers". Self-evaluations and the language of the beholder: objective performance and language solidarity predict L2 and L1 self-evaluations in bilingual adults. Correction: Distress reactions and susceptibility to misinformation for an analogue trauma event. Jack of all trades, master of one: domain-specific and domain-general contributions to perceptual expertise in visual comparison.
×
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