Business Is Changing: Expert and Public Opinion on the Future of Work and Artificial Intelligence Through Social Media Research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Big name organizations have proposed that AI will fundamentally transform the future of business by altering the skills that will be required to stay competitive in an epoch where routine- jobs are automated and where workers in less-routine jobs are displaced from burgeoning advancements in AI. When it comes to assessing the impact of hazardous technologies, a growing body of literature suggests that experts and everyday people tend to perceive risks differently. Social media is a tool that allows individuals to engage with one another, and more recently, social media has become an influential means of consuming and disseminating news online. Reddit is a form of social media that combines both news consumption and social engagement. This major research project (MRP) examines online discourses from end-users on Reddit, from articles written by journalists, and from experts quoted in the media. Inductive content analysis reveals that topics of conversation about AI and the future of work centre around inequality and the economy. Apparent differences are observed between end-users, journalists, and experts, such as the high prevalence of dread on Reddit, which may suggest that most individuals, as opposed to those in the news media, think negatively about AI being introduced into the workplace—for reasons that revolve around the economy, inequality, or both.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".