MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406062468 · doi:10.1016/j.im.2025.104099

Will AI-enabled conversational agents acting as digital employees enhance employee job identity?

2025· article· en· W4406062468 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueInformation & Management · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in Service Interactions
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaFederation for the Humanities and Social Sciences
KeywordsIdentity (music)Knowledge managementBusinessEmployee engagementPublic relationsPsychologyComputer sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Artificial Intelligence (AI)-enabled conversational agents (CAs) increasingly transform online customer service by acting as frontline workers. Understanding employees' attitudes toward these digital colleagues is crucial, as CAs blur the boundaries between human and machine roles. However, existing research often views CAs merely as tools rather than digital employees, neglecting their impact on employees' psychological drivers, such as job identity. This study introduces the perception of CAs as digital employees and develops a Job Identity Enhancement model to examine how human employees' job identity is influenced by their experience working with intelligent CAs. Empirical validation through a survey of frontline service workers reveals that the employees' perceptions of CA autonomy and learning capabilities enhance their job variety and job control, ultimately boosting their job identity and organizational commitment.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScholarly communication
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.956
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.033
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.277 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it