From the hash-bound evidence releases
Recorded claims
Each claim states what the inspected source says, at the recorded location—bounded by its scope and graded by its confidence. Nothing here is a synthesis across works.
Across studies totaling 1,215 participants, disclosing AI use produced a social-evaluation penalty: AI users were judged as less competent, diligent, or self-reliant in the studied evaluation contexts.
Scope: Experimental interpersonal evaluations; not measured promotion, pay, or firm outcomes.
The penalty varied with evaluators' own AI use, indicating that adoption norms and evaluator incentives can change whether workers feel safe revealing or using AI even when a formal policy encourages it.
Scope: Experimental judgments; organization-policy implication requires local validation.
Structured relationships
In-corpus citations
Only source-supplied cites relationships whose two endpoints are admitted are shown. Invocation evidence remains a separate relationship.
Cites (0)
No in-corpus outgoing citation is available in the current enrichment coverage.
Cited by (0)
No in-corpus incoming citation is available in the current enrichment coverage.
Boundaries
Limitations & independence
Recorded at coding time, carried with the work forever. A claim without its limits is not evidence.
Recorded limitations
- 1,215 participants across experimental judgment settings
- Perceptions may differ from workplace behavior
- No firm performance or long-run career outcome
- Context and disclosure norms can moderate effects
Source independence
Independent academic behavioral experiments; not a field measure of continuing employment outcomes.