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.
All 511 World Bank headquarters divisions were assigned across treatment/control conditions; seeding evidence with a senior rather than junior employee increased stated sharing likelihood by 14.2 percentage points, multiple infographic-link clicks by 15.8 points, and colleague recall of at least one study feature by 5.0 points.
Scope: Evidence diffusion inside 511 headquarters divisions; hierarchy treatment, not AI-tool productivity.
Treatments changing beliefs about colleagues' AI adoption or emphasizing evidence credibility had no detectable effect on sharing; overall diffusion was limited, with only 3% of colleagues recalling a relevant feature two to three weeks later in round 1 and none measured in round 2.
Scope: Diffusion of two GenAI evidence summaries inside the World Bank; not all organizational learning.
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
- One large international bureaucracy
- Seed response rates were 56% and 38% across rounds
- One round had an article-link tracking glitch and affected data were dropped
- Recall is a demanding but narrow diffusion outcome
- Working paper
Source independence
Pre-registered academic/World Bank field experiment inside the World Bank; focal organization is also one author's institution, with ethics/privacy approvals and disclosed reproducibility package.