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.
The abstract argues that people analytics and algorithmically driven technologies reshape ethical conduct and reflexivity through interacting mechanisms that close or reopen spaces for responsibility, contestation, and resistance.
Scope: abstract-level conceptual organizational study
The abstract theorizes how algorithmically driven workplace technologies reconfigure, rather than eliminate, spaces for reflexivity and ethical conduct.
Scope: abstract-level
Structured relationships
In-corpus citations
Only source-supplied cites relationships whose two endpoints are admitted are shown. Invocation evidence remains a separate relationship.
Cites (3)
Cited by (3)
- Problematizing the role of artificial intelligence in hiring and organizational inequalities: A multidisciplinary review
- Managing with Artificial Intelligence: An Integrative Framework
- Algorithmic surveillance and workers’ compliance: The role of trust, privacy concerns, and fairness in online crowdwork
Boundaries
Limitations & independence
Recorded at coding time, carried with the work forever. A claim without its limits is not evidence.
Recorded limitations
- Abstract-level evidence only; no full text inspected
- Bound from an already-retained journal-query response containing multiple works; no post-audit refetch
- Crossref metadata only; full text was not inspected.
- The publisher surface was not queried after the lane’s quarantined dynamic-challenge response; no independent publisher-page verification was attempted.
Source independence
publisher-only