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.
Crossref records this Academy of Management Annals article under a title about using artificial-intelligence analogies in organization theory.
Scope: title-and-bibliographic-metadata only
The title examines artificial-intelligence analogies in organization theory.
Scope: title-level metadata
Structured relationships
In-corpus citations
Only source-supplied cites relationships whose two endpoints are admitted are shown. Invocation evidence remains a separate relationship.
Cites (10)
- A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation
- Organizational Routines Are Stored as Procedural Memory: Evidence from a Laboratory Study
- Adaptation on Rugged Landscapes
- Knowledge of the Firm, Combinative Capabilities, and the Replication of Technology
- Design Rules
- Imitation of Complex Strategies
- Toward a knowledge‐based theory of the firm
- Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning
- Technology as an Occasion for Structuring: Evidence from Observations of CT Scanners and the Social Order of Radiology Departments
- The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields
Cited by (6)
- Human-AI Ensembles: When Can They Work?
- A Review of Artificial Intelligence, Algorithms, and Robots Through the Lens of Stakeholder Theory
- Combining Human and Artificial Intelligence: Hybrid Problem-Solving in Organizations
- Algorithmic Recommendation Tools and Experiential Learning in Clinical Care
- Artificial Intelligence, Trust, and Perceptions of Agency
- Artificial Intelligence as an Organizing Capability Arising from Human‐Algorithm Relations
Boundaries
Limitations & independence
Recorded at coding time, carried with the work forever. A claim without its limits is not evidence.
Recorded limitations
- Crossref supplies a 2022-01 issue date but no day-level published date, so published_date is null
- Retained Crossref query-page metadata only; no exact work refetch was made and full text was not inspected
- Scope inclusion rests on title-level organizational relevance; substantive claims were not coded
- Crossref supplied no abstract; the claim is limited to title-level metadata and bibliographic fields.
- 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