W4406490791 Peer-reviewed research AI × management and organizations

Navigating AI Convergence in Human–Artificial Intelligence Teams: A Signaling Theory Approach

Andria Smith · Hunter Phoenix van Wagoner · Ksenia Keplinger · Can Celebi

Also recorded as: doi:10.1002/job.2856

Journal of Organizational Behavior · 2025-01-17

Recorded claims
3
coded from the inspected source
Evidence classes
1
crossref-api-metadata
Recorded limitations
7
stated, never hidden

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 four experiments with approximately 1,100 participants in facial-recognition and hiring contexts, the abstract reports that congruent human and AI signals and the option to request AI advice increase employee convergence with AI recommendations.

confidence: moderate crossref-api-metadata apw-c1-obot-journals

Scope: publisher-deposited abstract metadata observed 2026-08-20

The Crossref abstract examines how signal congruence and optional AI advice shape employees’ alignment with AI recommendations in human–AI teams.

confidence: high crossref-api-metadata apw-c1-obot-journals

Scope: publisher-deposited abstract-level metadata

The abstract explains how signal fit, optional AI advice, and congruent human–AI signals shape employees’ decision alignment in human–AI teams.

confidence: high crossref-api-metadata apw-c1-obot-journals

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.

Boundaries

Limitations & independence

Recorded at coding time, carried with the work forever. A claim without its limits is not evidence.

Recorded limitations

  • Crossref public API abstract-level evidence only; full text was not inspected.
  • The participant denominator is reported approximately in the abstract.
  • Volume and issue were absent in the observed Crossref metadata; online-first status is based on that absence.
  • Publisher HTML was not inspected after a representative Wiley DOI page returned HTTP 403.
  • Abstract-level Crossref metadata only; the publisher Early View listing returned an access challenge and was not used.
  • 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