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 work examines whether disclosing generative-AI use across work tasks compromises trust in the user, with the retained result snippet identifying workplace actors including supervisors.
Scope: search-result snippet and bibliographic metadata; publisher abstract not inspected
Structured relationships
In-corpus citations
Only source-supplied cites relationships whose two endpoints are admitted are shown. Invocation evidence remains a separate relationship.
Cites (9)
- Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches
- When and How Artificial Intelligence Augments Employee Creativity
- Navigating the Jagged Technological Frontier: Field Experimental Evidence of the Effects of Artificial Intelligence on Knowledge Worker Productivity and Quality
- Algorithms at Work: The New Contested Terrain of Control
- When eliminating bias isn’t fair: Algorithmic reductionism and procedural justice in human resource decisions
- Artificial Intelligence and Management: The Automation-Augmentation Paradox
- Combining Human and Artificial Intelligence: Hybrid Problem-Solving in Organizations
- The Role of Human Managers within Algorithmic Performance Management Systems: A Process Model of Employee Trust in Managers through Reflexivity
- Human Trust in Artificial Intelligence: Review of Empirical Research
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
- Crossref supplied bibliographic metadata but no abstract.
- The work-context determination uses a full Elsevier abstract rendered in the retained Google Scholar result because ScienceDirect was access-blocked; publisher full text was not inspected.
- Crossref supplied only year and month, so published_date is null rather than an inferred day.
Source independence
corroborated:google-scholar-result