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.
A randomized field experiment with a meal-delivery company reports that AI suggestions improved customer-service agents' response speed, engagement, and customer sentiment, with larger benefits for less-experienced agents and adverse spillovers after prior chatbot-comprehension failures.
Scope: publisher-deposited abstract metadata; organizational customer-service setting; sample denominator and experimental period are not stated in the captured abstract
The publisher issue listing places this paper in the special issue on the human-algorithm connection, and its preview abstract reports a randomized field experiment at a meal-delivery company on AI effects on customer-service-agent productivity and customer sentiment.
Scope: publisher TOC preview abstract
Structured relationships
In-corpus citations
Only source-supplied cites relationships whose two endpoints are admitted are shown. Invocation evidence remains a separate relationship.
Cites (1)
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
- Abstract-level Crossref metadata only; the publisher landing page could not be retained because public retrieval was access-blocked.
- Crossref supplies only a year and month for publication, so published_date is null rather than an invented day.
- The abstract does not state the sample denominator or experimental period.
- Full text was not inspected.
- Publisher TOC preview abstract is truncated; full text was not inspected.
- Special-issue membership is established by the issue section heading.
Source independence
publisher-only