When AI hurts the pros: expertise-fixation costs and platform deployment of generative AI in subscription markets

IF 7.2 3区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS
Zhiyong Li,Hongxin Liu,Shiyao Shan,Min Zhang,Qiuxiao Yang
{"title":"When AI hurts the pros: expertise-fixation costs and platform deployment of generative AI in subscription markets","authors":"Zhiyong Li,Hongxin Liu,Shiyao Shan,Min Zhang,Qiuxiao Yang","doi":"10.1108/intr-10-2025-1768","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose This study examines when subscription-based content platforms should deploy generative AI, given the heterogeneous AI-induced Einstellung effects on novice and expert creators. It identifies conditions under which deployment improves or undermines platform performance. Design/methodology/approach A calibrated two-sided market model characterizes equilibrium outcomes under AI and non-AI regimes, derives closed-form deployment thresholds, and tests robustness to heterogeneous expert adoption and positive novice baseline quality. Findings AI deployment is governed by a cost threshold, with welfare effects depending on implementation costs and standalone utility for a consumer joining the platform. Low-cost deployment can benefit platforms, creators, and consumers, whereas high costs may reduce profitability and stakeholder welfare by amplifying expert-side cognitive friction. Maximizing AI adoption is therefore not always optimal, even when AI raises average productivity. Research limitations/implications The analysis treats creator quality as exogenous and considers only one platform. The core deployment logic nevertheless remains robust to heterogeneous expert adoption and positive novice baseline quality. Practical implications Before deployment, managers should assess the composition of creators, implementation costs, and consumer demand. Enhancing AI-workflow compatibility and using targeted strategies can reduce expert-side friction and expand the conditions under which AI creates ecosystem value. Social implications Indiscriminate AI deployment may discourage expert participation and reduce content quality and consumer welfare, despite increasing the overall content supply. Originality/value This study offers a cognition-aware deployment framework by incorporating heterogeneous creator responses into a two-sided market model. It identifies thresholds and welfare regimes showing when AI creates mutual gains and when strategic restraint is preferable.","PeriodicalId":54925,"journal":{"name":"Internet Research","volume":"37 1","pages":"1-23"},"PeriodicalIF":7.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Internet Research","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/intr-10-2025-1768","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose This study examines when subscription-based content platforms should deploy generative AI, given the heterogeneous AI-induced Einstellung effects on novice and expert creators. It identifies conditions under which deployment improves or undermines platform performance. Design/methodology/approach A calibrated two-sided market model characterizes equilibrium outcomes under AI and non-AI regimes, derives closed-form deployment thresholds, and tests robustness to heterogeneous expert adoption and positive novice baseline quality. Findings AI deployment is governed by a cost threshold, with welfare effects depending on implementation costs and standalone utility for a consumer joining the platform. Low-cost deployment can benefit platforms, creators, and consumers, whereas high costs may reduce profitability and stakeholder welfare by amplifying expert-side cognitive friction. Maximizing AI adoption is therefore not always optimal, even when AI raises average productivity. Research limitations/implications The analysis treats creator quality as exogenous and considers only one platform. The core deployment logic nevertheless remains robust to heterogeneous expert adoption and positive novice baseline quality. Practical implications Before deployment, managers should assess the composition of creators, implementation costs, and consumer demand. Enhancing AI-workflow compatibility and using targeted strategies can reduce expert-side friction and expand the conditions under which AI creates ecosystem value. Social implications Indiscriminate AI deployment may discourage expert participation and reduce content quality and consumer welfare, despite increasing the overall content supply. Originality/value This study offers a cognition-aware deployment framework by incorporating heterogeneous creator responses into a two-sided market model. It identifies thresholds and welfare regimes showing when AI creates mutual gains and when strategic restraint is preferable.
当人工智能伤害到优势时:专业知识固定成本和生成式人工智能在订阅市场的平台部署
本研究探讨了基于订阅的内容平台何时应该部署生成式人工智能,考虑到人工智能对新手和专家创作者的异质性诱导效应。它确定部署在哪些条件下会提高或破坏平台性能。经过校准的双边市场模型描述了人工智能和非人工智能制度下的均衡结果,推导出封闭式部署阈值,并测试了对异质专家采用和积极新手基线质量的稳健性。人工智能部署受成本阈值控制,福利效应取决于实施成本和消费者加入平台的独立效用。低成本部署可以使平台、创造者和消费者受益,而高成本可能会通过放大专家方面的认知摩擦来降低盈利能力和利益相关者的福利。因此,最大化采用人工智能并不总是最佳的,即使人工智能提高了平均生产率。该分析将创造者的质量视为外生因素,只考虑一个平台。然而,核心部署逻辑对于异质专家采用和积极的新手基线质量仍然是健壮的。在部署之前,管理人员应该评估创建者的组成、实现成本和用户需求。增强人工智能工作流的兼容性和使用有针对性的策略可以减少专家方面的摩擦,并扩大人工智能创造生态系统价值的条件。不加区分的人工智能部署可能会阻碍专家的参与,降低内容质量和消费者福利,尽管增加了整体内容供应。独创性/价值本研究通过将异质创造者的反应纳入双边市场模型,提供了一个认知感知的部署框架。它确定了阈值和福利制度,表明人工智能何时创造互利,何时更可取的是战略限制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Internet Research
Internet Research 工程技术-电信学
CiteScore
11.20
自引率
10.20%
发文量
85
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: This wide-ranging interdisciplinary journal looks at the social, ethical, economic and political implications of the internet. Recent issues have focused on online and mobile gaming, the sharing economy, and the dark side of social media.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书