对人工智能在人员选择中对人际交往能力的评估抱有信念。

IF 3.9 2区 综合性期刊 Q1 MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES
Ilyung Cheong, Young Eun Huh, Stefano Puntoni
{"title":"对人工智能在人员选择中对人际交往能力的评估抱有信念。","authors":"Ilyung Cheong, Young Eun Huh, Stefano Puntoni","doi":"10.1038/s41598-025-10358-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Artificial intelligence (AI) is revolutionizing talent acquisition, with organizations increasingly replacing humans with AI technologies in personnel selection processes. Field studies of nurses provide preliminary evidence that AI can outperform humans in predicting interpersonal skills. However, a series of surveys and experiments document widespread lay beliefs in the opposite direction: individuals perceive AI as being less capable than humans in assessing interpersonal skills. This effect was not observed for analytical skills, suggesting that the results stem from lay beliefs about the suitability of AI in interpersonal contexts and not from a generalized aversion to algorithms. These lay beliefs bias managers' perceptions of employees: managers were less likely to assign tasks requiring interpersonal skills to AI-selected (vs. human-selected) employees. Additionally, applicants reported reducing their emphasis on interpersonal (vs. analytical) skills during AI (vs. human) selection processes. Informing participants about advanced AI selection technologies reduced negative lay beliefs about AI performance in the interpersonal domains.</p>","PeriodicalId":21811,"journal":{"name":"Scientific Reports","volume":"15 1","pages":"25317"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12256587/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Lay beliefs about AI assessment of interpersonal skills in personnel selection.\",\"authors\":\"Ilyung Cheong, Young Eun Huh, Stefano Puntoni\",\"doi\":\"10.1038/s41598-025-10358-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Artificial intelligence (AI) is revolutionizing talent acquisition, with organizations increasingly replacing humans with AI technologies in personnel selection processes. Field studies of nurses provide preliminary evidence that AI can outperform humans in predicting interpersonal skills. However, a series of surveys and experiments document widespread lay beliefs in the opposite direction: individuals perceive AI as being less capable than humans in assessing interpersonal skills. This effect was not observed for analytical skills, suggesting that the results stem from lay beliefs about the suitability of AI in interpersonal contexts and not from a generalized aversion to algorithms. These lay beliefs bias managers' perceptions of employees: managers were less likely to assign tasks requiring interpersonal skills to AI-selected (vs. human-selected) employees. Additionally, applicants reported reducing their emphasis on interpersonal (vs. analytical) skills during AI (vs. human) selection processes. Informing participants about advanced AI selection technologies reduced negative lay beliefs about AI performance in the interpersonal domains.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21811,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Scientific Reports\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"25317\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12256587/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Scientific Reports\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"103\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-10358-7\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"综合性期刊\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scientific Reports","FirstCategoryId":"103","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-10358-7","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

人工智能(AI)正在彻底改变人才获取,越来越多的组织在人员选择过程中使用人工智能技术取代人类。对护士的实地研究提供了初步证据,表明人工智能在预测人际交往能力方面优于人类。然而,一系列调查和实验证明了相反的普遍看法:个人认为人工智能在评估人际交往能力方面不如人类。分析技能没有观察到这种影响,这表明结果源于对人工智能在人际环境中的适用性的非专业信念,而不是来自对算法的普遍厌恶。这些非专业的信念会影响管理者对员工的看法:管理者不太可能将需要人际交往能力的任务分配给人工智能选择的员工(而不是人类选择的员工)。此外,申请人报告说,在人工智能(与人类)选拔过程中,他们对人际交往(与分析)技能的重视程度有所降低。告知参与者先进的人工智能选择技术减少了对人工智能在人际领域表现的负面看法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Lay beliefs about AI assessment of interpersonal skills in personnel selection.

Lay beliefs about AI assessment of interpersonal skills in personnel selection.

Lay beliefs about AI assessment of interpersonal skills in personnel selection.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is revolutionizing talent acquisition, with organizations increasingly replacing humans with AI technologies in personnel selection processes. Field studies of nurses provide preliminary evidence that AI can outperform humans in predicting interpersonal skills. However, a series of surveys and experiments document widespread lay beliefs in the opposite direction: individuals perceive AI as being less capable than humans in assessing interpersonal skills. This effect was not observed for analytical skills, suggesting that the results stem from lay beliefs about the suitability of AI in interpersonal contexts and not from a generalized aversion to algorithms. These lay beliefs bias managers' perceptions of employees: managers were less likely to assign tasks requiring interpersonal skills to AI-selected (vs. human-selected) employees. Additionally, applicants reported reducing their emphasis on interpersonal (vs. analytical) skills during AI (vs. human) selection processes. Informing participants about advanced AI selection technologies reduced negative lay beliefs about AI performance in the interpersonal domains.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Scientific Reports
Scientific Reports Natural Science Disciplines-
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
4.30%
发文量
19567
审稿时长
3.9 months
期刊介绍: We publish original research from all areas of the natural sciences, psychology, medicine and engineering. You can learn more about what we publish by browsing our specific scientific subject areas below or explore Scientific Reports by browsing all articles and collections. Scientific Reports has a 2-year impact factor: 4.380 (2021), and is the 6th most-cited journal in the world, with more than 540,000 citations in 2020 (Clarivate Analytics, 2021). •Engineering Engineering covers all aspects of engineering, technology, and applied science. It plays a crucial role in the development of technologies to address some of the world''s biggest challenges, helping to save lives and improve the way we live. •Physical sciences Physical sciences are those academic disciplines that aim to uncover the underlying laws of nature — often written in the language of mathematics. It is a collective term for areas of study including astronomy, chemistry, materials science and physics. •Earth and environmental sciences Earth and environmental sciences cover all aspects of Earth and planetary science and broadly encompass solid Earth processes, surface and atmospheric dynamics, Earth system history, climate and climate change, marine and freshwater systems, and ecology. It also considers the interactions between humans and these systems. •Biological sciences Biological sciences encompass all the divisions of natural sciences examining various aspects of vital processes. The concept includes anatomy, physiology, cell biology, biochemistry and biophysics, and covers all organisms from microorganisms, animals to plants. •Health sciences The health sciences study health, disease and healthcare. This field of study aims to develop knowledge, interventions and technology for use in healthcare to improve the treatment of patients.
×
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