Qin Chen , Hongchuan Wang , Chengcheng Ma , Peng Ru
{"title":"专业人士如何应对人工智能对其管辖权的破坏性影响:互动治理的作用","authors":"Qin Chen , Hongchuan Wang , Chengcheng Ma , Peng Ru","doi":"10.1016/j.socscimed.2025.118626","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The increasing adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) in professional work has disrupted established jurisdiction, frequently eliciting defensive responses from professionals. However, limited research has systematically examined how professionals respond to such disruptions. Based on 86 interviews, 240 hours of non-participatory observation, and 20 documents collected over 47 months of fieldwork in Chinese public hospitals, this article investigates the Intelligent Prescribing Review (IPR) system — an AI tool designed to assist physicians with prescribing and dispensing — in order to analyze professionals’ responses to AI disruption. The study identifies four models of interactive governance employed by professionals: intra-professional division, inter-professional coordination, professional-AI collaboration, and professional-organization consultation. These responses are shown to be shaped by the interplay of the institutional environment, organizational strain, and a relationship-oriented society. By presenting interactive governance as the central mechanism, the analysis moves beyond dichotomous narratives that depict professional responses as mere acceptance or resistance. The findings highlight an important shift in professional jurisdiction, from reliance on individual knowledge-based expertise toward interactive governance through collaborative negotiation.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49122,"journal":{"name":"Social Science & Medicine","volume":"386 ","pages":"Article 118626"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How professionals respond to disruptive effects of artificial intelligence on their jurisdiction: The role of interactive governance\",\"authors\":\"Qin Chen , Hongchuan Wang , Chengcheng Ma , Peng Ru\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.socscimed.2025.118626\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>The increasing adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) in professional work has disrupted established jurisdiction, frequently eliciting defensive responses from professionals. However, limited research has systematically examined how professionals respond to such disruptions. Based on 86 interviews, 240 hours of non-participatory observation, and 20 documents collected over 47 months of fieldwork in Chinese public hospitals, this article investigates the Intelligent Prescribing Review (IPR) system — an AI tool designed to assist physicians with prescribing and dispensing — in order to analyze professionals’ responses to AI disruption. The study identifies four models of interactive governance employed by professionals: intra-professional division, inter-professional coordination, professional-AI collaboration, and professional-organization consultation. These responses are shown to be shaped by the interplay of the institutional environment, organizational strain, and a relationship-oriented society. By presenting interactive governance as the central mechanism, the analysis moves beyond dichotomous narratives that depict professional responses as mere acceptance or resistance. The findings highlight an important shift in professional jurisdiction, from reliance on individual knowledge-based expertise toward interactive governance through collaborative negotiation.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49122,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Science & Medicine\",\"volume\":\"386 \",\"pages\":\"Article 118626\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Science & Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953625009578\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Science & Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953625009578","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
How professionals respond to disruptive effects of artificial intelligence on their jurisdiction: The role of interactive governance
The increasing adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) in professional work has disrupted established jurisdiction, frequently eliciting defensive responses from professionals. However, limited research has systematically examined how professionals respond to such disruptions. Based on 86 interviews, 240 hours of non-participatory observation, and 20 documents collected over 47 months of fieldwork in Chinese public hospitals, this article investigates the Intelligent Prescribing Review (IPR) system — an AI tool designed to assist physicians with prescribing and dispensing — in order to analyze professionals’ responses to AI disruption. The study identifies four models of interactive governance employed by professionals: intra-professional division, inter-professional coordination, professional-AI collaboration, and professional-organization consultation. These responses are shown to be shaped by the interplay of the institutional environment, organizational strain, and a relationship-oriented society. By presenting interactive governance as the central mechanism, the analysis moves beyond dichotomous narratives that depict professional responses as mere acceptance or resistance. The findings highlight an important shift in professional jurisdiction, from reliance on individual knowledge-based expertise toward interactive governance through collaborative negotiation.
期刊介绍:
Social Science & Medicine provides an international and interdisciplinary forum for the dissemination of social science research on health. We publish original research articles (both empirical and theoretical), reviews, position papers and commentaries on health issues, to inform current research, policy and practice in all areas of common interest to social scientists, health practitioners, and policy makers. The journal publishes material relevant to any aspect of health from a wide range of social science disciplines (anthropology, economics, epidemiology, geography, policy, psychology, and sociology), and material relevant to the social sciences from any of the professions concerned with physical and mental health, health care, clinical practice, and health policy and organization. We encourage material which is of general interest to an international readership.