REVIEW 1 cited by
'Alexa, Do You Know Anything?' The Impact of an Intelligent Assistant on Team Interactions and Creative Performance Under Time Scarcity
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Human-AI collaboration is on the rise with the deployment of AI-enabled intelligent assistants (e.g. Amazon Echo, Cortana, Siri, etc.) across organizational contexts. It is claimed that intelligent assistants can help people achieve more in less time (Personal Digital Assistant - Cortana, n.d.). However, despite the increasing presence of intelligent assistants in collaborative settings, there is a void in the literature on how the deployment of this technology intersects with time scarcity to impact team behaviors and performance. To fill this gap in the literature, we collected behavioral data from 56 teams who participated in a between-subjects 2 (Intelligent Assistant: Available vs. Not Available) x 2 (Time: Scarce vs. Not Scarce/Control) lab experiment. The results show that teams with an intelligent assistant had significantly fewer interactions between its members compared to teams without an intelligent assistant. Teams who faced time scarcity also used the intelligent assistant more often to seek its assistance during task completion compared to those in the control condition. Lastly, teams with an intelligent assistant underperformed on a creative task compared to those without the device. We discuss implications of this technology from theoretical, empirical, and practical perspectives.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Advancing SLM Tool-Use Capability using Reinforcement Learning
GRPO with a strict reward for structured JSON output improves tool-call accuracy on small models, from 0.98%-6.1% to 22%-71% on the xLAM benchmark, though without baselines or variance.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.