@article {9999,
	title = {Technological Frames: Interpretations about the Futures of Work  and Intelligent Machines on Social Media},
	journal = {Information, Technology \& People},
	year = {2024},
	abstract = {Purpose: This study explores interpretations and feelings about futures of work and intelligent machines expressed on social media.

Design/methodology/approach: We investigate public interpretations, assumptions and expectations expressed in social media conversations through which users freely share their most recent ideas. In addition to frames, this study also coded the emotions and attitudes expressed in the text data. More specifically, a corpus consisting of 998 unique Reddit post titles and their corresponding 16,611 comments were analyzed by using computer-aided textual analysis comprising a BERTopic model, and two BERT text classification models, one for emotion and the other for sentiment analysis, supported by human judgment. Finally, relationships among frames and attitudes and frames and emotions were examined.

Findings: Twelve clusters were found that related to futures of work with intelligent machines. Based on the prior literature, two frames were chosen from these clusters and analyzed in detail: (1) general impacts of intelligent machines on wealth and society and (2) replacement of tasks (augmentation and substitution). The general attitude observed in conversations was positive, moreover the most common emotion category was approval. Findings also showed there are relationships between frames and attitudes and frames and emotions.

Originality: This work extends the prior literature on a topic relevant for academia and industry. Findings of this research can help realize potential needs and benefits from the public{\textquoteright}s vantage point in the case of possible transformations in the future of work with intelligent machines. The findings may also help enlighten researchers to shape research directions about futures of work. Furthermore, firms, organizations or industries may also employ framing methods to receive customers{\textquoteright} or workers{\textquoteright} responses, or even to influence the responses. Aside from the empirical findings, another crucial implication of this work is application of theory of technological frames for systematizing the interpretations of how people conceptualize the future of work with the technology of intelligent machines. This study constitutes a bridge that connects fields of IS, computational science and empirical social research. },
	doi = {10.1108/ITP-01-2023-0049},
	attachments = {https://waim.network/sites/crowston.syr.edu/files/frames\%20to\%20share.pdf},
	author = {Ay{\c s}e {\"O}cal and Kevin Crowston}
}
@article {Theresa2020,
	title = {Think with me, or think for me? On the future role of artificial intelligence in marketing strategy formulation},
	journal = {The TQM Journal},
	volume = {ahead-of-p},
	number = {ahead-of-print},
	year = {2020},
	month = {jan},
	abstract = {Purpose This paper explores if and how Artificial Intelligence can contribute to marketing strategy formulation.Design/methodology/approach Qualitative research based on exploratory in-depth interviews with industry experts currently working with artificial intelligence tools.Findings Key themes include: (1) Importance of AI in strategic marketing decision management; (2) Presence of AI in strategic decision management; (3) Role of AI in strategic decision management; (4) Importance of business culture for the use of AI; (5) Impact of AI on the business{\textquoteright} organizational model. A key consideration is a {\textquotedblleft}creative-possibility perspective,{\textquotedblright} highlighting the future potential to use AI not only for rational but also for creative thinking purposes.Research limitations/implications This work is focused only on strategy creation as a deliberate process. For this, AI can be used as an effective response to the external contingencies of high volumes of data and uncertain environmental conditions, as well as being an effective response to the external contingencies of limited managerial cognition. A key future consideration is a {\textquotedblleft}creative-possibility perspective.{\textquotedblright}Practical implications A practical extension of the Gartner Analytics Ascendancy Model (Maoz, 2013).Originality/value This paper aims to contribute knowledge relating to the role of AI in marketing strategy formulation and explores the potential avenues for future use of AI in the strategic marketing process. This is explored through the lens of contingency theory, and additionally, findings are expressed using the Gartner analytics ascendancy model.},
	keywords = {AI, artificial intelligence, creativity, marketing strategy, marketing synergy, paper type research paper, rationality, tqm},
	isbn = {1754-2731},
	doi = {10.1108/TQM-12-2019-0303},
	url = {https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-12-2019-0303},
	author = {Theresa, Eriksson and Alessandro, Bigi and Michelle, Bonera and Eriksson, Theresa and Bigi, Alessandro and Bonera, Michelle and Theresa, Eriksson and Alessandro, Bigi and Michelle, Bonera}
}
@article {Brundage2020,
	title = {Toward Trustworthy AI Development: Mechanisms for Supporting Verifiable Claims},
	year = {2020},
	pages = {1{\textendash}9},
	abstract = {With the recent wave of progress in artificial intelligence (AI) has come a growing awareness of the large-scale impacts of AI systems, and recognition that existing regulations and norms in industry and academia are insufficient to ensure responsible AI development. In order for AI developers to earn trust from system users, customers, civil society, governments, and other stakeholders that they are building AI responsibly, they will need to make verifiable claims to which they can be held accountable. Those outside of a given organization also need effective means of scrutinizing such claims. This report suggests various steps that different stakeholders can take to improve the verifiability of claims made about AI systems and their associated development processes, with a focus on providing evidence about the safety, security, fairness, and privacy protection of AI systems. We analyze ten mechanisms for this purpose{\textendash}spanning institutions, software, and hardware{\textendash}and make recommendations aimed at implementing, exploring, or improving those mechanisms.},
	url = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2004.07213},
	author = {Brundage, Miles and Avin, Shahar and Wang, Jasmine and Belfield, Haydn and Krueger, Gretchen and Hadfield, Gillian and Khlaaf, Heidy and Yang, Jingying and Toner, Helen and Fong, Ruth and Maharaj, Tegan and Koh, Pang Wei and Hooker, Sara and Leung, Jade and Trask, Andrew and Bluemke, Emma and Lebensold, Jonathan and O{\textquoteright}Keefe, Cullen and Koren, Mark and Ryffel, Th{\'e}o and Rubinovitz, JB and Besiroglu, Tamay and Carugati, Federica and Clark, Jack and Eckersley, Peter and de Haas, Sarah and Johnson, Maritza and Laurie, Ben and Ingerman, Alex and Krawczuk, Igor and Askell, Amanda and Cammarota, Rosario and Lohn, Andrew and Krueger, David and Stix, Charlotte and Henderson, Peter and Graham, Logan and Prunkl, Carina and Martin, Bianca and Seger, Elizabeth and Zilberman, Noa and H{\'E}igeartaigh, Se{\'a}n {\'O} and Kroeger, Frens and Sastry, Girish and Kagan, Rebecca and Weller, Adrian and Tse, Brian and Barnes, Elizabeth and Dafoe, Allan and Scharre, Paul and Herbert-Voss, Ariel and Rasser, Martijn and Sodhani, Shagun and Flynn, Carrick and Gilbert, Thomas Krendl and Dyer, Lisa and Khan, Saif and Bengio, Yoshua and Anderljung, Markus}
}
@book {2019,
	title = {Technology and Work Worth Doing (Not Jobs) Post-AlphaGo: A World-Building Workshop on the Future of Artificial Intelligence},
	year = {2019},
	publisher = {RAND Corporation},
	organization = {RAND Corporation},
	doi = {10.7249/CF398},
	author = {Pendleton-Jullian, Ann and Lempert, Robert}
}
@article {2019,
	title = {Ten ways the precautionary principle undermines progress in artificial intelligence},
	year = {2019},
	month = {02/2019},
	keywords = {consulting reports},
	url = {https://itif.org/publications/2019/02/04/ten-ways-precautionary-principle-undermines-progress-artificial-intelligence},
	author = {Daniel Castro and Michael McLaughlin}
}
@article {2019,
	title = {There is no general AI: Why Turing machines cannot pass the Turing test},
	year = {2019},
	url = {https://arxiv.org/abs/1906.05833},
	author = {Jobst Landgrebe}
}
@article {2019,
	title = {Is this time different? A note on automation and labour in the fourth industrial revolution},
	journal = {Journal of Industrial and Business Economics},
	volume = {46},
	year = {2019},
	month = {Jan-09-2019},
	pages = {323 - 331},
	keywords = {economics of automation},
	issn = {0391-2078},
	doi = {10.1007/s40812-019-00123-z},
	author = {Marengo, Luigi}
}
@article {2019,
	title = {Is this time different? How digitalization influences job creation and destruction},
	journal = {Research Policy},
	volume = {48},
	year = {2019},
	month = {Jan-10-2019},
	pages = {103765},
	issn = {00487333},
	doi = {10.1016/j.respol.2019.03.010},
	author = {Balsmeier, Benjamin and Woerter, Martin}
}
@article {2019,
	title = {{\textquotedblleft}This time may be a little different{\textquotedblright} {\textendash} exploring the Finnish view on the future of work},
	journal = {International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy},
	volume = {39},
	year = {2019},
	month = {Nov-03-2019},
	pages = {22 - 37},
	issn = {0144-333X},
	doi = {10.1108/IJSSP-05-2018-0070},
	author = {Pulkka, Ville-Veikko}
}
@book {2019,
	title = {Toward a conceptual framework for understanding AI action and legal reaction},
	volume = {11489},
	year = {2019},
	pages = {453 - 459},
	publisher = {Springer International Publishing},
	organization = {Springer International Publishing},
	address = {Cham},
	isbn = {978-3-030-18304-2},
	issn = {0302-9743},
	doi = {10.1007/978-3-030-18305-9_44},
	author = {Dahya, Raheena and Morris, Alexis},
	editor = {Meurs, Marie-Jean and Rudzicz, Frank}
}
@article {Frank2019,
	title = {Toward understanding the impact of artificial intelligence on labor},
	journal = {Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences},
	volume = {116},
	year = {2019},
	month = {apr},
	pages = {6531{\textendash}6539},
	abstract = {<p>Rapid advances in artificial intelligence (AI) and automation technologies have the potential to significantly disrupt labor markets. While AI and automation can augment the productivity of some workers, they can replace the work done by others and will likely transform almost all occupations at least to some degree. Rising automation is happening in a period of growing economic inequality, raising fears of mass technological unemployment and a renewed call for policy efforts to address the consequences of technological change. In this paper we discuss the barriers that inhibit scientists from measuring the effects of AI and automation on the future of work. These barriers include the lack of high-quality data about the nature of work (e.g., the dynamic requirements of occupations), lack of empirically informed models of key microlevel processes (e.g., skill substitution and human{\textendash}machine complementarity), and insufficient understanding of how cognitive technologies interact with broader economic dynamics and institutional mechanisms (e.g., urban migration and international trade policy). Overcoming these barriers requires improvements in the longitudinal and spatial resolution of data, as well as refinements to data on workplace skills. These improvements will enable multidisciplinary research to quantitatively monitor and predict the complex evolution of work in tandem with technological progress. Finally, given the fundamental uncertainty in predicting technological change, we recommend developing a decision framework that focuses on resilience to unexpected scenarios in addition to general equilibrium behavior.</p>},
	issn = {0027-8424},
	doi = {10.1073/pnas.1900949116},
	url = {http://www.pnas.org/lookup/doi/10.1073/pnas.1900949116},
	author = {Frank, Morgan R and Autor, David and Bessen, James E and Brynjolfsson, Erik and Cebrian, Manuel and Deming, David J and Feldman, Maryann and Groh, Matthew and Lobo, Jos{\'e} and Moro, Esteban and Wang, Dashun and Youn, Hyejin and Rahwan, Iyad}
}
@article {2019,
	title = {Towards a smart automated society: Cognitive technologies, knowledge production, and economic growth},
	journal = {Economics, Management, and Financial Markets},
	volume = {14},
	year = {2019},
	month = {Jan-01-2019},
	pages = {44},
	issn = {1842-3191},
	doi = {10.22381/EMFM14120195},
	author = {Mitchell Udell and Vojtech Stehel and Tomas Kliestik and Jana Kliestikova and Pavol Durana}
}
@article {2019,
	title = {Towards an AI economy that works for all},
	year = {2019},
	month = {02/2019},
	keywords = {ethics},
	url = {https://www.keystoneresearch.org/sites/default/files/FOW_TowardAIEconomyForAllFinalEdit.pdf},
	author = {Stephen Herzenberg and John Alic}
}
@article {2019,
	title = {Towards intelligent regulation of Artificial Intelligence},
	journal = {European Journal of Risk Regulation},
	volume = {10},
	year = {2019},
	month = {Jan-03-2019},
	pages = {41 - 59},
	issn = {1867-299X},
	doi = {10.1017/err.2019.8},
	author = {BUITEN, Miriam C}
}
@article {2019,
	title = {Transforming the communication between citizens and government through AI-guided chatbots},
	journal = {Government Information Quarterly},
	volume = {36},
	year = {2019},
	month = {Jan-04-2019},
	pages = {358 - 367},
	issn = {0740624X},
	doi = {10.1016/j.giq.2018.10.001},
	url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2018.10.001},
	author = {Androutsopoulou, Aggeliki and Karacapilidis, Nikos and Loukis, Euripidis and Charalabidis, Yannis}
}
@article {2018,
	title = {Technology and employment: Mass unemployment or job creation? Empirical evidence from European patenting firms},
	journal = {Research Policy},
	volume = {47},
	year = {2018},
	month = {Jan-11-2018},
	pages = {1762 - 1776},
	issn = {00487333},
	doi = {10.1016/j.respol.2018.06.008},
	author = {Van Roy, Vincent and V{\'e}rtesy, D{\'a}niel and Vivarelli, Marco}
}
@article {2018,
	title = {Technology, productivity and employment: an empirical analysis of indian industries},
	journal = {Journal of Business Thought},
	volume = {9},
	year = {2018},
	month = {Jan-04-2020},
	pages = {1 - 10},
	doi = {10.18311/jbt/2018/21173},
	author = {Aggarwal, Suresh Chand}
}
@article {2018,
	title = {Technology-induced bias in the theory of evidence-based medicine},
	journal = {Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice},
	volume = {24},
	year = {2018},
	month = {Jan-10-2018},
	pages = {945 - 949},
	doi = {10.1111/jep.12972},
	author = {Eustace, Scott}
}
@article {2018,
	title = {Techno-unemployment: A framework for assessing the effects of information and communication technologies on work},
	journal = {Telematics and Informatics},
	volume = {35},
	year = {2018},
	month = {Jan-10-2018},
	pages = {1863 - 1876},
	issn = {07365853},
	doi = {10.1016/j.tele.2018.05.013},
	author = {Garcia-Murillo, Martha and MacInnes, Ian and Bauer, Johannes M.}
}
@conference {2018,
	title = {Theorizing human and bot co - production effects on information quality},
	booktitle = {Thirty - n inth International Conference on Information Systems,},
	year = {2018},
	url = {https://icis2018postergallery.weebly.com/416-social-media-and-digital-collaboration.html},
	author = {Amber G. Young and Amber G. Young and Gerald C. Kane}
}
@article {2018,
	title = {Is There a Smarter Path to Artificial Intelligence? Some Experts Hope So},
	journal = {The NewYork Times},
	year = {2018},
	url = {https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/20/technology/deep-learning-artificial-intelligence.html},
	author = {Steve Lohr}
}
@article {2018,
	title = {This time it might be different: Analysis of the impact of digitalization on the labour market},
	journal = {European Scientific Journal ESJ},
	volume = {14},
	year = {2018},
	month = {Jul-12-2020},
	issn = {18577881},
	doi = {10.19044/esj.2018.v14n36p68},
	author = {Lovergine, Saverio and Pellero, Alberto}
}
@conference {2018,
	title = {Towards a Sociological Conception of Artificial Intelligence},
	booktitle = {Artificial General Intelligence (AGI)},
	year = {2018},
	publisher = {Springer},
	organization = {Springer},
	abstract = {Social sciences have been always formed and influenced by the development of society, adjusting the conceptual, methodological, and theoretical frameworks to emerging social phenomena. In recent years, with the leap in the advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and the proliferation of its everyday applications, "non-human intelligent actors" are increasingly becoming part of the society. This is manifested in the evolving realms of smart home systems, autonomous vehicles, chatbots, intelligent public displays, etc. In this paper, we present a prospective research project that takes one of the pioneering steps towards establishing a "distinctively sociological" conception of AI. Its first objective is to extract the existing conceptions of AI as perceived by its technological developers and (possibly differently) by its users. In the second part, capitalizing on a set of interviews with experts from social science domains, we will explore the new imaginable conceptions of AI that do not originate from its technological possibilities but rather from societal necessities. The current formal ways of defining AI are grounded in the technological possibilities, namely, machine learning methods and neural network models. Buy what exactly is AI as a social phenomenon, which may act on its own, can be blamed responsible for ethically problematic behavior, or even endanger people{\textquoteright}s employment? We argue that such conceptual investigation is a crucial step for further empirical studies of phenomena related to AI{\textquoteright}s position in current societies, but also will open up ways for critiques of new technological advancements with social consequences in mind from the outset.},
	keywords = {artificial intelligence, Social sciences, Sociology},
	doi = {10.1007/978-3-319-97676-1_13},
	author = {Jakub Mlynar and Hamed S. Alavi and Himanshu Verma and Lorenzo Cantoni}
}
@conference {2018,
	title = {Towards an understanding of how chatbots create value},
	booktitle = {Hawaii International Conference on System SciencesProceedings of the 51st Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences},
	year = {2018},
	publisher = {Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences},
	organization = {Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences},
	doi = {10.24251/HICSS.2018.255},
	author = {Stoeckli, Emanuel and Uebernickel, Falk and Brenner, Walter}
}
@article {2018,
	title = {Transparency and fairness in machine learning applications},
	journal = {Texas A\&M Journal of Property Law},
	volume = {4},
	year = {2018},
	url = {https://scholarship.law.tamu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1079\&context=journal-of-property-law},
	author = {Jim Shook and Robyn Smith and Alex Antonio}
}
@article {2017,
	title = {Thinking critically about and researching algorithms},
	journal = {Information, Communication \& Society},
	volume = {20},
	year = {2017},
	month = {Feb-01-2017},
	pages = {14 - 29},
	keywords = {Algorithmic management},
	issn = {1369-118X},
	doi = {10.1080/1369118X.2016.1154087},
	author = {Kitchin, Rob}
}
@article {2015,
	title = {Toward a computational hermeneutics},
	journal = {Big Data \& Society},
	volume = {2},
	year = {2015},
	month = {Mar-12-2017},
	pages = {205395171561380},
	issn = {2053-9517},
	doi = {10.1177/2053951715613809},
	author = {Mohr, John W and Wagner-Pacifici, Robin and Breiger, Ronald L}
}
@article {2014,
	title = {Testing the differences in perceptions of communication quality for a human agent and a bot agent on Twitter},
	journal = {Computers in Human Behavior},
	volume = {33},
	year = {2014},
	month = {Jan-04-2014},
	pages = {372 - 376},
	issn = {07475632},
	doi = {10.1016/j.chb.2013.08.013},
	author = {Edwards, Chad and Edwards, Autumn and Spence, Patric R. and Shelton, Ashleigh K.}
}
@article {2014,
	title = {Toward a Framework for Levels of Robot Autonomy in Human-Robot Interaction},
	journal = {Journal of Human-Robot Interaction},
	volume = {3},
	year = {2014},
	month = {Jan-06-2014},
	pages = {74},
	doi = {10.5898/JHRI.3.2.Beer},
	url = {http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=3109833http://dl.acm.org/ft_gateway.cfm?id=3109833\&ftid=1883786\&dwn=1},
	author = {Beer, Jenay M and Fisk, Arthur D and Rogers, Wendy A}
}
@article {2014,
	title = {A transdisciplinary perspective on hedonomic sustainability design},
	year = {2014},
	keywords = {environmental efficacy, environmental sustainability, hedonomics, sustainable design, transdisciplinary research},
	doi = {10.1177\%2F1064804613516762},
	url = {https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1064804613516762?journalCode=erga},
	author = {Stephen M. Fiore and Elizabeth Philips and Brittany C. Sellers}
}
@article {2011,
	title = {Is there an ethics of algorithms?},
	journal = {Ethics and Information Technology},
	volume = {13},
	year = {2011},
	month = {Jan-09-2011},
	pages = {251 - 260},
	issn = {1388-1957},
	doi = {10.1007/s10676-010-9233-7},
	author = {Kraemer, Felicitas and van Overveld, Kees and Peterson, Martin}
}
@article {2007,
	title = {Towards a theory for multiparty proactive communication in agent teams},
	journal = {International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems},
	volume = {16},
	year = {2007},
	month = {Jan-06-2009},
	pages = {271 - 298},
	issn = {0218-8430},
	doi = {10.1142/S0218843007001640},
	author = {Kaivan Kamali and Xiaocong Fan and John Yen, JOHN}
}
@article {2006,
	title = {Technical change, job tasks, and rising educational demands: looking outside the wage structure},
	journal = {Journal of Labor Economics},
	volume = {24},
	year = {2006},
	month = {Jan-04-2006},
	pages = {235 - 270},
	issn = {0734-306X},
	doi = {10.1086/499972},
	author = {Spitz-Oener, Alexandra}
}
@article {2000,
	title = {Technical change, inequality, and the labor market},
	year = {2000},
	institution = {National Bureau of Economic Research},
	address = {Cambridge, MA},
	doi = {10.3386/w7800},
	author = {Acemoglu, Daron}
}
