ArticleScientific reports2025
Artificial intelligence and the wellbeing of workers.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Social comparison contributes to work exhaustion in the context of workplace AI use: A three-wave follow-up study of Finnish workers.SSM - population health · 2026Article
- Article
- The Impact of Artificial Intelligence Usage on Affective Work Well-Being: A Self-Determination Theory Perspective.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Impact of artificial intelligence and work digitalization on mental health and occupational well-being: a scoping review.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Information bubble and skill evolution: a theoretical framework for integrating distributed cognition, cognition offloading, and metacognitive regulation based on AIOE.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Article
- The impact of AI integration in project preparation in education course on pre-service teachers' innovativeness, AI anxiety, attitudes, and acceptance.BMC psychology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study explores the relationship between artificial intelligence (AI) and workers' well-being and health using longitudinal survey data from Germany (2000-2020). Using a measure of occupational exposure to AI, we explore an event study design and a difference-in-differences approach to compare AI-exposed and non-exposed workers. Before AI became widely available, there is no evidence of differential pre-trends in workers' well-being and health. We find no evidence of a sizeable negative impact of AI on workers' well-being and mental health. If anything, there is evidence of an improvement in health status and health satisfaction, which may be explained by the decline in job physical intensity. Overall, our results are consistent with the lack of negative effects of AI on the labor markets.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.