ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
The impact of artificial intelligence application on employees' job insecurity: the moderating roles of self-efficacy and transformational leadership.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Against the backdrop of the intelligent era, the widespread application of artificial intelligence (AI) has fundamentally reshaped the internal and external developmental ecosystems of organizations, exerting a profound impact on employees' work-related psychological states. Drawing on the Conservation of Resources Theory and the Cognitive Appraisal Theory of Stress, this study empirically explores the underlying mechanism through which AI application influences employees' job insecurity. Methods: Data for this study were collected using a mixed online and offline distribution method, with all measures administered through employee self-reported questionnaires. A total of 453 questionnaires were distributed, including 242 online and 211 offline. We received 449 questionnaires, with 242 from the online channel and 207 offline. Following a stringent validity screening process conducted by the research team, 411 valid questionnaires were retained for analysis (219 online and 192 offline), resulting in an effective response rate of 90.73%. Results: There is a significant U-shaped relationship between AI application and employees' job insecurity: moderate AI application reduces insecurity, whereas excessive application heightens it. Self-efficacy negatively moderates this relationship by strengthening the insecurity-reducing effect of moderate AI application and weakening the insecurity-enhancing effect of excessive application. Transformational leadership similarly exerts a negative moderating effect, suggesting that both individual psychological resources and supportive leadership can buffer employees' insecurity responses to varying levels of AI application in digitality transforming organizational contexts more effectively. Discussion: This study advances research on AI-enabled workplace changes by revealing a U-shaped effect of AI application intensity on employees' job insecurity. It explains this relationship through the dual mechanisms of resource gain and resource threat. It further incorporates self-efficacy and transformational leadership as boundary conditions, thereby clarifying when AI application alleviates or intensifies employees' job insecurity. These findings enrich the theoretical understanding of employees' job insecurity within the context of AI application, and offer empirical insights for managing employee wellbeing and refining human resource strategies during organizational digital transformation.
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.