Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42676375›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026

Source matters, AI anxiety less so: comparing employee reactions to human, AI, and hybrid performance feedback and the limited role of AI anxiety.

Janka Laura Marót, Tamara Palcsó, Zsolt Péter Szabó

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Janka Laura MarótDoctoral School of Psychology, ELTE Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary.
Tamara PalcsóInstitute of Strategy and Management, Corvinus University of Budapest, Budapest, Hungary.
Zsolt Péter SzabóInstitute of Psychology, ELTE Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly integrated into human resource management practices and are becoming capable of supporting managerial tasks such as performance feedback. Although these technologies may improve the efficiency and quality of feedback delivery, it remains unclear whether knowledge of AI involvement influences recipients' reactions to it. Methods: This work presents results from a vignette-based experiment ( Results: Results demonstrated that fully AI-generated feedback elicited less favorable affective, motivational, relational, and performance-related responses than fully human-written feedback, whereas hybrid feedback generally occupied an intermediate position, with human-written feedback refined by AI producing outcomes comparable to purely human feedback. AI anxiety showed only limited effects. Discussion: These findings suggest that the perceived source of performance feedback influences how feedback is evaluated, whereas AI anxiety showed only limited associations with employees' reactions. The discussion addresses the theoretical implications of these findings for performance feedback, as well as their practical implications for organizations.

Indexed as

AI anxietyAI-generated feedbackdisclosure effectfeedback sourcegenerative artificial intelligencehuman-AI collaborationperformance feedback

Identifiers

PMID42676375
PMCPMC13526566

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.