How Tech Workers Contend with Hazards of Humanlikeness in Generative AI
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Generative AI's humanlike qualities are driving its rapid adoption in professional domains. However, this anthropomorphic appeal raises concerns from HCI and responsible AI scholars about potential hazards and harms, such as overtrust in system outputs. To investigate how technology workers navigate these humanlike qualities and anticipate emergent harms, we conducted focus groups with 30 professionals across six job functions (ML engineering, product policy, UX research and design, product management, technology writing, and communications). Our findings reveal an unsettled knowledge environment surrounding humanlike generative AI, where workers' varying perspectives illuminate a range of potential risks for individuals, knowledge work fields, and society. We argue that workers require comprehensive support, including clearer conceptions of ``humanlikeness'' to effectively mitigate these risks. To aid in mitigation strategies, we provide a conceptual map articulating the identified hazards and their connection to conflated notions of ``humanlikeness.''
Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 22 Dec 2025.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.
3 papers.
- 2026Working with Agentic `Teammates': When a New Organizational Actor Collides with the Human Ecosystem of Work24 Sep 2026
- 2026CompanionSim: Synthetic Data for Evaluating Anthropomorphism in Human-AI Relationships31 Aug 2026
- 2026DelusionEval: Measuring Delusion-Linked Behaviors in AI Chatbots5 Aug 2026