> According to the empirical literature on deskilling, automation bias, and skill decay, many professionals rely on artificial intelligence much more than is necessary when it is available, and the effects of such overreliance on skill decay are unlikely to be entirely understood by the professionals themselves. I argue that this – what I call the insidious nature of deskilling – supports a normative view, according to which the responsibility for tackling deskilling should not be ascribed to the individual professional but the risks of professional deskilling should be tackled by the professional community instead. Mitigating the risks of deskilling should start from an intra-field analysis of the core skills of the profession that should not be outsourced to artificial intelligence. Then, the individual professional would not be left alone to determine how and when to prevent deskilling during the adoption of artificial intelligence within her profession.
Yes, I read the article, although I appreciate your manner of suggesting i haven't over what it could have been. And again - the responsibility for making poor choices and over-reliance on AI lies with the individual, regardless of what the article says. This is like saying that responsibility for being able to do mental math should be tackled by the professional community because calculators exist, or that the professional chef community needs to get involved to prevent a devolution of skills due to this new-fangled micro-wave oven.
The professionals who are deskilling themselves, obviously.
> According to the empirical literature on deskilling, automation bias, and skill decay, many professionals rely on artificial intelligence much more than is necessary when it is available, and the effects of such overreliance on skill decay are unlikely to be entirely understood by the professionals themselves. I argue that this – what I call the insidious nature of deskilling – supports a normative view, according to which the responsibility for tackling deskilling should not be ascribed to the individual professional but the risks of professional deskilling should be tackled by the professional community instead. Mitigating the risks of deskilling should start from an intra-field analysis of the core skills of the profession that should not be outsourced to artificial intelligence. Then, the individual professional would not be left alone to determine how and when to prevent deskilling during the adoption of artificial intelligence within her profession.
Yes, I read the article, although I appreciate your manner of suggesting i haven't over what it could have been. And again - the responsibility for making poor choices and over-reliance on AI lies with the individual, regardless of what the article says. This is like saying that responsibility for being able to do mental math should be tackled by the professional community because calculators exist, or that the professional chef community needs to get involved to prevent a devolution of skills due to this new-fangled micro-wave oven.