人工智能反馈寻求行为的驱动机制及其影响效应

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1042.2025.1647

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

面对高度易变、不确定、复杂和模糊的乌卡时代, 员工需要主动寻求反馈来实现个人发展并提升职场竞争力。人工智能技术为员工主动寻求反馈提供了新契机, 甲骨文公司的调研报告显示超过50%的员工倾向于主动向人工智能寻求反馈。然而传统反馈寻求行为的研究未将人工智能纳入反馈寻求目标, 员工向人工智能寻求反馈的驱动机制和影响效果尚不明晰。同时, 人工智能反馈的研究刚兴起, 且主要把员工作为反馈的客体, 缺乏对员工主动寻求反馈的关注。因此, 本文欲融合传统反馈寻求行为和新兴人工智能反馈的研究, 拓展反馈寻求行为的概念, 将人工智能纳入人类员工寻求反馈的对象之中。围绕人工智能反馈寻求行为, 本文欲探究人工智能系统的透明性和拟人性特征对其的驱动机制, 并探讨其对员工绩效改善的影响效果。在此基础上, 本文能为“新兴技术与员工的心理与行为”等前沿方向提供一些研究证据, 并为相关管理实践提供启示。

关键词: 人工智能反馈寻求行为, 透明性, 拟人性, 绩效改善

Abstract:

In the current VUCA (volatility, uncertainty, complexity, ambiguity) era, employees must proactively seek feedback to facilitate personal development and enhance their workplace competitiveness. Artificial intelligence (AI) offers new opportunities for proactive feedback-seeking, with a survey by Oracle Corporation indicating that over 50% of employees prefer seeking feedback from AI systems. However, traditional research on feedback-seeking behavior has yet to incorporate AI as a feedback source, leaving the mechanisms and consequences of employee feedback-seeking from AI largely underexplored. Moreover, emerging studies on AI feedback primarily position employees as passive feedback recipients, paying limited attention to their proactive feedback-seeking behaviors. Therefore, this research aims to bridge the gap by integrating insights from traditional feedback-seeking behavior literature with emerging studies on AI feedback, expanding the concept of feedback-seeking to include AI as a viable source, and contributing to the burgeoning field of emerging technologies and employee psychology and behavior.

Specifically，Study 1 adopts a human-AI interaction perspective to examine how AI system characteristics influence employees’ feedback-seeking from AI, as well as the underlying mechanisms. Drawing on mind perception theory and trust literature, this study proposes that employees’ perceptions of AI agency and experience, along with their cognition-based and affect-based trust in AI, serve as serial mediators in the relationships between two AI system features—transparency and anthropomorphism—and employees’ feedback-seeking from AI. Furthermore, acknowledging that task characteristics are essential factors in traditional feedback-seeking research, we suggest that problem solving moderates the serial mediated relationship. Building on the core outcome of interest in the feedback literature, Study 2 seeks to explore the consequences of employees’ feedback-seeking from AI on performance improvement and its underlying mechanisms. Based on feedback process theory and AI-related literature, this study proposes that feedback-seeking from AI positively predicts employees’ performance improvement. This effect is mediated by the accuracy and specificity of AI-generated feedback information. Moreover, the type of task—objective vs. subjective—is expected to moderate this mediation process.

In sum, the findings from the two studies offer several important theoretical contributions. First, this research innovatively positions artificial intelligence as a target of employees’ feedback-seeking behavior, thereby expanding the boundaries of the feedback-seeking literature. It lays a foundation for future research to explore the unique dynamics, antecedents, and consequences of seeking feedback from AI in the workplace. Second, by focusing on two critical system characteristics—transparency and anthropomorphism—this research identifies how system-level features, which have been emphasized in evaluations of AI by human users, influence employees’ feedback-seeking from AI. It reveals unique antecedents and mechanisms through which AI system features shape user behavior, deepens our understanding of the relationship between system characteristics and feedback-seeking behavior, and provides theoretical guidance for future research in AI-enabled work settings. Third, taking into account the distinctive nature of human-AI interaction, this research examines the consequences of feedback-seeking from AI on employee performance-related outcomes and uncovers the underlying mechanisms. Performance is a core outcome of interest in feedback-seeking research, yet prior studies have yielded inconsistent findings regarding the feedback-performance link. By exploring how feedback-seeking from AI influences performance improvement and through which mechanisms, this research helps clarify this relationship and broadens the theoretical boundaries of AI-related feedback-seeking research.

From a practical perspective, the findings offer actionable insights for managers seeking to encourage employees to proactively seek feedback from AI systems, helping them leverage potential benefits while mitigating associated risks. It also highlights the types of work tasks where such feedback-seeking is most appropriate and effective. Overall, this research positions AI feedback-seeking as a lens through which managers can better understand the evolving interplay between emerging technologies and employee behavior, and it invites practitioners to rethink how to foster synergy between humans and intelligent systems.

Key words: feedback-seeking from AI, transparency, anthropomorphism, performance improvement

中图分类号:

B849: C93

孙芳, 李绍龙, 龙立荣, 雷宣, 曾祥麟, 黄夏虹. (2025). 人工智能反馈寻求行为的驱动机制及其影响效应. 心理科学进展 , 33(10), 1647-1662.

SUN Fang, LI Shaolong, LONG Lirong, LEI Xuan, ZENG Xianglin, HUANG Xiahong. (2025). Driving mechanisms and impact effects of AI feedback-seeking behavior: A research proposal. Advances in Psychological Science, 33(10), 1647-1662.

图/表 3

参考文献 94

[1]	冯向楠, 詹婧. (2019). 人工智能时代互联网平台劳动过程研究——以平台外卖骑手为例. 社会发展研究, 6(3), 61-83+243.
[2]	关健, 李文朴, 何国华, 张新安. (2025). 人工智能反馈:文献述评与研究展望. 外国经济与管理, 47(3), 83-100.
[3]	贾建锋, 葛羿京, 焦玉鑫. (2024). 有求必应, 还是相“机”而动? 员工反馈寻求行为对上级发展性反馈的影响机制研究. 管理工程学报, 38(6), 1-12.
[4]	蒋路远, 曹李梅, 秦昕, 谭玲, 陈晨, 彭小斐. (2022). 人工智能决策的公平感知. 心理科学进展, 30(5), 1078-1092. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2022.01078
[5]	林新奇, 徐洋洋. (2021). 未来工作自我清晰度与员工反馈寻求行为的关系: 变革型领导和工作投入的影响. 管理评论, 33(7), 216-226.
[6]	刘善仕, 裴嘉良, 葛淳棉, 刘小浪, 谌一璠. (2022). 在线劳动平台算法管理: 理论探索与研究展望. 管理世界, 38(2), 225-239+14-16.
[7]	罗文豪, 霍伟伟, 赵宜萱, 王震. (2022). 人工智能驱动的组织与人力资源管理变革: 实践洞察与研究方向. 中国人力资源开发, 39(1), 4-16.
[8]	倪清, 杜鹏程. (2017). 基于链式中介效应的谦卑型领导与经理人反馈寻求行为关系研究. 管理学报, 14(6), 823-831.
[9]	任巍, 简浩. (2020). 领导幽默对员工反馈寻求行为的影响研究: 促进焦点的中介作用. 广东财经大学学报, 35(6), 32-41.
[10]	孙伟平. (2020). 人工智能与人的“新异化”. 中国社会科学, (12), 119-137+202-203.
[11]	王怀勇, 岳思怡, 沈晓寻. (2022). 授权型领导对员工反馈寻求行为的影响机制: 领导差异化授权两阶段的调节作用. 心理与行为研究, 20(1), 130-137. doi: 10.12139/j.1672-0628.2022.01.019
[12]	王宁, 杨芮, 周密, 于玲玲. (2021). 差序格局视角下个体反馈寻求行为对创新绩效的影响研究. 软科学, 35(8), 69-75.
[13]	王雁飞. (2005). 组织中的个体反馈寻求行为. 心理科学进展, 13(5), 679-685.
[14]	王振源, 段永嘉, 王燕榕. (2018). 徒弟寻求反馈促进导师知识共享?一个有中介的调节作用模型. 管理工程学报, 32(4), 20-27.
[15]	王振源, 姚明辉. (2022). 工作场所人机协作对员工影响的研究述评. 外国经济与管理, 44(9), 86-102.
[16]	谢小云, 左玉涵, 胡琼晶. (2021). 数字化时代的人力资源管理: 基于人与技术交互的视角. 管理世界, 37(1), 200-216+13.
[17]	张建平, 秦传燕, 刘善仕. (2020). 寻求反馈能改善绩效吗?——反馈寻求行为与个体绩效关系的元分析. 心理科学进展, 28(4), 549-565. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2020.00549
[18]	张敏, 赵宜萱. (2022). 机器学习在人力资源管理领域中的应用研究. 中国人力资源开发, 39(1), 71-83.
[19]	张燕红, 廖建桥. (2015). 团队真实型领导、新员工反馈寻求行为与社会化结果. 管理科学, 28(2), 126-136.
[20]	张颖, 杨付. (2018). 反馈寻求行为的影响因素和本土化发展. 心理科学进展, 26(6), 1121-1130. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2018.01121
[21]	张正堂, 丁明智, 刘宁. (2018). 领导奖励缺失对员工反馈寻求行为的影响机制. 经济管理, 40(9), 107-122.
[22]	Acikgoz Y., Davison K. H., Compagnone M., & Laske M. (2020). Justice perceptions of artificial intelligence in selection. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 28(4), 399-416.
[23]	Anseel F., Beatty A. S., Shen W., Lievens F., & Sackett P. R. (2015). How are we doing after 30 years? A metanalytic review of the antecedents and outcomes of feedback-seeking behavior. Journal of Management, 41(1), 318-348.
[24]	Anseel F., & Lievens F. (2007). The relationship between uncertainty and desire for feedback: A test of competing hypotheses. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37(5), 1007-1040.
[25]	Ashford S. J. (1986). Feedback-seeking in individual adaptation: A resource perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 29(3), 465-487.
[26]	Ashford S. J., & Cummings L. L. (1983). Feedback as an individual resource: Personal strategies of creating information. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 32(3), 370-398.
[27]	Ashford S. J., De Stobbeleir K., & Nujella M. (2016). To seek or not to seek: Is that the only question? Recent developments in feedback-seeking literature. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 3(1), 213-239.
[28]	Bauer K., & Gill A. (2024). Mirror, mirror on the wall: Algorithmic assessments, transparency, and self-fulfilling prophecies. Information Systems Research, 35(1), 226-248.
[29]	Bauer K., Heigl R., Hinz O., & Kosfeld M.(2024). Feedback loops in machine learning: A study on the interplay of continuous updating and human discrimination. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 25(4), 804-866.
[30]	Bogert E., Schecter A., & Watson R. T. (2021). Humans rely more on algorithms than social influence as a task becomes more difficult. Scientific Reports, 11(1), 8028. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-87480-9 pmid: 33850211
[31]	Brett J. F., & Atwater L. E. (2001). 360° feedback: Accuracy, reactions, and perceptions of usefulness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(5), 930-942. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.86.5.930 pmid: 11596809
[32]	Brynjolfsson E., & Mitchell T. (2017). What can machine learning do? Workforce implications. Science, 358(6370), 1530-1534. doi: 10.1126/science.aap8062 pmid: 29269459
[33]	Butterfield M. E., Hill S. E., & Lord C. G. (2012). Mangy mutt or furry friend? Anthropomorphism promotes animal welfare. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(4), 957-960.
[34]	Castelo N., Bos M. W., & Lehmann D. R. (2019). Task-dependent algorithm aversion. Journal of Marketing Research, 56(5), 809-825. doi: 10.1177/0022243719851788
[35]	Choi S., Kang H., Kim N., & Kim J. (2025). How does artificial intelligence improve human decision-making? Evidence from the AI-powered Go program. Strategic Management Journal, 46(6), 1523-1554. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3694
[36]	Coutifaris C. G. V., & Grant A. M. (2022). Taking your team behind the curtain: The effects of leader feedback- sharing and feedback-seeking on team psychological safety. Organization Science, 33(4), 1574-1598.
[37]	Dahling J. J., & Whitaker B. G. (2016). When can feedback-seeking behavior result in a better performance rating? Investigating the moderating role of political skill. Human Performance, 29(2), 73-88.
[38]	De Stobbeleir K., Ashford S., & Zhang C. (2020). Shifting focus: Antecedents and outcomes of proactive feedback seeking from peers. Human Relations, 73(3), 303-325.
	Dietvorst B. J., Simmons J. P., & Massey C. (2015). Algorithm aversion: People erroneously avoid algorithms after seeing them err. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 144(1), 114-126.
[40]	Epley N., Waytz A., & Cacioppo J. T. (2007). On seeing human: A three-factor theory of anthropomorphism. Psychological Review, 114(4), 864-886. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.114.4.864 pmid: 17907867
[41]	Förster M., Broder H. R., Fahr M. C., Klier M., & Fink L. (2025). Tell me more, tell me more: The impact of explanations on learning from feedback provided by artificial intelligence. European Journal of Information Systems, 34(2), 323-345.
[42]	Gajendran R. S., Loewenstein J., Choi H., & Ozgen S. (2022). Hidden costs of text-based electronic communication on complex reasoning tasks: Motivation maintenance and impaired downstream performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 169, 104130.
[43]	Glikson E., & Woolley A. W. (2020). Human trust in artificial intelligence: Review of empirical research. Academy of Management Annals, 14(2), 627-660.
[44]	Gong Y., Wang M., Huang J.-C., & Cheung S. Y. (2017). Toward a goal orientation-based feedback-seeking typology: Implications for employee performance outcomes. Journal of Management, 43(4), 1234-1260.
[45]	Goodman J. S., Wood R. E., & Chen Z. (2011). Feedback specificity, information processing, and transfer of training. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 115(2), 253-267.
[46]	Gray H. M., Gray K., & Wegner D. M. (2007). Dimensions of mind perception. Science, 315(5812), 619. pmid: 17272713
[47]	Gray K., & Wegner D. M. (2012). Feeling robots and human zombies: Mind perception and the uncanny valley. Cognition, 125(1), 125-130. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2012.06.007 pmid: 22784682
[48]	Gupta A. K., Govindarajan V., & Malhotra A. (1999). Feedback-seeking behavior within multinational corporations. Strategic Management Journal, 20(3), 205-222.
[49]	Hall K. R., Harrison D. E., Ajjan H., & Marshall G. W. (2022). Understanding salesperson intention to use AI feedback and its influence on business-to-business sales outcomes. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 37(9), 1787-1801.
[50]	Han M. C. (2021). The impact of anthropomorphism on consumers’ purchase decision in chatbot commerce. Journal of Internet Commerce, 20(1), 46-65.
[51]	Hancock P. A., Billings D. R., Schaefer K. E., Chen J. Y., De Visser E. J., & Parasuraman R. (2011). A meta-analysis of factors affecting trust in human-robot interaction. Human Factors, 53(5), 517-527. pmid: 22046724
[52]	Heflick N. A., Goldenberg J. L., Cooper D. P., & Puvia E. (2011). From women to objects: Appearance focus, target gender, and perceptions of warmth, morality and competence. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47(3), 572-581.
[53]	Hobfoll S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist, 44(3), 513-524. doi: 10.1037//0003-066x.44.3.513 pmid: 2648906
[54]	Ilgen D. R., Fisher C. D., & Taylor M. S. (1979). Consequences of individual feedback on behavior in organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64(4), 349-371.
[55]	Inbar Y., Cone J., & Gilovich T. (2010). People’s intuitions about intuitive insight and intuitive choice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99(2), 232-247. doi: 10.1037/a0020215 pmid: 20658841
[56]	Kellogg K. C., Valentine M. A., & Christin A. (2020). Algorithms at work: The new contested terrain of control. Academy of Management Annals, 14(1), 366-410.
[57]	Klein J., Moon Y., & Picard R. W. (2002). This computer responds to user frustration: Theory, design, and results. Interacting with Computers, 14(2), 119-140.
[58]	Kosinski M. (2023). Evaluating large language models in theory of mind tasks. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2302.02083
[59]	Krasman J. (2010). The feedback-seeking personality: Big five and feedback-seeking behavior. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 17(1), 18-32.
[60]	Krasman J. (2013). Putting feedback-seeking into “context”: Job characteristics and feedback‐seeking behaviour. Personnel Review, 42(1), 50-66.
[61]	Luo X., Qin M. S., Fang Z., & Qu Z. (2021). Artificial intelligence coaches for sales agents: Caveats and solutions. Journal of Marketing, 85(2), 14-32.
[62]	Mahmud H., Islam A., Ahmed S., & Smolander K. (2022). What influences algorithmic decision-making? A systematic literature review on algorithm aversion. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 175, 121390.
[63]	McAllister D. J. (1995). Affect- and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 38(1), 24-59.
[64]	Morgeson F. P., & Humphrey S. E. (2006). The Work Design Questionnaire (WDQ): Developing and validating a comprehensive measure for assessing job design and the nature of work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(6), 1321-1339. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.91.6.1321 pmid: 17100487
[65]	Moss S. E., Song M., Hannah S. T., Wang Z., & Sumanth J. J. (2020). The duty to improve oneself: How duty orientation mediates the relationship between ethical leadership and followers’ feedback-seeking and feedback-avoiding behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 165(4), 615-631.
[66]	Nass C., & Moon Y. (2000). Machines and mindlessness: Social responses to computers. Journal of Social Issues, 56(1), 81-103.
[67]	Nurmohamed S., & Schwingel-Sauer Z. (2024). Beyond the first choice: The impact of being an alternate choice on social integration and feedback seeking. Journal of Applied Psychology, 109(4), 587-598. doi: 10.1037/apl0001163 pmid: 38032602
[68]	Ochmann J., Michels L., Tiefenbeck V., Maier C., & Laumer S. (2024). Perceived algorithmic fairness: An empirical study of transparency and anthropomorphism in algorithmic recruiting. Information Systems Journal, 34(2), 384-414.
[69]	Park E., Jenkins Q., & Jiang X. (2008). Measuring trust of human operators in new generation rescue robots. Proceedings of the JFPS International Symposium on Fluid Power, 2008(7-2), 489-492.
[70]	Pei J., Wang H., Peng Q., & Liu S. (2024). Saving face: Leveraging artificial intelligence-based negative feedback to enhance employee job performance. Human Resource Management, 63(5), 775-790.
[71]	Pulakos E. D., Mueller-Hanson R., & Arad S. (2019). The evolution of performance management: Searching for value. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 6(1), 249-271.
[72]	Raisch S., & Krakowski S. (2021). Artificial intelligence and management: The automation-augmentation paradox. Academy of Management Review, 46(1), 192-210.
[73]	Saffarizadeh K., Keil M., Boodraj M., & Alashoor T. (2024). “My name is Alexa. What’s your name?” The impact of reciprocal self-disclosure on post-interaction trust in conversational agents. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 25(3), 528-568.
[74]	Schmitt A., Zacher H., & Frese M. (2012). The buffering effect of selection, optimization, and compensation strategy use on the relationship between problem solving demands and occupational well-being: A daily diary study. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 17(2), 139-149. doi: 10.1037/a0027054 pmid: 22308966
[75]	Seitz L., Bekmeier-Feuerhahn S., & Gohil K. (2022). Can we trust a chatbot like a physician? A qualitative study on understanding the emergence of trust toward diagnostic chatbots. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 165, 102848.
[76]	Sheehan B., Jin H. S., & Gottlieb U. (2020). Customer service chatbots: Anthropomorphism and adoption. Journal of Business Research, 115, 14-24.
[77]	Sherf E. N., Gajendran R. S., & Posner B. Z. (2021). Seeking and finding justice: Why and when managers’ feedback seeking enhances justice enactment. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 42(6), 741-766.
[78]	Sherf E. N., & Morrison E. W. (2020). I do not need feedback! Or do I? Self-efficacy, perspective taking, and feedback seeking. Journal of Applied Psychology, 105(2), 146-165. doi: 10.1037/apl0000432 pmid: 31219259
[79]	Shin D., & Park Y. J. (2019). Role of fairness, accountability, and transparency in algorithmic affordance. Computers in Human Behavior, 98, 277-284.
[80]	Steelman L. A., Levy P. E., & Snell A. F. (2004). The feedback environment scale: Construct definition, measurement, and validation. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64(1), 165-184.
[81]	Thuillard S., Adams M., Jelmini G., Schmutz S., Sonderegger A., & Sauer J. (2022). When humans and computers induce social stress through negative feedback: Effects on performance and subjective state. Computers in Human Behavior, 133, 107270.
[82]	Tong S., Jia N., Luo X., & Fang Z. (2021). The Janus face of artificial intelligence feedback: Deployment versus disclosure effects on employee performance. Strategic Management Journal, 42(9), 1600-1631.
[83]	Turel O. (2024). To learn or not learn from AI? Unpacking the effects of feedback valence on novel insights recall. European Journal of Information Systems. https://doi.org/10.1080/0960085X.2024.2426473
[84]	van der Woerdt, S., & Haselager P. (2019). When robots appear to have a mind: The human perception of machine agency and responsibility. New Ideas in Psychology, 54, 93-100.
[85]	Vandenberghe C., Landry G., Bentein K., Anseel F., Mignonac K., & Roussel P. (2021). A dynamic model of the effects of feedback-seeking behavior and organizational commitment on newcomer turnover. Journal of Management, 47(2), 519-544.
[86]	Wambsganss T., Janson A., Söllner M., Koedinger K., & Leimeister J. M. (2025). Improving students’ argumentation skills using dynamic machine-learning-based modeling. Information Systems Research, 36(1), 474-507.
[87]	Wang T., Wang D., & Liu Z. (2022). Feedback-seeking from team members increases employee creativity: The roles of thriving at work and mindfulness. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 39(4), 1321-1340.
[88]	Waytz A., & Norton M. I. (2014). Botsourcing and outsourcing: Robot, British, Chinese, and German workers are for thinking—not feeling—jobs. Emotion, 14(2), 434-444. doi: 10.1037/a0036054 pmid: 24708509
[89]	Wegner D. M., & Gray K. (2017). The mind club: Who thinks, what feels, and why it matters. Penguin.
[90]	Whitaker B., & Levy P. (2012). Linking feedback quality and goal orientation to feedback seeking and job performance. Human Performance, 25(2), 159-178.
[91]	Wilkinson D., Alkan Ö., Liao Q. V., Mattetti M., Vejsbjerg I., Knijnenburg B. P., & Daly E. (2021). Why or why not? The effect of justification styles on chatbot recommendations. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 39(4), 1-21.
[92]	Yam K. C., Bigman Y. E., Tang P. M., Ilies R., De Cremer D., Soh H., & Gray K. (2021). Robots at work: People prefer—and forgive—service robots with perceived feelings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 106(10), 1557-1572.
[93]	Yam K. C., Goh E.-Y., Fehr R., Lee R., Soh H., & Gray K. (2022). When your boss is a robot: Workers are more spiteful to robot supervisors that seem more human. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 102, 104360.
[94]	Zhu Q., Martinescu E., Beersma B., & Wei F. (2024). The double-edged sword of negative supervisor gossip: When and why negative supervisor gossip promotes versus inhibits feedback seeking behavior among gossip targets. Human Relations, 77(6), 864-886.