Parenting Journal · Volume 1 · Issue 3 · Licensed source edition
Different types of human–AI interaction and employees’ knowledge territorial behavior: the role of organizational dehumanization and paradoxical leadership
Originally published 2026-07-29 · Frontiers in Psychology
Frontiers Media SA · DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1854239 ↗
AI / system type
Enhanced versus impeded human–AI interaction in organizational work
Workplace evidenceExamines workers, organizations or AI at work. Participants are not necessarily parents; family benefits are not established by this evidence alone.
The AI connection
System or context examined: Enhanced versus impeded human–AI interaction in organizational work. The source-specific system and study design determine what can be inferred.
Why this reading matters
The reading brings knowledge territoriality and feeling dehumanized during AI interaction into a concrete discussion of humane work during technological change. It offers scenario experiment and two-wave field survey evidence or analysis, not a promise of organizational or family benefit.
Workplace evidence
Work, care and the whole person.
The workplace lens is knowledge territoriality and feeling dehumanized during AI interaction. Source setting or population: Experimental participants and employees in an organizational field study. Parenting and child-development outcomes are not inferred from the workplace evidence.
Examines workers, organizations or AI at work. Participants are not necessarily parents; family benefits are not established by this evidence alone.
Editorial reading guide · Collaboration
How can AI collaboration avoid making colleagues feel replaceable or defensive?
This scenario experiment and two-wave field survey examines knowledge territoriality and feeling dehumanized during AI interaction. Its TRICK home is Collaboration, an editorial reading path rather than a claim that the paper tests the full framework.
Study context
Experimental participants and employees in an organizational field study
Age / stage: Adult workplace context; no child age range inferred
Read with three questions
- How can AI collaboration avoid making colleagues feel replaceable or defensive?
- What do this study’s design and population — Experimental participants and employees in an organizational field study — allow you to infer about another workplace?
- When considering knowledge territoriality and feeling dehumanized during AI interaction, which decisions would need employee input before applying this reading to a working family’s circumstances?
Keep the limits in view
Experimental scenarios and observational field pathways should be interpreted separately; reduced knowledge territoriality is not proof of improved employee wellbeing.
The text below is the original article’s licensed repository edition. Its wording is not rewritten. Use the Paper Agent beside the text to locate evidence; open the source for figures, tables and complete context.
Opening the verified paper and agent…
Checking the article identity, license record, and saved source text.
Open the repository recordAttribution & reuse
Follow the original.
Original authorship, publication date, journal and DOI are preserved. This issue’s TRICK placement and reading questions are editorial additions, not claims made by the original authors.
Ziyi Zhang; Yuying Wu (2026). Different types of human–AI interaction and employees’ knowledge territorial behavior: the role of organizational dehumanization and paradoxical leadership Frontiers in Psychology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1854239
Permissions checked against the saved article notice; repository publication notices screened 2026-11-05. This is not a new peer-review decision. The source authors and publishers are not represented as endorsing this issue.