A Study Related Artificial Intelligence's Effect on Emotional Intelligence in the Workplace in Pune's IT Sector
Keywords:
feeling simulated intelligence, close to home simulated intelligence, feeling acknowledgment, full of feeling figuring, fake capacity to appreciate individuals on a deeper level, inactive detecting, profound work, protection, working environment, eventual fate of workAbstract
A rising field of study is the way computerized reasoning (man-made intelligence) influences workers' EQ at work. The capacity to distinguish, cycle, control, and gainfully apply one's own and others' close to home states is what we mean when we discuss the ability to understand people on a deeper level. Authority, collaboration, question goal, and representative prosperity are regions where EQ has a significant impact in the working environment.
How man-made consciousness (simulated intelligence) apparatuses like chatbots, feeling examination, and feeling ID are utilized in the work environment is an open subject.
Feeling simulated intelligence is acquiring ubiquity in the work environment, and it very well may be exceptionally helpful for organizations. Despite the fact that feeling simulated intelligence is turning out to be progressively normal in the work environment, little is had some significant awareness of how representatives who are exposed to it feel about it. To make up for this shortfall, we directed interviews with 80 IT laborers in Pune and saw that as (1) members considered feeling artificial intelligence to be a serious interruption into the security of their own profound information; (2) feeling computer based intelligence might implement laborers' consistence with close to home work assumptions; and (3) laborers might participate in close to home work for the purpose of safeguarding their protection over their feelings. The outcomes feature the requirement for exploration and strategy worries to be gotten some information about how to protect and save close to home security in the working environment and then some, as well as the need to perceive and characterize a singular right to what we depict as profound protection.
Downloads
References
Praveen Aggarwal, Stephen B Castleberry, Rick Ridnour, and C David Shepherd. 2005. Salesperson empathy and listening: impact on relationship outcomes. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice 13, 3 (2005), 16–31.
John R. Aiello and Kathryn J. Kolb. 1995. Electronic performance monitoring and social context: Impact on productivity and stress. Journal of Applied Psychology 80, 3 (1995), 339–353. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.80.3.339 Place: US Publisher: American Psychological Association.
Ifeoma Ajunwa, Kate Crawford, and Jason Schultz. 2016. Limitless Worker Surveillance. SSRN Scholarly Paper ID 2746211. Social Science Research Network, Rochester, NY. https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2746211
Ifeoma Ajunwa and Daniel Greene. 2019. Platforms at work: Automated hiring platforms and other new intermediaries in the organization of work. In Work and labor in the digital age. Emerald Publishing Limited, USA.
Irwin Altman, Anne Vinsel, and Barbara B Brown. 1981. Dialectic conceptions in social psychology: An application to social penetration and privacy regulation. In Advances in experimental social psychology. Vol. 14. Elsevier, 107–160.
Tawfiq Ammari, Sarita Schoenebeck, and Meredith Morris. 2014. Accessing Social Support and Overcoming Judgment on Social Media among Parents of Children with Special Needs. https://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/ICWSM/ICWSM14/paper/view/8032/8102
Nazanin Andalibi and Justin Buss. 2020. The Human in Emotion Recognition on Social Media: Attitudes, Outcomes, Risks. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Honolulu, HI, USA) (CHI ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376680
Elizabeth Anderson and Stephen Macedo. 2017. Private government: how employers rule our lives (and why we don't talk about it). Princeton University Press, Princeton ; Oxford. OCLC: ocn962352916.
Benjamin Baez. 2002. Confidentiality in qualitative research: Reflections on secrets, power and agency. Qualitative research 2, 1 (2002), 35–58.
F Lee Bailey, Roger E Zuckerman, and Kenneth R Pierce. 1989. The employee polygraph protection act: A manual for polygraph examiners and employers. American Polygraph Association Severna Park, MD.
Kirstie Ball. 2010. Workplace surveillance: An overview. Labor History 51, 1 (2010), 87–106.
Jennifer S Bard. 2021. Developing Legal Framework for Regulating Emotion AI. BUJ Sci. & Tech. L. 27(2021), 271.
Julian Barling, Kathryne E Dupré, and E Kevin Kelloway. 2009. Predicting workplace aggression and violence. Annual review of psychology 60 (2009), 671–692.
Lisa Feldman Barrett, Ralph Adolphs, Stacy Marsella, Aleix M Martinez, and Seth D Pollak. 2019. Emotional expressions reconsidered: Challenges to inferring emotion from human facial movements. Psychological science in the public interest 20, 1 (2019), 1–68.
Clement Bellet, Jan-Emmanuel De Neve, and George Ward. 2020. Does employee happiness have an impact on productivity?Saïd Business School WP 2019-13(2020).
Robert J Bies. 1993. Privacy and procedural justice in organizations. Social Justice Research 6, 1 (1993), 69–86.
Abeba Birhane. 2021. Algorithmic injustice: a relational ethics approach. Patterns 2, 2 (2021), 100205.
Kirsten Boehner, Rogério DePaula, Paul Dourish, and Phoebe Sengers. 2007. How emotion is made and measured. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 65, 4 (2007), 275–291.
Karen Boyd and Nazanin Andalibi. 2023. Automated emotion recognition in the workplace: How proposed technologies reveal potential futures of work. Proceedings of the ACM on human–computer interaction (2023).
Stefano Bromuri, Alexander P. Henkel, Deniz Iren, and Visara Urovi. 2020. Using AI to predict service agent stress from emotion patterns in service interactions. Journal of Service Management ahead-of-print, ahead-of-print (Jan. 2020). https://doi.org/10.1108/JOSM-06-2019-0163
Paul Brook. 2009. The Alienated Heart: Hochschild's ‘emotional labour'thesis and the anticapitalist politics of alienation. Capital & Class 33, 2 (2009), 7–31.
Jed R. Brubaker, Lynn S. Dombrowski, Anita M. Gilbert, Nafiri Kusumakaulika, and Gillian R. Hayes. 2014. Stewarding a Legacy: Responsibilities and Relationships in the Management of Post-Mortem Data. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Toronto, Ontario, Canada) (CHI ’14). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 4157–4166. https://doi.org/10.1145/2556288.2557059
Christopher Burr and Nello Cristianini. 2019. Can machines read our minds?Minds and Machines 29, 3 (2019), 461–494.
Jenna Butler, Mary Czerwinski, Shamsi Iqbal, Sonia Jaffe, Kate Nowak, Emily Peloquin, and Longqi Yang. 2021. Personal Productivity and Well-being–Chapter 2 of the 2021 New Future of Work Report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2103.02524(2021).
Ryan Calo. 2017. Artificial intelligence policy: a primer and roadmap. UCDL Rev. 51(2017), 399.
Rafael A Calvo and Sidney D'Mello. 2010. Affect detection: An interdisciplinary review of models, methods, and their applications. IEEE Transactions on affective computing 1, 1 (2010), 18–37.
Jonathan Care. 2018. Gartner: Market Guide for User and Entity Behavior Analytics. https://www.gartner.com/document/3917096?ref=solrAll&refval=278161460
John M Carroll. 2000. Five reasons for scenario-based design. Interacting with computers 13, 1 (2000), 43–60.
Stevie Chancellor, Michael L Birnbaum, Eric D Caine, Vincent MB Silenzio, and Munmun De Choudhury. 2019. A taxonomy of ethical tensions in inferring mental health states from social media. In Proceedings of the conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency. 79–88.
Kathy Charmaz. 2006. Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. sage.
Angela Chen and K Hao. 2020. Emotion AI researchers say overblown claims give their work a bad name. MIT Technology Review 14(2020), 2020.
Danielle Keats Citron. 2022. The fight for privacy: protecting dignity, identity, and love in the digital age (first editioned.). W.W. Norton & Company, Inc, New York.
Danielle Keats Citron and Daniel J Solove. 2022. Privacy harms. BUL Rev. 102(2022), 793.
Ahammad, D. S. H. ., & Yathiraju, D. . (2021). Maternity Risk Prediction Using IOT Module with Wearable Sensor and Deep Learning Based Feature Extraction and Classification Technique. Research Journal of Computer Systems and Engineering, 2(1), 40:45. Retrieved from https://technicaljournals.org/RJCSE/index.php/journal/article/view/19
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
All papers should be submitted electronically. All submitted manuscripts must be original work that is not under submission at another journal or under consideration for publication in another form, such as a monograph or chapter of a book. Authors of submitted papers are obligated not to submit their paper for publication elsewhere until an editorial decision is rendered on their submission. Further, authors of accepted papers are prohibited from publishing the results in other publications that appear before the paper is published in the Journal unless they receive approval for doing so from the Editor-In-Chief.
IJISAE open access articles are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. This license lets the audience to give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made and if they remix, transform, or build upon the material, they must distribute contributions under the same license as the original.
