Trial reportScientific reports2025
AI feedback and workplace social support in enhancing occupational self-efficacy: a randomized controlled trial in Japan.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The impact of perceived social support on Chinese university students' employability: a perspective based on signaling theory.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- A Generative AI Framework for Cognitive Intervention in Older Adults: An Integrated Engineering Design and Clinical Protocol.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As AI is expected to take on the role of providing workplace feedback to employees in the future, understanding how AI and humans can complement effectively in this context is crucial. This study explores this through a randomized controlled experiment testing the feedback effectiveness of two different Chat-GPT-based AI chatbots-one that delivers positive feedback focused on individual strengths (n = 54) and the other that provides negative feedback aimed at areas for improvement (n = 48). Japanese office workers, including freelancers, participated in this study. We conducted mixed-effects model analysis to assess whether the effects of these AI chatbots on occupational self-efficacy are moderated by the level of social support from supervisors and colleagues. The results showed that positive feedback from the AI chatbots significantly enhanced occupational self-efficacy. Furthermore, negative feedback also boosted self-efficacy, but only when employees perceived a high level of emotional support from their supervisors and colleagues. These findings point to effective ways of integrating AI into the workplace, where humans and AI can assume complementary roles in employee development.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.