Agency metaphors expressed fear that GenAI steals human agency and threatens jobs, reflecting a binary human-versus-machine model¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · qualitative r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2025 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Participants attributed agency and volition to GenAI with dread, conceptualising agency as a zero-sum resource GenAI was stealing from teachers and students. → Carmen Vallis 2025

Evidence¶

Carmen Vallis 2025¶

Carmen Vallis, Stephanie Wilson, Alison Casey. (2025). Fear and Awe: Making Sense of Generative AI Through Metaphor. Journal of Interactive Media Education. https://doi.org/10.5334/jime.972

q2 · i? · qualitative · r3

Qualitative analysis of workshop metaphors. Beneath the dread was fear of GenAI as a "job rival" and "competitor"; replacement metaphors reflected sociocultural anxiety about professional obsolescence, alongside awe at superhuman qualities like operating 24/7 and never tiring.

"GenAI was often attributed agency and volition, with a sense of dread. Participants conceptualised agency as finite or limited, a zero-sum resource, with GenAI "stealing" and "taking agency" from teachers and students by being a crutch and laziness promoter."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Role metaphors positioned GenAI as helper, learning partner, and friend/foe, with a high proportion combining friend and foe — related
• Current AIED rests on five faulty assumptions that risk learner dependence, isolation, and reduced flourishing — related
• Teachers raise big-picture concerns about GenAI including surveillance, over-reliance, reduced teacher collaboration, job replacement, and training needs — related
• Fear that AI will replace jobs creates significant barriers to workforce engagement in AI literacy training — related
• Functions metaphors framing GenAI as an efficient tool for routine and creative tasks were the most agreed-upon in the workshops — related
• Collaborative metaphor workshops helped higher education staff and students make sense of GenAI and raised their awareness of its ethical dimensions — a broader claim this one bears on
• Qualities metaphors depicted GenAI as unknowable, unreliable and unbounded, with participants unsettled by its opacity — related
• Client interviews suggest a recurring shift from treating AI as a passive answer machine (\"Oracle\") to engaging it as a collaborative tool under human direction (\"Process Partner\") — related
• Students spontaneously use language and metaphors of addiction to describe their AI use, framed as loss of control rather than enjoyment — related
• Students express fear and apathy about AI's impact on their careers, shifting focus toward outcomes over process and questioning effort investment in learning computer science — related
• Students adopted nondeterministic (SCOT-like) views in which humans influence technological change, supporting agency — reports the opposite
• Control-group students framed sustainability as an external obligation and held techno-optimistic views of AI centered on efficiency with little ethical reflection — related
• Stakeholder communities differ sharply in GenAI discourse focus: K-12 teachers foreground cognitive dependency, academics detection, professional students career anxiety — related