企业人工智能价值对齐：研究进展与未来展望
AI Value Alignment in Enterprises: Research Progress and Future Prospects
DOI: 10.16538/j.cnki.fem.20260601.102
引用本文（GB/T 7714-2025）
[1]王雁飞,张晓念,朱瑜.企业人工智能价值对齐：研究进展与未来展望[J/OL].外国经济与管理,2026,48(08):77-94[2026-11-11].https://doi.org/10.16538/j.cnki.fem.20260601.102.
摘要
人工智能技术的迅速发展为企业管理带来了重要机遇，也提出了新的治理挑战。企业人工智能价值对齐作为降低价值偏离、伦理风险和安全风险的重要治理路径，受到越来越多的关注。相较而言，国内相关研究仍处于起步阶段。鉴于此，本研究对现有文献进行系统性梳理和归纳，阐明人工智能价值对齐的概念内涵、结构维度及其测量方式，构建人工智能价值对齐的实现机制，并对企业人工智能价值对齐的前因和效应进行梳理，形成整合性的理解框架，最后对该领域的未来研究方向进行展望。本研究有助于促进对人工智能价值对齐的深层次理解，并为国内企业人工智能价值对齐的实证研究和实践应用提供参考。
The rapid development of artificial intelligence (AI) technology has brought significant opportunities for enterprise management, while also posing new governance challenges. As a critical governance pathway for mitigating value deviations, ethical risks, and security risks, AI value alignment in enterprises has garnered increasing attention. In contrast, domestic research in this field is still in its infancy. In view of this, this paper systematically reviews and synthesizes existing literature, clarifies the conceptual connotation, structural dimensions, and measurement approaches of AI value alignment, constructs a mechanism for its realization, and sorts out the antecedents and consequences of AI value alignment in enterprises to form an integrated understanding framework. Finally, future research directions in this field are prospected. This paper contributes to a deeper understanding of AI value alignment and provides a reference for empirical research and practical applications of AI value alignment in enterprises in the domestic context.
关键词： 人工智能,价值对齐,人工智能伦理,企业治理
参考文献
1 付业辉, 僧建芬, 乐凯迪, 等. 人工智能应用与企业价值链升级: 效应、机制与情境异质性——大语言模型的文本分析证据[J]. 科技进步与对策, 2026, 43(8): 26-36.
5 李海舰, 赵丽. 数据价值理论研究[J]. 财贸经济, 2023, 44(6): 5-20.
6 李思雯. 人工智能价值对齐的路径探析[J]. 伦理学研究, 2024, (5): 99-108. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1671-9115.2024.05.012
7 凌斌, 贺筱颖, 王晓辰. AI算法视域下决策建议来源对验证性信息偏差的影响[J]. 心理科学, 2025, 48(5): 1185-1196. DOI:10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20250514
8 裴嘉良, 刘善仕, 钟楚燕, 等. AI算法决策能提高员工的程序公平感知吗?[J]. 外国经济与管理, 2021, 43(11): 41-55.
9 宋保林. 人工智能大模型价值对齐的伦理建构[J]. 伦理学研究, 2025, (3): 94-99. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1671-9115.2025.03.012
11 唐林垚. 公司法如何促进模型可信与价值对齐[J]. 东方法学, 2024, (2): 76-87. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1007-1466.2024.02.008
12 王戈, 张哲君. 任务客观性、情感相似度何以影响算法决策感知公平与接受度?——基于调查实验的实证分析[J]. 公共管理与政策评论, 2023, 12(6): 77-95. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.2095-4026.2023.06.007
15 夏永红. 人工智能伦理治理范式: 从价值对齐到价值共生[J]. 自然辩证法通讯, 2025, 47(1): 1-8. DOI:10.15994/j.1000-0763.2025.01.001
16 闫坤如. 人工智能体价值对齐的分布式路径探赜[J]. 上海师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2024, 53(4): 131-139. DOI:10.13852/J.CNKI.JSHNU.2024.04.013
18 矣晓沅, 谢幸. 大模型道德价值观对齐问题剖析[J]. 计算机研究与发展, 2023, 60(9): 1926-1945. DOI:10.7544/issn1000-1239.202330553
19 易显飞, 高津宇. 幻觉的蒸馏: 生成式人工智能价值观三条对齐路径的价值风险解析[J]. 东岳论丛, 2026, 47(1): 26-34,191. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1003-8353.2026.01.003
20 曾雯, 侯凌风, 周旅军. 价值对齐: 人工智能时代的技术伦理与文明对话[J]. 贵州民族大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2025, (6): 172-191. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1003-6644.2025.06.011
21 赵艺. “人工智能+”时代的价值对齐: 困境与治理[J/OL]. 科学学研究, 2026: 1-14.
22 赵一骏, 许丽颖, 喻丰, 等. 感知不透明性增加职场中的算法厌恶[J]. 心理学报, 2024, 56(4): 497-514. DOI:10.3724/SP.J.1041.2024.00497
23 周恋, 雷雪, 后锐, 等. 在线用工平台算法管理的消极影响和控制策略研究: 算法技术属性视角[J]. 中国人力资源开发, 2022, 39(6): 8-22.
24 Abadi M, Chu A, Goodfellow I, et al. Deep learning with differential privacy[A]. Proceedings of 2016 ACM SIGSAC conference on computer and communications security[C]. Vienna: ACM, 2016.
25 Abositta A, Adedokun M W, Berberoğlu A. Influence of artificial intelligence on engineering management decision-making with mediating role of transformational leadership[J]. Systems, 2024, 12(12): 570. DOI:10.3390/systems12120570
26 Acikgoz Y, Davison K H, Compagnone M, et al. Justice perceptions of artificial intelligence in selection[J]. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 2020, 28(4): 399-416. DOI:10.1111/ijsa.12306
27 Ali B A. AI integrated approach to achieve transformational strategic leadership and its reflections on employee engagement[A]. The International Conference on Artificial Intelligence Management and Trends[C], 2025, 87.
28 Baker J, Cao Q, Jones D, et al. Dynamic strategic alignment competency: A theoretical framework and an operationalization[R]. Working Paper, 2009.
29 Barabadi E, Fotuhabadi Z, Arghavan A, et al. Comparing AI and human moral reasoning: Context-sensitive patterns beyond utilitarian bias[J]. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 2026, 8: 1710410. DOI:10.3389/frai.2025.1710410
30 Beheshti A, Kerridge I. Understanding the artificial intelligence revolution and its ethical implications[J]. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 2025, 22(3): 497-505. DOI:10.1007/s11673-025-10427-6
31 Boncella R. AI and management: Navigating the alignment problem for ethical and effective decision-making[J]. Issues in Information Systems, 2024, 25(4): 194-204.
32 Bostrom N. Superintelligence: Paths, dangers, strategies[M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014.
33 Braun M, Greve M, Gnewuch U.The new dream team? A review of human-AI collaboration research from a human teamwork perspective[A]. Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Systems[C]. Hyderabad: Association for Information Systems, 2023.
34 Brown C V. Examining the emergence of hybrid IS governance solutions: Evidence from a single case site[J]. Information Systems Research, 1997, 8(1): 69-94. DOI:10.1287/isre.8.1.69
35 Brown O, Davison R M, Decker S, et al. Theory-driven perspectives on generative artificial intelligence in business and management[J]. British Journal of Management, 2024, 35(1): 3-23. DOI:10.1111/1467-8551.12788
36 Cai Y N, Wang C. Effect of transparency of algorithmic performance management on proactive work behavior: Role of motivation to improve performance and psychological ownership[J]. International Journal of Asian Business and Information Management (IJABIM), 2024, 15(1): 1-17.
37 Capasso M, Arora P, Sharma D, et al. On the right to work in the age of artificial intelligence: Ethical safeguards in algorithmic human resource management[J]. Business and Human Rights Journal, 2024, 9(3): 346-360. DOI:10.1017/bhj.2024.26
38 Carter D. Regulation and ethics in artificial intelligence and machine learning technologies: Where are we now? Who is responsible? Can the information professional play a role?[J]. Business Information Review, 2020, 37(2): 60-68. DOI:10.1177/0266382120923962
39 Cath C. Governing artificial intelligence: Ethical, legal and technical opportunities and challenges[J]. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 2018, 376(2133): 20180080. DOI:10.1098/rsta.2018.0080
40 Chan Y E, Reich B H. IT alignment: What have we learned?[J]. Journal of Information Technology, 2007, 22(4): 297-315. DOI:10.1057/palgrave.jit.2000109
41 Cheong B C. Transparency and accountability in AI systems: Safeguarding wellbeing in the age of algorithmic decision-making[J]. Frontiers in Human Dynamics, 2024, 6: 1421273. DOI:10.3389/fhumd.2024.1421273
42 Chung Y W,Im S,Kim J E,et al. Artificial intelligence awareness, career resilience, job insecurity and behavioural outcomes[J]. Australian Journal of Psychology, 2025, 77(1): 2559910. DOI:10.1080/00049530.2025.2559910
43 Csaszar F A, Ketkar H, Kim H. Artificial intelligence and strategic decision-making: Evidence from entrepreneurs and investors[J]. Strategy Science, 2024, 9(4): 322-345. DOI:10.1287/stsc.2024.0190
44 de Laat P B. Companies committed to responsible AI: From principles towards implementation and regulation?[J]. Philosophy & Technology, 2021, 34(4): 1135-1193.
45 Decker M C, Wegner L, Leicht-Scholten C. Procedural fairness in algorithmic decision-making: The role of public engagement[J]. Ethics and Information Technology, 2025, 27(1): 1. DOI:10.1007/s10676-024-09811-4
46 Ebers M. Truly risk-based regulation of artificial intelligence: How to implement the EU’s AI Act[J]. European Journal of Risk Regulation, 2025, 16(2): 684-703. DOI:10.1017/err.2024.78
47 Enholm I M, Papagiannidis E, Mikalef P, et al. Artificial intelligence and business value: A literature review[J]. Information Systems Frontiers, 2022, 24(5): 1709-1734. DOI:10.1007/s10796-021-10186-w
48 Erdélyi O J, Goldsmith J. Regulating artificial intelligence: Proposal for a global solution[A]. Proceedings of the 2018 AAAI/ACM conference on AI, ethics, and society[C]. New Orleans: ACM, 2018.
49 Fabris A, Baranowska N, Dennis M J, et al. Fairness and bias in algorithmic hiring: A multidisciplinary survey[J]. ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology, 2025, 16(1): 16.
50 Feldkamp T, Langer M, Wies L, et al. Justice, trust, and moral judgements when personnel selection is supported by algorithms[J]. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 2024, 33(2): 130-145. DOI:10.1080/1359432X.2023.2169140
51 Ferrara E. Addressing racial bias in AI: Towards a more equitable future[A]. Czarnowski I, Howlett R J, Jain L C. Intelligent decision technologies[M]. Singapore: Springer, 2025.
52 Firt E. Addressing corrigibility in near-future AI systems[J]. AI and Ethics, 2025, 5(2): 1481-1490. DOI:10.1007/s43681-024-00484-9
53 Floridi L, Cowls J. A unified framework of five principles for AI in society[A]. Carta S. Machine learning and the city: Applications in architecture and urban design[M]. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 2022.
54 Floridi L, Cowls J, King T C, et al. How to design AI for social good: Seven essential factors[A]. Floridi L. Ethics, governance, and policies in artificial intelligence[M]. Cham: Springer, 2021.
55 Gabriel I. Artificial intelligence, values, and alignment[J]. Minds and Machines, 2020, 30(3): 411-437. DOI:10.1007/s11023-020-09539-2
56 Gabriel I, Ghazavi V. The challenge of value alignment: From fairer algorithms to AI safety[A]. Véliz C. The Oxford handbook of digital ethics[M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2022.
57 García-Madurga M Á, Gil-Lacruz A I, Saz-Gil I, et al. The role of artificial intelligence in improving workplace well-being: A systematic review[J]. Businesses, 2024, 4(3): 389-410. DOI:10.3390/businesses4030024
58 Gehman S, Gururangan S, Sap M, et al. RealToxicityPrompts: Evaluating neural toxic degeneration in language models[A]. Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2020[C]. 2020: 3356-3369.
59 Gkinko L, Elbanna A. Designing trust: The formation of employees’ trust in conversational AI in the digital workplace[J]. Journal of Business Research, 2023, 158: 113707. DOI:10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.113707
60 Glikson E, Woolley A W. Human trust in artificial intelligence: Review of empirical research[J]. Academy of Management Annals, 2020, 14(2): 627-660. DOI:10.5465/annals.2018.0057
61 Habbal A, Ali M K, Abuzaraida M A. Artificial Intelligence Trust, Risk and Security Management (AI TRiSM): Frameworks, applications, challenges and future research directions[J]. Expert Systems with Applications, 2024, 240: 122442. DOI:10.1016/j.eswa.2023.122442
62 Hadfield-Menell D, Dragan A, Abbeel P, et al. Cooperative inverse reinforcement learning[A]. Proceedings of the 30th international conference on neural information processing systems[C]. Barcelona: Curran Associates Inc., 2016.
63 Hickman E, Petrin M. Trustworthy AI and corporate governance: The EU’s ethics guidelines for trustworthy artificial intelligence from a company law perspective[J]. European Business Organization Law Review, 2021, 22(4): 593-625. DOI:10.1007/s40804-021-00224-0
64 Hiremath S, P R, Konek S S, et al. Artificial intelligence (AI) governance in organizational decision-making: Balancing autonomy, accountability and transparency[J]. Journal of Entrepreneurship and Public Policy, 2025: 1-24.
65 Hristova T, Magee L, Soldatic K. The problem of alignment[J]. AI & Society, 2025, 40(3): 1439-1453.
66 Janssen M, Brous P, Estevez E, et al. Data governance: Organizing data for trustworthy artificial intelligence[J]. Government Information Quarterly, 2020, 37(3): 101493. DOI:10.1016/j.giq.2020.101493
67 Jaung W. Does AI value the environment? Evaluation of AI value alignment[J]. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 2026, 225: 124550. DOI:10.1016/j.techfore.2026.124550
68 Ji J M, Qiu T Y, Chen B Y, et al. AI alignment: A comprehensive survey[Z]. arXiv: 2310.19852, 2023.
69 Jobin A, Ienca M, Vayena E. The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines[J]. Nature Machine Intelligence, 2019, 1(9): 389-399. DOI:10.1038/s42256-019-0088-2
70 Josifović S. Legal and administrative frameworks as foundations for AI alignment with human volition[J]. AI and Ethics, 2025, 5(3): 3057-3067. DOI:10.1007/s43681-024-00640-1
71 Kim S. Perceptions of discriminatory decisions of artificial intelligence: Unpacking the role of individual characteristics[J]. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 2025, 194: 103387. DOI:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2024.103387
72 Kumar S, Datta S, Singh V, et al. Applications, challenges, and future directions of human-in-the-loop learning[J]. IEEE Access, 2024, 12: 75735-75760. DOI:10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3401547
73 Leike J, Krueger D, Everitt T, et al. Scalable agent alignment via reward modeling: A research direction[Z]. arXiv: 1811.07871, 2018.
74 Leslie D. Understanding artificial intelligence ethics and safety[Z]. arXiv: 1906.05684, 2019.
75 Liu Z, Lin Q X, Tu S M, et al. When robot knocks, knowledge locks: How and when does AI awareness affect employee knowledge hiding?[J]. Frontiers in Psychology, 2025, 16: 1627999. DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1627999
76 Lu Y. Artificial intelligence: A survey on evolution, models, applications and future trends[J]. Journal of Management Analytics, 2019, 6(1): 1-29. DOI:10.1080/23270012.2019.1570365
77 Madanchian M, Taherdoost H. Ethical theories, governance models, and strategic frameworks for responsible AI adoption and organizational success[J]. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 2025, 8: 1619029. DOI:10.3389/frai.2025.1619029
78 Majrashi K. Employees’ perceptions of the fairness of AI-based performance prediction features[J]. Cogent Business & Management, 2025, 12(1): 2456111.
79 Marklund H, Infanger A, Van Roy B. Misalignment from treating means as ends[Z]. arXiv: 2507.10995, 2025.
80 Martin K. Ethical implications and accountability of algorithms[J]. Journal of Business Ethics, 2019, 160(4): 835-850. DOI:10.1007/s10551-018-3921-3
81 Matthews M J, Su R K, Yonish L, et al. A review of artificial intelligence, algorithms, and robots through the lens of stakeholder theory[J]. Journal of Management, 2025, 51(6): 2627-2676. DOI:10.1177/01492063241311855
82 Meng Q, Wu T J, Duan W, et al. Effects of employee–artificial intelligence (AI) collaboration on counterproductive work behaviors (CWBs): Leader emotional support as a moderator[J]. Behavioral Sciences, 2025, 15(5): 696. DOI:10.3390/bs15050696
83 Mkhize S, Lourens M. Elevating knowledge sharing and communication through artificial intelligence: An organizational perspective[J]. International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science, 2025, 14(4): 103-114.
84 Mohammadi H, Bagheri A. Exploring cultural variations in moral judgments with large language models[Z]. arXiv: 2506.12433, 2025.
85 Mökander J, Floridi L. Ethics-based auditing to develop trustworthy AI[J]. Minds and Machines, 2021, 31(2): 323-327. DOI:10.1007/s11023-021-09557-8
86 Norhashim H, Hahn J. Measuring human-AI value alignment in large language models[A]. Proceedings of the 7th AAAI/ACM conference on AI, ethics, and society[C]. San Jose: AAAI, 2024.
87 Nouis S C, Uren V, Jariwala S. Evaluating accountability, transparency, and bias in AI-assisted healthcare decision- making: A qualitative study of healthcare professionals’ perspectives in the UK[J]. BMC Medical Ethics, 2025, 26(1): 89. DOI:10.1186/s12910-025-01243-z
88 Novelli C, Taddeo M, Floridi L. Accountability in artificial intelligence: What it is and how it works[J]. AI & Society, 2024, 39(4): 1871-1882.
89 Obermeyer Z, Powers B, Vogeli C, et al. Dissecting racial bias in an algorithm used to manage the health of populations[J]. Science, 2019, 366(6464): 447-453. DOI:10.1126/science.aax2342
90 Ochmann J, Michels L, Tiefenbeck V, et al. Perceived algorithmic fairness: An empirical study of transparency and anthropomorphism in algorithmic recruiting[J]. Information Systems Journal, 2024, 34(2): 384-414. DOI:10.1111/isj.12482
91 Omohundro S M. The basic AI drives[A]. Proceedings of the 1st AGI conference[C]. Memphis: IOS Press, 2008.
92 Ouyang L, Wu J, Jiang X, et al. Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback[A]. Proceedings of the 36th international conference on neural information processing systems[C]. New Orleans: Curran Associates Inc., 2022.
93 Papagiannidis E, Enholm I M, Dremel C, et al. Toward AI governance: Identifying best practices and potential barriers and outcomes[J]. Information Systems Frontiers, 2023, 25(1): 123-141. DOI:10.1007/s10796-022-10251-y
94 Park H J. Patient perspectives on informed consent for medical AI: A web-based experiment[J]. Digital Health, 2024, 10.
95 Park K, Yoon H Y. AI algorithm transparency, pipelines for trust not prisms: Mitigating general negative attitudes and enhancing trust toward AI[J]. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 2025, 12(1): 1160. DOI:10.1057/s41599-025-05116-z
96 Park S, Nan X L. Generative AI and misinformation: A scoping review of the role of generative AI in the generation, detection, mitigation, and impact of misinformation[J]. AI & Society, 2026, 41(2): 1501-1515.
97 Pelletier C, Raymond L. Investigating the strategic IT alignment process with a dynamic capabilities view: A multiple case study[J]. Information & Management, 2024, 61(4): 103819.
98 Raji I D, Smart A, White R N, et al. Closing the AI accountability gap: Defining an end-to-end framework for internal algorithmic auditing[A]. Proceedings of 2020 conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency[C]. Barcelona: ACM, 2020.
99 Rane N, Choudhary S P, Rane J. Acceptance of artificial intelligence: Key factors, challenges, and implementation strategies[J]. Journal of Applied Artificial Intelligence, 2024, 5(2): 50-70. DOI:10.48185/jaai.v5i2.1017
100 Russell S, Dewey D, Tegmark M. Research priorities for robust and beneficial artificial intelligence[J]. AI Magazine, 2015, 36(4): 105-114. DOI:10.1609/aimag.v36i4.2577
101 Russell S J. Human compatible: Artificial intelligence and the problem of control[M]. London: Allen Lane, 2019.
102 Sabherwal R, Hirschheim R, Goles T. The dynamics of alignment: Insights from a punctuated equilibrium model[J]. Organization Science, 2001, 12(2): 179-197. DOI:10.1287/orsc.12.2.179.10113
103 Saeidnia H R, Jahani S, Ghiasi N, et al. Generative AI and health misinformation: Production, propagation, and mitigation—a systematic review[J]. BMC Public Health, 2026, 26(1): 693. DOI:10.1186/s12889-025-26148-9
104 Salaheldin S, Hussein S. The determinants of AI adoption and its impact on employee engagement: Evidence from Egyptian organizations[J]. International Journal of Management and Applied Research, 2025, 12(2): 45-67. DOI:10.18646/2056.122.25-004
105 Sarkar A, Faik I. Structural transparency of societal AI alignment through institutional logics[Z]. arXiv: 2602.08246, 2026.
106 Schilke O, Reimann M. The transparency dilemma: How AI disclosure erodes trust[J]. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 2025, 188: 104405. DOI:10.1016/j.obhdp.2025.104405
107 Seghid N, Iqbal F, Al-Room K, et al. Emerging threats in AI: A detailed review of misuses and risks across modern AI technologies[J]. Frontiers in Communications and Networks, 2026, 6: 1727425. DOI:10.3389/frcmn.2025.1727425
108 Shah M, Sureja N. A comprehensive review of bias in deep learning models: Methods, impacts, and future directions[J]. Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering, 2025, 32(1): 255-267. DOI:10.1007/s11831-024-10134-2
109 Shen H, Knearem T, Ghosh R, et al. Towards bidirectional human-AI alignment: A systematic review for clarifications, framework, and future directions[Z]. arXiv: 2406.09264v1, 2024.
110 Sorensen T, Jiang L W, Hwang J D, et al. Value kaleidoscope: Engaging AI with pluralistic human values, rights, and duties[A]. Proceedings of the 38th AAAI conference on artificial intelligence[C]. Vancouver: AAAI, 2024.
111 Stahl B C, Antoniou J, Ryan M, et al. Organisational responses to the ethical issues of artificial intelligence[J]. AI & Society, 2022, 37(1): 23-37.
112 Stanikzai M E, Mittal E. Strategic alignment of organizational structure based on decisions for sustainable organizational performance: A bibliometric-systematic literature review[J]. Cogent Business & Management, 2025, 12(1): 2560650.
113 Tamkin A, Brundage M, Clark J, et al. Understanding the capabilities, limitations, and societal impact of large language models[Z]. arXiv: 2102.02503, 2021.
114 Tang P M, Koopman J, Mai K M, et al. No person is an island: Unpacking the work and after-work consequences of interacting with artificial intelligence[J]. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2023, 108(11): 1766-1789. DOI:10.1037/apl0001103
115 Tulis M, Dresel M. Effects on and consequences of responses to errors: Results from two experimental studies[J]. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 2025, 95(1): 143-161. DOI:10.1111/bjep.12686
116 Übellacker T. Making sense of AI limitations: How individual perceptions shape organizational readiness for AI adoption[Z]. arXiv: 2502.15870, 2025.
117 Van de Wetering R. Dynamic enterprise architecture capabilities and organizational benefits: An empirical mediation study[Z]. arXiv: 2105.10036, 2021.
118 Von Zahn M, Liebich L, Jussupow E, et al. Knowing (not) to know: Explainable artificial intelligence and human metacognition[J]. Information Systems Research, 2025, doi: 10.1287/isre.2024.1431.
119 Watson E, Viana T, Zhang S J, et al. Towards an end-to-end personal fine-tuning framework for AI value alignment[J]. Electronics, 2024, 13(20): 4044. DOI:10.3390/electronics13204044
120 Wiener N. Some moral and technical consequences of automation: As machines learn they may develop unforeseen strategies at rates that baffle their programmers[J]. Science, 1960, 131(3410): 1355-1358. DOI:10.1126/science.131.3410.1355
121 Xia H S, Chen H, Zhang J Z, et al. Exploring the impact of responsible AI governance on corporate performance: A quasi-natural experiment[J]. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 2026, 223: 124425. DOI:10.1016/j.techfore.2025.124425
122 Yang J F, Xie W Y, Ni J J. A framework for AI ethics literacy: Development, validation, and its role in fostering students’ self-rated learning competence[J]. Scientific Reports, 2025, 15(1): 38030. DOI:10.1038/s41598-025-21977-5
123 Young M M, Bullock J B, Lecy J D. Artificial discretion as a tool of governance: A framework for understanding the impact of artificial intelligence on public administration[J]. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, 2019, 2(4): 301-313.
124 Yu L R, Li Y. Artificial intelligence decision-making transparency and employees’ trust: The parallel multiple mediating effect of effectiveness and discomfort[J]. Behavioral Sciences, 2022, 12(5): 127. DOI:10.3390/bs12050127
125 Yu L R, Li Y, Fan F. Employees’ appraisals and trust of artificial intelligences’ transparency and opacity[J]. Behavioral Sciences, 2023, 13(4): 344. DOI:10.3390/bs13040344
126 Yuan Y, Shi Y, Su T, et al. Resistance or compliance? The impact of algorithmic awareness on people’s attitudes toward online information browsing[J]. Frontiers in Psychology, 2025, 16: 1563592. DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1563592
127 Yudkowsky E. Artificial intelligence as a positive and negative factor in global risk[A]. Bostrom N, Ćirković M M. Global catastrophic risks[M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008.
128 Zárate-Torres R, Rey-Sarmiento C F, Acosta-Prado J C, et al. Influence of leadership on human-artificial intelligence collaboration[J]. Behavioral Sciences, 2025, 15(7): 873. DOI:10.3390/bs15070873
脚注 / 注释
Baker J, Cao Q, Jones D, et al. Dynamic strategic alignment competency: A theoretical framework and an operationalization[R]. Working Paper, 2009.