Over-reliance on technology poses emerging workforce and business risk, researcher warns
Artificial intelligence (AI) is reshaping not only jobs but also employee well-being, according to one expert.
Stéphane McNamara — a researcher at the University of Florida — says employers must prepare for a wave of psychological effects linked to automation.
McNamara co-authored a study on the concept of artificial intelligence replacement dysfunction (AIRD), “a proposed clinical construct that outlines the psychological distress and negative mental health effects that workers are going to be faced with when faced with a threat or reality of AI-induced job displacement.”
While layoffs linked to automation continue to make headlines, she notes that the human impact is often overlooked: “We haven’t really been hearing about what the mental health impacts of that are going to look like."
Some Canadians have used autonomous AI in the past six months — systems that go beyond offering recommendations to taking action without human intervention, according to a previous EY report.
Psychological symptoms
AIRD “may manifest through a range of psychological symptoms, including anxiety, insomnia, demoralization, and a profound loss of occupational identity,” pointing to a deeper disruption in how employees relate to their work, according to McNamara’s report.
One Stanford HAI report noted that 88 per cent of surveyed organizations reported using AI in 2025 (up from 78 per cent in 2024 and 55 per cent in 2023); 70 per cent use generative AI in at least one business function. Also, 53 per cent of the world population had adopted generative AI within three years — the fastest adoption of any modern technology.
“Workers who use AI can be negatively impacted,” McNamara warns. Among the challenges are “cognitive overload, managing the AI outputs as well as verifying the accuracy,” alongside concerns about skill erosion and dependency, she says.
Workers may also experience “anxiety about dependence,” questioning whether their abilities are diminishing as AI takes on more tasks. At the same time, organisations may raise performance expectations, assuming AI tools will accelerate productivity.
This pressure can weaken employee confidence. Over time, McNamara warns, workers may experience reduced confidence in their own judgment, reinforcing reliance on AI and creating what her research describes as “feelings of irrelevance in the workplace, including professional identity loss, inadequacy, and loss of purpose.”
A previous Robert Half Canada survey found that 62 per cent of Canadian professionals are burned out – up from 47 per cent just months earlier. More alarming: AI is a significant factor, with 37 per cent saying it adds pressure "to have even higher productivity."
When reliance becomes business risk
A key concern for employers is the point at which AI shifts from a support tool to a substitute for human thinking, according to McNamara.
She says workers can be classified as over-reliant on AI when it “shifts from being just a tool to being a substitute for independent thinking.” Specifically, it is when workers are using AI “to do their entire job, letting AI make decisions and not really verifying those decisions.”
The consequences extend beyond individual performance. McNamara points to “a decline in… critical thinking skills” and “lower self-efficacy.” Workers may then feel they cannot do their jobs without AI, she says.
Organisational risks also grow. These include quality issues when outputs are not reviewed, and accountability gaps, where responsibility becomes unclear — for example, saying, "Oh, well, the AI did this, so it’s really not my fault," she says.
Such dynamics align with her clinical findings that AIRD can involve “intense and persistent fear of job loss or personal obsolescence… often leading to significant functional impairment,” raising concerns about both productivity and risk management.
Rather than a pure mental health issue, much of what shows up as burnout is actually an “executive function problem” created by how modern work is structured, one expert previously told Canadian HR Reporter.
HR’s role in setting AI safeguards
As AI adoption accelerates, McNamara says many organisations lack clear policies, creating an urgent opportunity for HR leadership.
“A lot of the companies are just saying, ‘Oh, we’re just going to use AI for everything,’” she says. Instead, she recommends defining AI as an assistant rather than a replacement and maintaining strong human oversight.
Practical steps organisations can take, McNamara says, include establishing verification norms, ensuring employees review AI outputs, and investing in AI literacy so workers understand when — and when not — to rely on technology.
“Having those guidelines in place of when we should not use AI and what should still be human-centred work is going to be really important,” she says.
