Parenting Journal · Volume 1 · Issue 3 · Licensed source edition
Governing algorithms, empowering people: how ethical AI oversight shapes trust, technostress, and employee autonomy in AI-enabled HRM
Originally published 2026-08-31 · Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence
Frontiers Media SA · DOI 10.3389/frai.2026.1911545 ↗
AI / system type
AI-enabled human resource management systems
Workplace evidenceExamines workers, organizations or AI at work. Participants are not necessarily parents; family benefits are not established by this evidence alone.
The AI connection
System or context examined: AI-enabled human resource management systems. The source-specific system and study design determine what can be inferred.
Why this reading matters
The reading brings algorithmic transparency, fairness and human oversight in HRM into a concrete discussion of humane work during technological change. It offers employee survey with structural equation modeling evidence or analysis, not a promise of organizational or family benefit.
Workplace evidence
Work, care and the whole person.
The workplace lens is algorithmic transparency, fairness and human oversight in HRM. Source setting or population: 290 employees in India whose organizations used AI-enabled HRM systems. Parenting and child-development outcomes are not inferred from the workplace evidence.
Examines workers, organizations or AI at work. Participants are not necessarily parents; family benefits are not established by this evidence alone.
Editorial reading guide · Trust
Who can explain or review an AI decision that affects my work?
This employee survey with structural equation modeling examines algorithmic transparency, fairness and human oversight in HRM. Its TRICK home is Trust, an editorial reading path rather than a claim that the paper tests the full framework.
Study context
290 employees in India whose organizations used AI-enabled HRM systems
Age / stage: Adult workplace context; no child age range inferred
Read with three questions
- Who can explain or review an AI decision that affects my work?
- What do this study’s design and population — 290 employees in India whose organizations used AI-enabled HRM systems — allow you to infer about another workplace?
- When considering algorithmic transparency, fairness and human oversight in HRM, which decisions would need employee input before applying this reading to a working family’s circumstances?
Keep the limits in view
Self-reported structural relationships do not establish causation; autonomy at work is not a measured parenting outcome.
The text below is the original article’s licensed repository edition. Its wording is not rewritten. Use the Paper Agent beside the text to locate evidence; open the source for figures, tables and complete context.
Opening the verified paper and agent…
Checking the article identity, license record, and saved source text.
Open the repository recordAttribution & reuse
Follow the original.
Original authorship, publication date, journal and DOI are preserved. This issue’s TRICK placement and reading questions are editorial additions, not claims made by the original authors.
Tamrisha Patnaik; Robert Ipiin Gnankob; Nitya Sundar Nanda (2026). Governing algorithms, empowering people: how ethical AI oversight shapes trust, technostress, and employee autonomy in AI-enabled HRM Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence. https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2026.1911545
Permissions checked against the saved article notice; repository publication notices screened 2026-11-05. This is not a new peer-review decision. The source authors and publishers are not represented as endorsing this issue.