ChatGPT Undermines Human Reflexivity, Scientific Responsibility and Responsible Management Research

Dirk Lindebaum, Peter Fleming

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

14 Citations (SciVal)

Abstract

With ChatGPT being promoted to and by academics for writing scholarly articles more effectively, we ask what kind of knowledge does ChatGPT produce, what this means for our reflexivity as responsible management educators/researchers, and how an absence of reflexivity disqualifies us from shaping management knowledge in responsible ways. We urgently need to grasp what makes human knowledge distinct compared with knowledge generated by ChatGPT et al. Thus, we first explain how ChatGPT operates and unpack its intrinsic epistemological limitations. Using high-probability choices that are derivative, ChatGPT has no stake in the knowledge it produces and is thus likely prone to offering irresponsible outputs. By contrast, genuine human thinking—embodied in a contingent socio-cultural setting—uses low-probability choices both ‘inside’ and ‘outside’ the box of training data, making it creative, contextual and committed. We conclude that the use of ChatGPT is wholly incompatible with scientific responsibility and responsible management.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)566-575
Number of pages10
JournalBritish Journal of Management
Volume35
Issue number2
Early online date23 Nov 2023
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Apr 2024

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • General Business,Management and Accounting
  • Strategy and Management
  • Management of Technology and Innovation

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'ChatGPT Undermines Human Reflexivity, Scientific Responsibility and Responsible Management Research'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this