Search results

With the rapid advancement of generative artificial intelligence (AI), it is important to consider how young people are making sense of these tools in their everyday lives. Drawing on critical postdigital approaches to learning and literacy, this study aims to center the experiences and perspectives of young people who encounter and experiment with generative AI in their daily writing practices.

This critical case study of one digital platform – Character.ai – brings together an adolescent and adult authorship team to inquire about the intertwining of young people’s playful and critical perspectives when writing on/with digital platforms. Drawing on critical walkthrough methodology (Light et al., 2018), the authors engage digital methods to study how the creative and “fun” uses of AI in youths’ writing lives are situated in broader platform ecologies.

The findings suggest experimentation and pleasure are key aspects of young people’s engagement with generative AI. The authors demonstrate how one platform works to capitalize on these dimensions, even as youth users engage critically and artfully with the platform and develop their digital writing practices.

This study highlights how playful experimentation with generative AI can engage young people both in pleasurable digital writing and in exploration and contemplation of platforms dynamics and structures that shape their and others’ literate activities. Educators can consider young people’s creative uses of these evolving technologies as potential opportunities to develop a critical awareness of how commercial platforms seek to benefit from their users.

This study contributes to the development of a critical and humanist research agenda around generative AI by centering the experiences, perspectives and practices of young people who are underrepresented in the burgeoning research devoted to AI and literacies.

We empirically assessed the antecedents of subjective well-being at work for French permanent employees.

The methodology includes qualitative and quantitative data analyses. In the first phase, interviews elicited the antecedents of subjective well-being at work among permanent French employees. In the second phase, a questionnaire survey was used to confirm the relevance of the antecedents uncovered in the first phase.

We found 14 distinct elements that influence French employees’ subjective well-being at work: corporate culture, job dissonance, relationships with colleagues, achievement, professional development, relationships with superiors, status, workload, perks, feedback, workspace, diversity and pay. Moreover, we identified discrete antecedents for the three components of subjective well-being at work: work achievement and relationships with superiors and colleagues for positive emotions at work, job dissonance and workload for negative emotions at work and organizational culture and professional development for satisfaction with one’s work.

The original contribution of this study is to have unpacked the black box of the antecedents of subjective well-being in the French workplace and to have uncovered discriminant predictors for each of the three components of subjective well-being at work. Furthermore, we specifically linked each of these three components with their most significant antecedents.

The paper aims to apply social practice theory to clarify the process of innovation design and delivery from one successful digital innovation: the building information modelling (BIM) risk library. The paper clarifies the practices surrounding construction innovation and provides a schema useful for practitioners and technology designers through a social practice analysis.

The paper applies Schatzki's “organisation of practice” concepts to a construction project innovation to clarify how the practice of innovation revolves around understandings, rules and teleoaffectivities (emotive behaviours). Sources for the study include notes from meetings, workshops with experts and the shared artefacts of innovation.

The practice of innovation design and delivery are clarified through a social practice analysis: a distinct “field of practice” and a “schema” of generalisable prescriptions and preferences for innovation delivery being presented.

The paper informs the practice and process of innovation design and delivery; the insights clarify how collective understandings and rules of use evolve over time, becoming formalised into contracts, agreements and workplans. Practically, processes whereby innovation “sayings” evolve into innovation “doings” are clarified: a schema detailing prescriptions and preferences of practitioners and developers being presented.

The social practice analysis of one successful construction innovation is an original contribution to the body of knowledge, adding a level of detail regarding innovation design and delivery often missing from reported research.