Impact of AI and laptops on quality of life revealed: “A depressing and unhealthy place”

The study found that artificial intelligence in the workplace, robots and trackers are bad for quality of life. Technologies such as laptops, tablets and instant messaging have a more positive impact on well-being, the think tank reports.

The use of new technologies at work, including trackers, robots and artificial intelligence software, is having a negative impact on people’s quality of life, according to groundbreaking research from think tank The Institute for Work.

According to The Guardian, based on a survey of more than 6,000 people, the study analyzed the impact on well-being of four groups of technologies that are becoming increasingly common in the economy.

The authors found that the more workers became familiar with technologies in three of these categories—software based on artificial intelligence and machine learning; surveillance devices such as wearable trackers; and robotics—the worse their health and well-being tended to be.

In contrast, using more established information and communications technologies (ICTs) such as laptops, tablets and instant messaging at work tended to have a more positive impact on well-being.

“We found that quality of life improved as the frequency of interaction with ICT increased, while quality of life deteriorated as the frequency of interaction with new technologies in the workplace increased,” the report states.

Although the authors did not directly explore the reasons, they noted that their findings were consistent with previous research, which showed: “such technologies can exacerbate job insecurity, increased workload, routinization and loss of meaning in work, as well as disempowerment and loss of autonomy, all of which reduce general well-being of employees.”

Economists at Goldman Sachs last year suggested that 300 million jobs worldwide could be automated by 2030 as a result of advances in generative artificial intelligence, with many other roles changing radically.

Dr Magdalena Soffia, lead author of the study, said the problem was not necessarily the technologies themselves, but how they were implemented.

“We don’t want to suggest that there is any determinism in what technology causes in terms of well-being,” she said. “We say it really depends on the context: a lot of structural factors, environmental conditions, how it’s designed and how it’s applied. So many human decisions.”

Magdalena Soffia added that the researchers used the well-established EuroQol EQ-5D-3L quality of life measure, which asks respondents about factors such as their mobility, mental health and pain levels.

“We wanted to provide a more nuanced, nuanced understanding of what’s happening in terms of well-being. So we used this indicator, which is a very validated indicator used by the UK public health sector,” Soffia said.

Discussing the impact of ICT on quality of life, she suggested that “one possible potential mechanism is that it actually streamlines work processes and makes working life a little more efficient. And this in turn gives you a sense of achievement.”

Instead, the findings about trackers and surveillance technology echo recent warnings from trade unions and campaigners about the negative impact on workers whose performance is constantly monitored.

Mary Towers, TUC head of artificial intelligence, said: “These findings should concern us all. They show that without robust new regulation, AI could turn the world of work into an oppressive and unhealthy place for many. It should not be. If we put the right barriers in place, AI can be used to truly improve productivity and improve working conditions.”

The new report is part of Pissarides’ Future of Work and Wellbeing review, led by IFW in collaboration with Warwick Business School and Imperial College London.

Professor Sir Christopher Pissarides, the veteran economist who oversaw the review, said: “As new technologies rapidly permeate our working lives, it is vital that we understand how our interactions with them affect our quality of life.”