本表由全书各章文献合并去重而成，西文在前、中文在后，各按著者字顺排列。各章正文中的引注编号为该章原编号，与本表序号不对应；查证时请按著者与年份检索。
1. Almaatouq, A., Noriega-Campero, A., Alotaibi, A., Krafft, P. M., Moussaïd, M., & Pentland, A. (2020). Adaptive Social Networks Promote the Wisdom of Crowds. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(21), 11379–11386.
2. Andrada, G., & Carter, J. A. (2025). Mind-Technology Problems for Know-How Anti-Intellectualism. Social Epistemology. https://doi.org/10.1080/02691728.2025.2463059
3. Ashkinaze, J., Mendelsohn, J., Qiwei, L., Budak, C., & Gilbert, E. (2024/2025). How AI Ideas Affect the Creativity, Diversity, and Evolution of Human Ideas: Evidence From a Large, Dynamic Experiment. arXiv:2401.13481.
4. Bainbridge L. Ironies of automation[J]. Automatica, 1983, 19(6): 775-779. DOI:10.1016/0005-1098(83)90046-8.
5. Bainbridge, L. (1983). Ironies of automation. Automatica, 19(6), 775–779.
6. Bandura, A. (1999). Moral Disengagement in the Perpetration of Inhumanities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3(3), 193–209.
7. Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G. V., & Pastorelli, C. (1996). Mechanisms of Moral Disengagement in the Exercise of Moral Agency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(2), 364–374.
8. Barkoczi, D., & Galesic, M. (2016). Social Learning Strategies Modify the Effect of Network Structure on Group Performance. Nature Communications, 7, 13109.
9. Barnett, S. M., & Ceci, S. J. (2002). When and where do we apply what we learn? A taxonomy for far transfer. Psychological Bulletin, 128(4), 612–637. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.128.4.612
10. Bastani, H., Bastani, O., Sungu, A., Ge, H., Kabakcı, O., & Mariman, R. (2025). Generative AI without guardrails can harm learning: Evidence from high school mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 122(26), e2422633122. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2422633122. （另见2025年作者更正：e2518204122）
11. Bastani, H., Bastani, O., Sungu, A., Ge, H., Kabakcı, Ö., & Mariman, R. (2025). Generative AI without guardrails can harm learning: Evidence from high school mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2422633122
12. Baumann, F., Czaplicka, A., & Rahwan, I. (2024). Network Structure Shapes the Impact of Diversity in Collective Learning. Scientific Reports, 14, 2491.
13. Bickel C S, Cross J M, Bamman M M. Exercise dosing to retain resistance training adaptations in young and older adults[J]. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 2011, 43(7): 1177-1187. DOI:10.1249/MSS.0b013e318207c15d.
14. Bjork, R. A., Dunlosky, J., & Kornell, N. (2013). Self-regulated learning: Beliefs, techniques, and illusions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 417–444.
15. Bleher, H., Braun, M., & others. (2022). Attributions of Responsibility in the Use of AI-driven Clinical Decision Support Systems. Frontiers / related empirical literature.
16. Blythe, T., & Associates. (1998). The Teaching for Understanding Guide. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; Project Zero, Harvard Graduate School of Education.
17. Bovens, M., Schillemans, T., & Goodin, R. E. (eds.). (2014). The Oxford Handbook of Public Accountability. Oxford University Press. 相关章节讨论多手问题与组织责任。
18. Boyd, R., & Richerson, P. J. (1985). Culture and the Evolutionary Process. University of Chicago Press.
19. Boyd, R., & Richerson, P. J. (2005). The Origin and Evolution of Cultures. Oxford University Press.
20. Bransford, J. D., & Schwartz, D. L. (1999). Rethinking transfer: A simple proposal with multiple implications. Review of Research in Education, 24, 61–100. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X024001061
21. Braverman H. Labor and Monopoly Capital: The Degradation of Work in the Twentieth Century[M]. New York: Monthly Review Press, 1974.
22. Brown, A. L., Bransford, J. D., Ferrara, R. A., & Campione, J. C. (1983). Learning, remembering, and understanding. In J. H. Flavell & E. M. Markman (Eds.), Handbook of Child Psychology, Vol. 3. Wiley.
23. Brown, G., Wyatt, J. L., & Tiňo, P. (2005). Managing Diversity in Regression Ensembles. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 6, 1621–1650.
24. Brynjolfsson, E., Li, D., & Raymond, L. R. (2025). Generative AI at Work. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 140(2), 889–942.
25. Burton, J. W., Lopez-Lopez, E., Hechtlinger, S., et al. (2024). How Large Language Models Can Reshape Collective Intelligence. Nature Human Behaviour, 8(9), 1643–1655.
26. Butler, O. (2025). Algorithmic Decision-Making, Delegation and the Modern Machinery of Government. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 45(3), 727–754.
27. Buçinca, Z., Malaya, M. B., & Gajos, K. Z. (2021). To Trust or to Think: Cognitive Forcing Functions Can Reduce Overreliance on AI in AI-Assisted Decision-Making. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 5(CSCW1), 1–21.
28. Cananea, G. della. (2024). Administrative Procedure Acts in Europe: An Emerging Common Core? American Journal of Comparative Law, 72(2), 324–376.
29. Cane, P. (2002). Responsibility in Law and Morality. Hart Publishing.
30. Cao, S., Liu, A., & Huang, C.-M. (2024). Designing for Appropriate Reliance: The Roles of AI Uncertainty Presentation, Initial User Decision, and User Demographics in AI-Assisted Decision-Making. arXiv:2401.05612.
31. Caosun, M., & Aral, S. (2026). The Augmentation Trap: AI Productivity and the Cost of Cognitive Offloading. arXiv:2604.03501.
32. Casner S M, Geven R W, Recker M P, Schooler J W. The retention of manual flying skills in the automated cockpit[J]. Human Factors, 2014, 56(8): 1506-1516. DOI:10.1177/0018720814535628.
33. Caspar, E. A., Christensen, J. F., Cleeremans, A., & Haggard, P. (2016). Coercion Changes the Sense of Agency in the Human Brain. Current Biology, 26(5), 585–592.
34. Centola, D. (2022). The Network Science of Collective Intelligence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 26(11), 923–941.
35. Centola, D., & Baronchelli, A. (2015). The Spontaneous Emergence of Conventions: An Experimental Study of Cultural Evolution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(7), 1989–1994.
36. Chi, M. T. H., Feltovich, P. J., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5(2), 121–152. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0502_2
37. Chirikov, I., Smirnov, I., & Kizilcec, R. F. (2026). Generative AI use and misuse call for assessment reform in higher education. Science, 392, 818–820. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aec5115
38. Clark, A. (2008). Supersizing the Mind: Embodiment, Action, and Cognitive Extension. Oxford University Press.
39. Clark, A., & Chalmers, D. (1998). The Extended Mind. Analysis, 58(1), 7–19.
40. Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. E. (1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the crafts of reading, writing, and mathematics. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, Learning, and Instruction. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
41. Collins, H. M., & Evans, R. (2002). The third wave of science studies: Studies of expertise and experience. Social Studies of Science, 32(2), 235–296.
42. Collins, H., & Evans, R. (2007). Rethinking Expertise. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
43. Constantinescu, M., et al. (2025). Responsibility Gaps, LLMs & Organisations: Many Agents, Distributed Accountability and Business Ethics. AI and Ethics / PMC.
44. Contractor, Z., & Reyes, G. (2026). Experimental Evidence on the Learning Impact of Generative AI. arXiv:2607.08849. Preprint.
45. Crossan, M. M., Lane, H. W., & White, R. E. (1999). An Organizational Learning Framework: From Intuition to Institution. Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 522–537.
46. Crozier, M., & Friedberg, E. (1980). Actors and Systems: The Politics of Collective Action. University of Chicago Press.
47. Darley, J. M., & Latané, B. (1968). Bystander Intervention in Emergencies: Diffusion of Responsibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 8(4), 377–383.
48. Dekker, S. (2014). The Field Guide to Understanding Human Error (3rd ed.). CRC Press.
49. Dell’Acqua, F., McFowland III, E., Mollick, E. R., Lifshitz-Assaf, H., Kellogg, K., Rajendran, S., et al. (2023). Navigating the Jagged Technological Frontier: Field Experimental Evidence of the Effects of AI on Knowledge Worker Productivity and Quality. Harvard Business School Working Paper 24-013.
50. Denton, K. K., Ram, Y., Liberman, U., & Feldman, M. W. (2020). Cultural Evolution of Conformity and Anticonformity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117, 13603–13614.
51. Doshi, A. R., & Hauser, O. P. (2024). Generative AI Enhances Individual Creativity but Reduces the Collective Diversity of Novel Content. Science Advances, 10(28), eadn5290.
52. Doshi-Velez, F., et al. (2017). Accountability of AI Under the Law: The Role of Explanation. Berkman Klein Center / arXiv.
53. Dunbar, K. (1993). Concept discovery in a scientific domain. Cognitive Science, 17(3), 397–434.
54. Elish, M. C. (2019). Moral Crumple Zones: Cautionary Tales in Human-Robot Interaction. Engaging Science, Technology, and Society, 5, 40–60.
55. Elmqvist, T., Folke, C., Nyström, M., Peterson, G., Bengtsson, J., Walker, B., & Norberg, J. (2003). Response Diversity, Ecosystem Change, and Resilience. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 1(9), 488–494.
56. Endsley M R, Kiris E O. The out-of-the-loop performance problem and level of control in automation[J]. Human Factors, 1995, 37(2): 381-394.
57. Endsley M R. Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems[J]. Human Factors, 1995, 37(1): 32-64.
58. Endsley, M. R. (1995). Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Human Factors, 37(1), 32–64.
59. Endsley, M. R., & Kiris, E. O. (1995). The Out-of-the-Loop Performance Problem and Level of Control in Automation. Human Factors, 37(2), 381–394. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872095779064555
60. European Union. (2024). Directive (EU) 2024/2853 on liability for defective products.
61. European Union. (2024). Directive (EU) 2024/2853, Product Liability Directive, modernised rules for software and defective products.
62. European Union. (2024). Regulation (EU) 2024/1689, Article 14 Human Oversight and Article 25 Responsibilities along the AI Value Chain.
63. European Union. (2024, consolidated text 2026). Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 (Artificial Intelligence Act), especially Articles 14, 25–26.
64. European Union. (2024/2026 consolidated text). Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence, Article 14: Human oversight.
65. Faas, C., Uth, R., Sterz, S., Langer, M., & Feit, A. M. (2026). Don’t blame me: How Intelligent Support Affects Moral Responsibility in Human Oversight. arXiv preprint.
66. Federal Aviation Administration. AC 61-98E: Currency Requirements and Guidance for the Flight Review and Instrument Proficiency Check[S]. Washington, DC: FAA, 2024.
67. Ferdman, A. (2025). AI deskilling is a structural problem. AI & Society. DOI: 10.1007/s00146-025-02686-z.
68. Fleisher, W. (2025). Responsibility and Accountability in an Algorithmic Society. Philosophy & Technology.
69. Fleishman E A, Parker J F. Factors in the retention and relearning of perceptual-motor skill[J]. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1962, 64(3): 215-226.
70. Gadamer, H.-G. (2004). Truth and Method (2nd rev. ed., J. Weinsheimer & D. G. Marshall, Trans.). London/New York: Continuum. (Original work published 1960).
71. Gettier, E. L. (1963). Is Justified True Belief Knowledge? Analysis, 23(6), 121–123. https://doi.org/10.1093/analys/23.6.121
72. Gibson, J. J. (1979). The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Houghton Mifflin.
73. Gick, M. L., & Holyoak, K. J. (1980). Analogical problem solving. Cognitive Psychology, 12(3), 306–355. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(80)90013-4
74. Goldman, A. I. (1979). What Is Justified Belief? In G. Pappas (Ed.), Justification and Knowledge: New Studies in Epistemology (pp. 1–25). D. Reidel.
75. Greeno, J. G. (1998). The situativity of knowing, learning, and research. American Psychologist, 53(1), 5–26.
76. Guo, Z., Wu, Y., Hartline, J., & Hullman, J. (2024). A Decision Theoretic Framework for Measuring AI Reliance. arXiv:2401.15356.
77. Haggard, P. (2017). Sense of Agency in the Human Brain. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 18, 196–207.
78. Hanna, G. (1990). Some pedagogical aspects of proof. Interchange, 21(1), 6–13.
79. Hardwig, J. (1985). Epistemic Dependence. The Journal of Philosophy, 82(7), 335–349.
80. Harlow, C., & Rawlings, R. (2009). Law and Administration (3rd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
81. Hart, H. L. A., & Honoré, T. (1985). Causation in the Law (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
82. Hatano, G., & Inagaki, K. (1986). Two courses of expertise. In H. Stevenson, H. Azuma, & K. Hakuta (Eds.), Child Development and Education in Japan (pp. 262–272). New York: W. H. Freeman.
83. Heft, H. (2001). Ecological Psychology in Context: James Gibson, Roger Barker, and the Legacy of William James’s Radical Empiricism. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
84. Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and Time (J. Macquarrie & E. Robinson, Trans.). Oxford: Blackwell. (Original work published 1927).
85. Henrich, J. (2004). Demography and Cultural Evolution: How Adaptive Cultural Processes Can Produce Maladaptive Losses—The Tasmanian Case. American Antiquity, 69(2), 197–214.
86. Henrich, J., & Gil-White, F. J. (2001). The Evolution of Prestige: Freely Conferred Deference as a Mechanism for Enhancing the Benefits of Cultural Transmission. Evolution and Human Behavior, 22(3), 165–196.
87. Hepburn, J. (2012). The Duty to Give Reasons for Administrative Decisions in International Law. International & Comparative Law Quarterly, 61(3), 641–663.
88. Hickson R C, Rosenkoetter M A. Reduced training frequencies and maintenance of increased aerobic power[J]. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 1981, 13(1): 13-16.
89. Hollan, J., Hutchins, E., & Kirsh, D. (2000). Distributed cognition: Toward a new foundation for human-computer interaction research. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 7(2), 174–196.
90. Hong, L., & Page, S. E. (2004). Groups of Diverse Problem Solvers Can Outperform Groups of High-Ability Problem Solvers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 101(46), 16385–16389.
91. Horvitz, E. (1999). Principles of mixed-initiative user interfaces. Proceedings of CHI 1999, 159–166.
92. Hosanagar, K., & Ahn, D. (2024). Designing Human and Generative AI Collaboration. arXiv:2412.14199.
93. Huesmann, K., et al. (2024). Perception-action coupling in anticipation research: a classification and its application to racket sports. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, 1396873.
94. Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the Wild. MIT Press.
95. International Atomic Energy Agency. Maintenance, Testing, Surveillance and Inspection in Nuclear Power Plants[S]. IAEA Safety Standards Series No. SSG-74. Vienna: IAEA, 2022.
96. International Atomic Energy Agency. Risk Based Optimization of Technical Specifications for Operation of Nuclear Power Plants[R]. IAEA-TECDOC-729. Vienna: IAEA, 1993.
97. Jiménez, Á. V., & Mesoudi, A. (2019). Prestige-Biased Social Learning: Current Evidence and Outstanding Questions. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 5, 20.
98. Kaber, D. B., & Endsley, M. R. (2004). The effects of level of automation and adaptive automation on human performance, situation awareness and workload in a dynamic control task. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 5(2), 113–153.
99. Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, Fast and Slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
100. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263–291.
101. Kane, M. T. (2013). Validating the Interpretations and Uses of Test Scores. Journal of Educational Measurement, 50(1), 1–73.
102. Kapur, M. (2008). Productive failure. Cognition and Instruction, 26(3), 379–424.
103. Karpicke, J. D., & Roediger, H. L. III. (2008). The critical importance of retrieval for learning. Science, 319(5865), 966–968.
104. Kestin, G., Miller, K., Klales, A., Milbourne, T., & Ponti, G. (2025). AI tutoring outperforms in-class active learning: An RCT introducing a novel research-based design in an authentic educational setting. Scientific Reports, 15, 17458. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-025-97652-6.
105. Kim, E., Garg, A., Peng, K., & Garg, N. (2025). Correlated Errors in Large Language Models. arXiv:2506.07962.
106. Kirsh, D. (2010). Thinking with external representations. AI & Society, 25, 441–454.
107. Klingbeil, A., Grützner, C., & Schreck, P. (2024). Trust and reliance on AI—An experimental study on the extent and costs of overreliance on AI. Computers in Human Behavior.
108. Koedinger, K. R., & Aleven, V. (2007). Exploring the assistance dilemma in experiments with Cognitive Tutors. Educational Psychology Review, 19(3), 239–264.
109. Krenn, M., Pollice, R., Guo, S. Y., et al. (2022). On scientific understanding with artificial intelligence. Nature Reviews Physics, 4, 761–769. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42254-022-00518-3
110. Krogh, A., & Vedelsby, J. (1995). Neural Network Ensembles, Cross Validation, and Active Learning. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 7, 231–238.
111. Kuhn, D. (2005). Education for Thinking. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
112. Laibson, D. (1997). Golden Eggs and Hyperbolic Discounting. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(2), 443–477.
113. Lakatos, I. (1976). Proofs and Refutations: The Logic of Mathematical Discovery. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
114. Lee H P, Sarkar A, Tankelevitch L, Drosos I, Rintel S, Banks R, Wilson N. The impact of generative AI on critical thinking: Self-reported reductions in cognitive effort and confidence effects from a survey of knowledge workers[C]//Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 2025.
115. Lee, H.-P. (H.), Sarkar, A., Tankelevitch, L., Drosos, I., Rintel, S., Banks, R., & Wilson, N. (2025). The Impact of Generative AI on Critical Thinking: Self-Reported Reductions in Cognitive Effort and Confidence Effects From a Survey of Knowledge Workers. Proceedings of CHI 2025, Article 1121, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1145/3706598.3713778
116. Lee, H.-P., Sarkar, A., Tankelevitch, L., Drosos, I., Rintel, S., Banks, R., & Wilson, N. (2025). The impact of generative AI on critical thinking: Self-reported reductions in cognitive effort and confidence effects from a survey of knowledge workers. Proceedings of CHI 2025. DOI: 10.1145/3706598.3713778.
117. Lee, J. D., & See, K. A. (2004). Trust in automation: Designing for appropriate reliance. Human Factors, 46(1), 50–80.
118. Legaspi, R., et al. (2024). The Sense of Agency in Human–AI Interactions. Knowledge-Based Systems.
119. Levinthal, D. A., & March, J. G. (1993). The Myopia of Learning. Strategic Management Journal, 14(S2), 95–112.
120. Levitt, B., & March, J. G. (1988). Organizational Learning. Annual Review of Sociology, 14, 319–340.
121. Liu, G., Christian, B., Dumbalska, T., Bakker, M. A., & Dubey, R. (2026). AI Assistance Reduces Persistence and Hurts Independent Performance. arXiv:2604.04721.
122. Lobo, L., Heras-Escribano, M., & Travieso, D. (2018). The History and Philosophy of Ecological Psychology. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 2228.
123. Lorenz, J., Rauhut, H., Schweitzer, F., & Helbing, D. (2011). How Social Influence Can Undermine the Wisdom of Crowd Effect. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(22), 9020–9025.
124. Ma, S., Chen, Q., Wang, X., Zheng, C., Peng, Z., Yin, M., & Ma, X. (2025). Towards Human-AI Deliberation: Design and Evaluation of LLM-Empowered Deliberative AI for AI-Assisted Decision-Making. Proceedings of CHI 2025.
125. March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71–87.
126. March, J. G., & Simon, H. A. (1958). Organizations. Wiley.
127. Mashaw, J. L. (2018). Reasoned Administration and Democratic Legitimacy: How Administrative Law Supports Democratic Government. Cambridge University Press.
128. Matthias, A. (2004). The Responsibility Gap: Ascribing Responsibility for the Actions of Learning Automata. Ethics and Information Technology, 6(3), 175–183.
129. McClure, S. M., Laibson, D. I., Loewenstein, G., & Cohen, J. D. (2004). Separate Neural Systems Value Immediate and Delayed Monetary Rewards. Science, 306(5695), 503–507.
130. Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), Educational Measurement (3rd ed.). Macmillan.
131. Messick, S. (1994). The Interplay of Evidence and Consequences in the Validation of Performance Assessments. Educational Researcher, 23(2), 13–23.
132. Morgan, T. J. H., & Feldman, M. W. (2025). Human Culture Is Uniquely Open-Ended Rather Than Uniquely Cumulative. Nature Human Behaviour, 9, 28–42.
133. NIST AI Resource Center. (2023–2026). AI RMF Core and Playbook: Govern, Map, Measure, Manage.
134. NIST. (2024). Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework: Generative Artificial Intelligence Profile, NIST AI 600-1.
135. National Institute of Standards and Technology. (2023). Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0). NIST AI 100-1.
136. National Institute of Standards and Technology. (2024). Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework: Generative Artificial Intelligence Profile. NIST AI 600-1.
137. Navajas, J., Niella, T., Garbulsky, G., Bahrami, B., & Sigman, M. (2018). Aggregated Knowledge from a Small Number of Debates Outperforms the Wisdom of Large Crowds. Nature Human Behaviour, 2, 126–132.
138. Nisioti, E., Risi, S., Momennejad, I., Oudeyer, P.-Y., & Moulin-Frier, C. (2024). Collective Innovation in Groups of Large Language Models. arXiv:2407.05377.
139. Nissenbaum, H. (1996). Accountability in a Computerized Society. Science and Engineering Ethics, 2(1), 25–42.
140. Noy, S., & Zhang, W. (2023). Experimental evidence on the productivity effects of generative artificial intelligence. Science, 381(6654), 187–192.
141. Parasuraman R, Riley V. Humans and automation: Use, misuse, disuse, abuse[J]. Human Factors, 1997, 39(2): 230-253.
142. Parasuraman, R., & Riley, V. (1997). Humans and automation: Use, misuse, disuse, abuse. Human Factors, 39(2), 230–253.
143. Parasuraman, R., Sheridan, T. B., & Wickens, C. D. (2000). A model for types and levels of human interaction with automation. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics—Part A, 30(3), 286–297.
144. Peng, S., Kalliamvakou, E., Cihon, P., & Demirer, M. (2023). The Impact of AI on Developer Productivity: Evidence from GitHub Copilot. arXiv:2302.06590.
145. Perrow, C. (1984). Normal Accidents: Living with High-Risk Technologies. Basic Books.
146. Polanyi, M. (1958). Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
147. Raees, M., Khan, V.-J., Lykourentzou, I., & Papangelis, K. (2026). Do People Appropriately Rely on AI-Advice? An Analytical Review of HCI Research on Human-AI Decision-Making. Proceedings of CHI 2026.
148. Raghavan, M. (2024). Competition and Diversity in Generative AI. arXiv:2412.08610.
149. Renkl, A., Atkinson, R. K., Maier, U. H., & Staley, R. (2002). From example study to problem solving: Smooth transitions help learning. Journal of Experimental Education, 70(4), 293–315.
150. Ricoeur, P. (1973). The model of the text: Meaningful action considered as a text. New Literary History, 5(1), 91–117. https://doi.org/10.2307/468410
151. Risko, E. F., & Gilbert, S. J. (2016). Cognitive Offloading. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20(9), 676–688. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2016.07.002
152. Ryle, G. (1949). The Concept of Mind. London: Hutchinson.
153. Salatino, A., Prével, A., Caspar, E. A., & Lo Bue, S. (2025). Influence of AI behavior on human moral decisions, agency, and responsibility. Scientific Reports, 15.
154. Salganik, M. J., Dodds, P. S., & Watts, D. J. (2006). Experimental Study of Inequality and Unpredictability in an Artificial Cultural Market. Science, 311(5762), 854–856.
155. Salomon, G., & Perkins, D. N. (1989). Rocky roads to transfer: Rethinking mechanisms of a neglected phenomenon. Educational Psychologist, 24(2), 113–142.
156. Savage, L. J. (1954). The Foundations of Statistics. John Wiley & Sons.
157. Schemmer, M., Kuehl, N., Benz, C., Bartos, A., & Satzger, G. (2023). Appropriate Reliance on AI Advice: Conceptualization and the Effect of Explanations. Proceedings of IUI 2023, 410–422.
158. Schemmer, M., et al. (2023). Towards Effective Human-AI Decision-Making: The Role of Human Learning in Appropriate Reliance on AI Advice. ICIS 2023 Proceedings.
159. Schlonsak, R., Jetter, H.-C., & Matthies, D. J. C. (2026). The Cost of Convenience: How Delegation and Decision Horizons Erode Human Agency when overusing LLM Systems. CHI EA ’26. DOI: 10.1145/3772363.3798760.
160. Schoeffer, J., De-Arteaga, M., & Kühl, N. (2024). Explanations, Fairness, and Appropriate Reliance in Human-AI Decision-Making. Proceedings of CHI 2024.
161. Schwartz, D. L., & Bransford, J. D. (1998). A time for telling. Cognition and Instruction, 16(4), 475–522.
162. Schwartz, D. L., & Martin, T. (2004). Inventing to prepare for future learning: The hidden efficiency of encouraging original student production in statistics instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 22(2), 129–184.
163. Schwartz, D. L., Bransford, J. D., & Sears, D. (2005). Efficiency and innovation in transfer. In J. P. Mestre (Ed.), Transfer of Learning from a Modern Multidisciplinary Perspective. Information Age Publishing.
164. Shen, J. H., & Tamkin, A. (2026). How AI Impacts Skill Formation. arXiv:2601.20245.
165. Shen, J. H., & Tamkin, A. (2026). How AI Impacts Skill Formation. arXiv:2601.20245v2.
166. Sheridan, T. B., Verplank, W. L., & Brooks, T. L. (1978). Human/Computer Control of Undersea Teleoperators. Proceedings of the 14th Annual Conference on Manual Control / NASA Technical Reports Server, Document 19790007441.
167. Shirado, H., & Christakis, N. A. (2017). Locally Noisy Autonomous Agents Improve Global Human Coordination in Network Experiments. Nature, 545, 370–374.
168. Shumailov, I., Shumaylov, Z., Zhao, Y., Papernot, N., Anderson, R., & Gal, Y. (2024). AI Models Collapse When Trained on Recursively Generated Data. Nature, 631, 755–759.
169. Simon, H. A. (1947/1997). Administrative Behavior. Free Press.
170. Slamecka, N. J., & Graf, P. (1978). The generation effect: Delineation of a phenomenon. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 4(6), 592–604.
171. Snook, S. A. (2000). Friendly Fire: The Accidental Shootdown of U.S. Black Hawks over Northern Iraq. Princeton University Press.
172. Soderstrom, N. C., & Bjork, R. A. (2015). Learning Versus Performance: An Integrative Review. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(2), 176–199.
173. Sparrow, B., Liu, J., & Wegner, D. M. (2011). Google Effects on Memory: Cognitive Consequences of Having Information at Our Fingertips. Science, 333(6043), 776–778. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1207745
174. Stapleton, J. (2008). Choosing What We Mean by “Causation” in the Law. Missouri Law Review, 73.
175. Steiner, M. (1978). Mathematical explanation. Philosophical Studies, 34(2), 135–151.
176. Taylor, H. L., Talleur, D. A., Bradshaw, G. L., Emanuel, T. W. Jr., Hulin, C. L., Rantanen, E. M., & Lendrum, L. (2003). Effectiveness of Personal Computers to Meet Recency of Experience Requirements. Federal Aviation Administration technical report 03/03.
177. Thompson, D. F. (1980). Moral Responsibility of Public Officials: The Problem of Many Hands. American Political Science Review, 74(4), 905–916.
178. Thurston, W. P. (1994). On proof and progress in mathematics. Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society, 30(2), 161–177. https://doi.org/10.1090/S0273-0979-1994-00502-6
179. Ueda, K., et al. (2021). Influence of levels of automation on the sense of agency during continuous action. Scientific Reports, 11. PMID: 33510395.
180. Ueshima, A., Jones, M. I., & Christakis, N. A. (2024). Simple Autonomous Agents Can Enhance Creative Semantic Discovery by Human Groups. Nature Communications, 15, 5212.
181. Vasconcelos, H., Jörke, M., Grunde-McLaughlin, M., Gerstenberg, T., Bernstein, M. S., & Krishna, R. (2023). Explanations Can Reduce Overreliance on AI Systems During Decision-Making. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 7(CSCW1), 1–38.
182. Vaughan, D. (1996). The Challenger Launch Decision: Risky Technology, Culture, and Deviance at NASA. University of Chicago Press.
183. Vered, M., et al. (2023). The effects of explanations on automation bias. Artificial Intelligence, 322, 103952.
184. Wan, Y., & Kalman, Y. M. (2025). Using Generative AI Personas Increases Collective Diversity in Human Ideation. arXiv:2504.13868.
185. Westbrook, A., Kester, D., & Braver, T. S. (2013). What Is the Subjective Cost of Cognitive Effort? Load, Trait, and Aging Effects Revealed by Economic Preference. PLoS ONE, 8(7), e68210.
186. Whitehead, A. N. (1929). The Aims of Education and Other Essays. New York: Macmillan.
187. Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by Design (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
188. Wiles, E., Krayer, L., Abbadi, M., Awasthi, U., Kennedy, R., Mishkin, P., Sack, D., & Candelon, F. (2024). GenAI as an Exoskeleton: Experimental Evidence on Knowledge Workers Using GenAI on New Skills. SSRN 4944588.
189. Wilkenfeld, D. A. (2013). Understanding as representation manipulability. Synthese, 190, 997–1016. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-011-0055-x
190. Williams, R. (2022). Rethinking Administrative Law for Algorithmic Decision Making. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 42(2), 468–494.
191. Wise, S. L. (2019). Controlling Construct-Irrelevant Factors Through Computer-Based Testing. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice.
192. Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical Investigations. Oxford: Blackwell.
193. Wolpert, D. M., Ghahramani, Z., & Jordan, M. I. (1995). An Internal Model for Sensorimotor Integration. Science, 269(5232), 1880–1882. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.7569931
194. Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(2), 89–100.
195. Wood, D., Mu, T., Webb, A. M., Reeve, H. W. J., Luján, M., & Brown, G. (2023). A Unified Theory of Diversity in Ensemble Learning. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 24(359), 1–49.
196. Woolley, A. W., Chabris, C. F., Pentland, A., Hashmi, N., & Malone, T. W. (2010). Evidence for a Collective Intelligence Factor in the Performance of Human Groups. Science, 330(6004), 686–688.
197. Wu, S., Liu, Y., Ruan, M., Chen, S., & Xie, X. (2025). Human–Generative AI Collaboration Enhances Task Performance but Undermines Human’s Intrinsic Motivation. Scientific Reports, 15, 15105.
198. Wu, S., Liu, Y., Ruan, M., Chen, S., et al. (2025). Human-generative AI collaboration enhances task performance but undermines human's intrinsic motivation. Scientific Reports, 15, 15105. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-98385-2
199. Wu, S., Liu, Y., Ruan, M., et al. (2025). Human-generative AI collaboration enhances task performance but undermines human’s intrinsic motivation. Scientific Reports, 15, 15105. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-98385-2
200. Yan, L., Greiff, S., Lodge, J. M., & Gašević, D. (2025). Distinguishing Performance Gains from Learning When Using Generative AI. Nature Reviews Psychology, 4, 435–436.
201. Zöller, N., et al. (2025). Human–AI Collectives Most Accurately Diagnose Clinical Vignettes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 122(24), e2426153122.
202. de Regt, H. W. (2017). Understanding Scientific Understanding. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
203. de Villiers, M. (1990). The role and function of proof in mathematics. Pythagoras, 24, 17–24.
204. van de Poel, I. (2011/2012). The Problem of Many Hands: Climate Change as an Example. Science and Engineering Ethics, 17/18.
205. von Neumann, J., & Morgenstern, O. (1944). Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. Princeton University Press.
206. 孔凡鹤. 正确答案不等于能力：生成式AI时代“不可外包能力”的断代理复闭环判据[R]. , 2026.
207. 孔凡鹤（2026）.《消化性裁决》．未刊稿。
208. 孔凡鹤（2026）.《退出迟滞：无明显症状阶段成瘾风险的动态识别与正当干预》.．未刊稿。
209. 本章为理论与方法论文，不声称“结构辖域判据”已经获得直接实证确认。文中对生成式AI学习效应的讨论依据截至 2026 年 8 月 11 日可核验的公开论文与预印本；其中 Contractor 与 Reyes（2026）明确按预印本处理。公开实验主要用于压力测试“AI辅助表现能否直接等同于人的理解”这一较弱命题，尚未直接检验本章提出的边界破坏任务。
210. ［10］National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Reproducibility and Replicability in Science. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2019.
211. ［11］Popper K. The Logic of Scientific Discovery. London: Hutchinson, 1959.
212. ［12］Mayo D G. Statistical Inference as Severe Testing: How to Get Beyond the Statistics Wars. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018.
213. ［13］Huang J, Chen J, Ji Z, et al. Large Language Models Cannot Self-Correct Reasoning Yet. International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR), 2024.
214. ［14］Manakul P, Liusie A, Gales M. SelfCheckGPT: Zero-Resource Black-Box Hallucination Detection for Generative Large Language Models. EMNLP, 2023: 9004-9017.
215. ［15］Farquhar S, Kossen J, Kuhn L, Gal Y. Detecting Hallucinations in Large Language Models Using Semantic Entropy. Nature, 2024, 630: 625-630.
216. ［16］Dhuliawala S, Komeili M, Xu J, et al. Chain-of-Verification Reduces Hallucination in Large Language Models. arXiv:2309.11495, 2023.
217. ［17］Wei J, Yang C, Song X, et al. Long-form Factuality in Large Language Models. arXiv:2403.18802, 2024.
218. ［18］Min S, Krishna K, Lyu X, et al. FActScore: Fine-grained Atomic Evaluation of Factual Precision in Long Form Text Generation. EMNLP, 2023.
219. ［19］Gou Z, Shao Z, Gong Y, et al. CRITIC: Large Language Models Can Self-Correct with Tool-Interactive Critiquing. ICLR, 2024.
220. ［1］International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB). International Standard on Auditing 200: Overall Objectives of the Independent Auditor and the Conduct of an Audit in Accordance with International Standards on Auditing. In: Handbook of International Quality Management, Auditing, Review, Other Assurance, and Related Services Pronouncements.
221. ［20］Huang L, Yu W, Ma W, et al. A Survey on Hallucination in Large Language Models: Principles, Taxonomy, Challenges, and Open Questions. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 2025.
222. ［21］NIST. Developing Cyber-Resilient Systems: A Systems Security Engineering Approach, NIST SP 800-160 Vol. 2 Rev. 1. 2021.
223. ［22］Ioannidis J P A. Why Most Published Research Findings Are False. PLoS Medicine, 2005, 2(8): e124.
224. ［23］Gundersen O E. The Fundamental Principles of Reproducibility. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, 2021, 379: 20200210.
225. ［24］Devezer B, Nardin L G, Baumgaertner B, Buzbas E O. Scientific Discovery in a Model-Centric Framework: Reproducibility, Innovation, and Epistemic Diversity. PLoS ONE, 2019, 14(5): e0216125.
226. ［25］NASA. NASA-STD-8729.1A: NASA Reliability and Maintainability (R&M) Standard for Spaceflight and Support Systems. 2017.
227. ［26］NASA. NASA-HDBK-8709.22: Safety and Mission Assurance Acronyms, Abbreviations, and Definitions. 2018.
228. ［2］IAASB. International Standard on Auditing 320: Materiality in Planning and Performing an Audit.
229. ［3］IAASB. International Standard on Auditing 530: Audit Sampling.
230. ［4］IAASB. ISA 315 (Revised 2019): Identifying and Assessing the Risks of Material Misstatement. 2019.
231. ［5］NASA. NASA Systems Engineering Handbook, NASA/SP-2016-6105 Rev 2. Washington, DC: National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 2016.
232. ［6］NASA Goddard Space Flight Center. GSFC-HDBK-8004: Failure Modes, Effects, and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) Handbook. 2024.
233. ［7］NASA Software Engineering Handbook. SWE-141: Software Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V).
234. ［8］National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0), NIST AI 100-1. 2023.
235. ［9］NIST. Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework: Generative Artificial Intelligence Profile, NIST AI 600-1. 2024.