The model proposes that neither competency alone is sufficient for responsible AI practice and that their combination enables public relations professionals to advocate not only for organizational publics, but for humanity as the emergent public of the AI age.
Abstract
This research examined how public relations professionals conceptualize, enact, and advocate for responsible AI (RAI) during a period of rapid technological change. Drawing on 22 semi-structured interviews with experienced U.S.-based communications professionals and using constructivist grounded theory (Charmaz, 2006), the study examined how professionals navigate such core ethical values of truth, trust, and transparency while adopting AI and counseling their organizations. Findings reveal that responsible AI in public relations is not given or simply adopted but actively constructed through everyday professional judgment, human oversight, and organizational influence. The study finds that responsible AI practice depends on the interdependence of AI literacy and ethics literacy, with public relations professionals translating both into advocacy, governance, disclosure judgments, and counsel. The study introduces the AI-Ethics Literacy Model for Human Advocacy[trademark] (AELHA[trademark], pronounced “ah-LEE-ha”) as its original conceptual contribution. AELHA encodes a foundational relationship: AI Literacy + Ethics Literacy = Human Advocacy. The model proposes that neither competency alone is sufficient for responsible AI practice and that their combination enables public relations professionals to advocate not only for organizational publics, but for humanity as the emergent public of the AI age.
This qualitative phenomenological study explores how Kuwaiti public school principals understand and anticipate their responsibilities regarding AI-use in schools and foregrounding principals’ ethical reasoning in a Gulf Region context and offers implications for leadership preparation, policy development, and responsi...
As generative artificial intelligence (AI) becomes embedded in everyday literacy practices, pre-service teachers (PSTs) must decide what work remains distinctly human in AI-mediated meaning-making. This qualitative case study investigates how PSTs enact boundary work with generative AI during a semester-long literacy e...
I. O'Byrne· Literacy Research Theory Met...· 0 citations
Across roles, participants converged on the irreducibility of human responsibility and on the demand for verifiable transparency, but diverged sharply on questions of cultural homogenisation, the locus of accountability between developers and deployers, and the appropriate regulatory response.
Andrej Miklošík, Tanja Rosenbaum· AI and Ethics· 0 citations
The findings reveal that coaches report using GenAI extensively for structured, information-intensive tasks while maintaining control over relational and interpretative work, which can be understood as boundary work preserving human authority over domains of tacit expertise.
It is argued that expecting practitioners to bear ethical accountability for outcomes they cannot meaningfully influence is increasingly untenable, yet the practice of thinking otherwise—constructing alternative realities and engaging in self-authorship—remains available even when structural power is not.
The study generated the framework Contextualizing Responsible AI Governance Through Adaptive School Leadership, which explains responsible AI governance as a continuing process of policy interpretation, contextual adaptation, institutional capacity building, ethical accountability, and stakeholder collaboration.
Venz Mae Siodo· QualiSearch Journal of Educa...· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.