<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <id>urn:uuid:aed1118c-8a94-51e4-bc35-3d75b1ed5054</id>
  <title>SocioLens — RO-LD02-04: Are juniors who still get hired at AI-adopting firms promoted and trained less?</title>
  <subtitle>New versions of this research opportunity and changes to the claims it rests on.</subtitle>
  <link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="https://sociolens-web.pages.dev/opportunities/ro-ld02-04/feed.xml"/>
  <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://sociolens-web.pages.dev/opportunities/ro-ld02-04/"/>
  <updated>2026-10-14T00:00:00Z</updated>
  <author><name>SocioLens</name></author>
  <entry>
    <id>urn:uuid:7d4b2153-7734-59ed-af34-9ee9360ae543</id>
    <title type="text">Claim LD02-HQ-C03 revised to v1.1</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://sociolens-web.pages.dev/claims/ld02-hq-c03/v1.1/"/>
    <updated>2026-10-14T00:00:00Z</updated>
    <summary type="text">What changed: The contradictory/supporting field no longer says that this result simply complements Humlum &amp; Vestergaard. It now says the two Danish studies are in tension: the March 2026 revision of Humlum &amp; Vestergaard finds no differential change in employment (total hours), job churn or the early-career share at workplaces that encourage chatbot use, through December 2024. The public-facing claim and the Nationalbank estimate are unchanged.

Why: A recheck on 14 October 2026 read the full text of NBER Working Paper 33777 as revised in March 2026. Version 1.0 treated the two Danish studies as measuring different margins (incumbent earnings and hours against firm recruitment), but Section 3.4 of the revision also estimates workplace employment, job churn and the early-career share at adopting workplaces and finds no differential change. The studies differ in how adoption is measured (firm AI adoption against employer-encouraged chatbot use in 11 exposed occupations), in unit and in horizon (late 2025 against December 2024), so they need not contradict each other, but the difference is not explained by either paper as far as was read; the Nationalbank paper itself could not be opened for this recheck. The recheck and this revision were done by an AI agent, not by a person.</summary>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <id>urn:uuid:dc4601aa-407b-5f43-972a-b0d515555919</id>
    <title type="text">Research opportunity revised to v2: RO-LD02-04 — Are juniors who still get hired at AI-adopting firms promoted and trained less?</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://sociolens-web.pages.dev/opportunities/ro-ld02-04/v2/"/>
    <updated>2026-10-13T00:00:00Z</updated>
    <summary type="text">Literature check added: a second, deeper search for existing work, with its queries, new nearest work and limits. The question and verdict stand.</summary>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <id>urn:uuid:871fca99-42db-5b96-b3d4-32ceeecb9892</id>
    <title type="text">New research opportunity: RO-LD02-04 — Are juniors who still get hired at AI-adopting firms promoted and trained less?</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://sociolens-web.pages.dev/opportunities/ro-ld02-04/v1/"/>
    <updated>2026-10-12T00:00:00Z</updated>
    <summary type="text">Among workers hired into junior positions before and after their employer began using AI, do promotion into higher-skill occupations, wage growth, recorded training and retention over the following two to four years differ between AI-adopting and comparable non-adopting firms?</summary>
  </entry>
</feed>
