HKU Jockey Club Enterprise Sustainability Global Research Institute
World-Class Hub for Sustainability
Phyllis Xue Wang|Sara Kim|Minki Kim
Robot Anthropomorphism and Job Insecurity: The Role of Social Comparison
Mar 13. 2025
Key Takeaways
- Robot anthropomorphism—attributing human-like characteristics to robots—can increase job insecurity among employees.
- Social comparison triggered by anthropomorphic robots leads employees to view robots as competitors, exacerbating feelings of job insecurity.
- The negative impact of anthropomorphism on job insecurity is less pronounced when robots and humans have distinct roles or collaborate rather than compete.
- Managerial strategies to mitigate job insecurity include reducing robots’ human-like features, emphasizing collaborative roles, and educating employees about the distinctions between humans and robots.
Source Publication: Wang, P.X., Kim, S., & Kim, M. (2023). Robot anthropomorphism and job insecurity: The role of social comparison. Journal of Business Research, 164, 114003.
Research Questions
As robots increasingly become integral to the workplace, their presence not only reshapes job functions but also influences employees’ perceptions of their job security. While automation and artificial intelligence continue to develop, concerns about job displacement are on the rise. This study, conducted by Wang, Kim, and Kim, investigates how the anthropomorphism of robots—attributing to machines human qualities such as emotions, facial expressions, or intentions—intensifies employees’ anxieties regarding their job stability. Central to this inquiry is whether human-like robots amplify job insecurity and how social comparison, a psychological mechanism that often drives how individuals assess their worth in relation to others, mediates these effects. Through this lens, the research provides insights into how organizations can manage the psychological challenges posed by robot integration in the workplace.
Methodology
The authors conducted a comprehensive series of seven studies across various participant groups, including students, call center workers, nurses, and online panelists. In each study, they manipulated the degree of anthropomorphism in robots—ranging from highly human-like features, such as facial expressions and body movements, to machine-like, functional designs—to assess how these features impacted employees’ perceptions of job insecurity. By comparing responses to robots designed to resemble humans with those that appeared purely mechanical, the study delves into the psychological effects that robot design may have on employees’ workplace fears and anxieties.
Table 1 Overview of studies
Key Findings
The study provides compelling evidence that robot anthropomorphism triggers heightened job insecurity. Employees who interacted with robots exhibiting human-like traits perceived these machines as rivals, which led to increased feelings of inadequacy. This effect was particularly pronounced among individuals predisposed to anthropomorphizing technology—those more likely to attribute human-like characteristics to machines. The research highlights the role of social comparison, a powerful, often unconscious psychological mechanism. Employees tend to compare themselves to robots in the workplace, viewing these anthropomorphized machines as competitors rather than tools. As the authors note, “Since people tend to believe that similar others provide a better basis for comparison, they often make comparisons with those they perceive as similar rather than those who differ significantly.”
However, the negative psychological impact of robot anthropomorphism on job insecurity diminished when humans and robots were assigned distinct job roles or when they engaged in collaborative tasks. In these scenarios, employees were more likely to view robots as colleagues than as competitors. This finding underscores the importance of framing human-robot interactions as cooperative rather than adversarial to reduce perceived threats to job security.
Further, individual differences in susceptibility to anthropomorphism played a significant role in determining how employees reacted to the presence of robots. Those more inclined to anthropomorphize robots were especially vulnerable to heightened insecurity about their job prospects. This finding suggests personal psychological traits may influence the degree to which employees feel threatened by automation and robot integration in the workplace.
Implications for Managers
The findings of this study have significant implications for managers navigating the integration of robots in the workplace. First, the study suggests careful design of robots is crucial to reducing job insecurity. By minimizing human-like features—such as facial expressions or behaviors that mimic human intentions—organizations can help prevent unnecessary social comparisons, which may otherwise lead employees to feel their jobs are at risk.
Additionally, fostering a collaborative environment where humans and robots work together as a team can mitigate job insecurity. When robots are framed as tools that assist rather than replace employees, the perceived competition between the two diminishes, reducing feelings of job threat. Managers must emphasize this cooperative dynamic to reassure employees about the safety of their positions.
Finally, training is an essential strategy for reducing the psychological impact of robot anthropomorphism. Educating employees on the capabilities and limitations of robots can help minimize the tendency to anthropomorphize machines. By understanding robots are designed to complement rather than replace human work, employees can better adjust to the presence of automation without feeling threatened.