The Saturation of Ease: Diagnosing Epistemic Stewardship and the Innovator’s Paradox in Generative Learning Environments

This investigation diagnoses the innovator’s paradox within specialized knowledge domains, where high technical competence does not significantly predict the adoption of generative artificial intelligence (AI). The findings identify epistemic stewardship as the primary driver of practitioner resistance, revealing that experts reject frictionless generative heuristics to protect student epistemic agency, defined as the cognitive struggle of synthesis. Utilizing a triadic theoretical framework (TAM, Diffusion of Innovations, and HCI), this research identifies a saturation-of-ease threshold where technical efficiency conflicts with pedagogical validity. The data suggest that, for expert practitioners, perceived ease of use is a non-predictive metric of technology acceptance when it threatens the integrity of the learning process. We conclude that sustaining scholarly integrity requires a systemic shift toward Socratic architectures that prioritize cognitive friction and professional stewardship over algorithmic velocity. This transparent approach serves as a blueprint for institutional guardrails that preserve the human cognitive core within automated academic workflows.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Auburn University Scholarly Repository
Published
2026-03-07
DOI
https://doi.org/10.35099/sdy5-z370
Primary Topic
Educational Strategies and Epistemologies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Saturation of Ease: Diagnosing Epistemic Stewardship and the Innovator’s Paradox in Generative Learning Environments

Christopher A. Clemons, James R. Lindner, Jason D. McKibben
Auburn University Scholarly Repository
Educational Strategies and Epistemologies
article

The Saturation of Ease: Diagnosing Epistemic Stewardship and the Innovator’s Paradox in Generative Learning Environments

Christopher A. Clemons, James R. Lindner, Jason D. McKibben
article en

Abstract

This investigation diagnoses the innovator’s paradox within specialized knowledge domains, where high technical competence does not significantly predict the adoption of generative artificial intelligence (AI). The findings identify epistemic stewardship as the primary driver of practitioner resistance, revealing that experts reject frictionless generative heuristics to protect student epistemic agency, defined as the cognitive struggle of synthesis. Utilizing a triadic theoretical framework (TAM, Diffusion of Innovations, and HCI), this research identifies a saturation-of-ease threshold where technical efficiency conflicts with pedagogical validity. The data suggest that, for expert practitioners, perceived ease of use is a non-predictive metric of technology acceptance when it threatens the integrity of the learning process. We conclude that sustaining scholarly integrity requires a systemic shift toward Socratic architectures that prioritize cognitive friction and professional stewardship over algorithmic velocity. This transparent approach serves as a blueprint for institutional guardrails that preserve the human cognitive core within automated academic workflows.

Auburn University Scholarly Repository
Auburn University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 34%
Educational Strategies and Epistemologies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.