From Outputs to Warranted Claims: Reframing AI Literacy as Culturally Mediated Quality Judgement for HRD

Generative AI has made the production of fluent drafts, summaries, and recommendations inexpensive and rapid, shifting the bottleneck of performance from producing outputs to judging whether outputs are good enough to use. This shift challenges prevailing accounts of AI literacy in human resource development (HRD) that emphasise tool proficiency and broad critical awareness while leaving the evaluative core under-specified. Drawing on an integrative literature review, this article reframes AI literacy as culturally mediated quality judgement: the capacity to interpret, appraise, justify, and responsibly act on AI-assisted outputs as warranted claims relative to domain standards and situational demands. The article makes three contributions: it (1) specifies four domains of quality judgement – relevance, warrant, applicability, and responsibility; (2) identifies the sociocultural conditions through which judgement is enacted and developed at work; and (3) outlines HRD design principles and testable propositions for cultivating calibrated reliance on AI assistance.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Human Resource Development Review
Published
2026-09-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/15344843261480993
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

From Outputs to Warranted Claims: Reframing AI Literacy as Culturally Mediated Quality Judgement for HRD

Igor Borisov
Human Resource Development Review
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
article

From Outputs to Warranted Claims: Reframing AI Literacy as Culturally Mediated Quality Judgement for HRD

Igor Borisov
article en

Abstract

Generative AI has made the production of fluent drafts, summaries, and recommendations inexpensive and rapid, shifting the bottleneck of performance from producing outputs to judging whether outputs are good enough to use. This shift challenges prevailing accounts of AI literacy in human resource development (HRD) that emphasise tool proficiency and broad critical awareness while leaving the evaluative core under-specified. Drawing on an integrative literature review, this article reframes AI literacy as culturally mediated quality judgement: the capacity to interpret, appraise, justify, and responsibly act on AI-assisted outputs as warranted claims relative to domain standards and situational demands. The article makes three contributions: it (1) specifies four domains of quality judgement – relevance, warrant, applicability, and responsibility; (2) identifies the sociocultural conditions through which judgement is enacted and developed at work; and (3) outlines HRD design principles and testable propositions for cultivating calibrated reliance on AI assistance.

Human Resource Development Review
National Research University Higher School of Economics (RU)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
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.