Professional Expertise Practice Adaptation and Sense of Agency During AI Implementation in Radiology

Abstract

This study examines psychological processes during narrow-task artificial intelligence (NT-AI) implementation in radiological practice, focusing on how professionals cope with tensions arising from discrepancies between intended and experienced expertise practices with NT-AI. Such tensions may hold a particular threat to professionals’ sense of agency (SoA) and are therefore particularly important to address in a process of AI implementation.

Using ethnographic methods across two Danish hospitals, we observe professionals’ typical coping strategies to core experiences of tension-based challenges: disruption, re-validation, vigilance, rejection, and practice transformation. We analyze these coping responses based on a typology of four distinct ideal types of human-AI collaboration: Parallel expertise, Forwarded expertise, Augmented expertise, and Collective expertise. Our study contributes to a nuanced understanding of human-AI collaboration by demonstrating how professionals adaptively navigate between these ideal types to transform their professional practice and reconstitute their SoA.

Keywords

AI implementation sense of agency human-AI collaboration expertise adaptation radiology professional practice

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Acosta

J. N.

Dogra

Adithan

Moritz

Kwak

Rajpurkar

(2024). The impact of AI assistance on radiology reporting: A pilot study using simulated AI draft reports. 1–6. http://arxiv.org/abs/2412.12042.

Ågnes

J. S.

(2022). Gaining and training a digital colleague: Employee responses to robotization. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 58(1), 29–64. https://doi.org/10.1177/00218863211043596

AI in the Workplace Statistics. (2024). https://www.aiprm.com/ai-in-healthcare-statistics/ .

Anderson

P. G.

Tarder-Stoll

Alpaslan

Keathley

Levin

D. L.

Venkatesh

Bartel

Sicular

Howell

Lindsey

R. V.

Jones

R. M.

(2024). Deep learning improves physician accuracy in the comprehensive detection of abnormalities on chest X-rays. Scientific Reports, 14(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-76608-2

Antonissen

Tryfonos

Houben

I. B.

Jacobs

de Rooij

van Leeuwen

K. G.

(2025). Artificial intelligence in radiology: 173 commercially available products and their scientific evidence. European Radiology, July(2025), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-025-11830-8

Armour

Sako

(2020). AI-enabled business models in legal services: From traditional law firms to next-generation law companies? Journal of Professions and Organization, 7(1), 27–46. https://doi.org/10.1093/jpo/joaa001

Bandura

(1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37(2), 122–147. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.37.2.122

Bandura

(2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9(3), 75–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00064

Bandura

(2002). Growing primacy of human agency in adaptation and change in the electronic era. European Psychologist, 7(1), 2–16. https://doi.org/10.1027//1016-9040.7.1.2

10.

Bandura

(2006). Toward a psychology of human agency. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1(2), 164–180. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00011.x

11.

Bandura

(2018). Toward a psychology of human agency: Pathways and reflections. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 13(2), 130–136. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691617699280

12.

Barley

(1986). Technology as an occasion for structuring; Evidence from observations of CT scanners and the Social Order of Radiology Departments .

13.

Barley

(1996). Technicians in the workplace: Ethnographic evidence for bringing work into organizational (Vol. 41, Issue 3).

14.

Barley

(2020). How do technologies change organizations? In Work and technological change (pp. 25–68). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198795209.003.0002

15.

Barley

Bailey

(2020). Managing the fears of studying technical work. In Work and technological change (pp. 116–144). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198795209.003.0004

16.

Barley

Beane

(2020). How should we study intelligent Technologies’ implications for work and employment? In Work and technological change (pp. 69–115). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198795209.003.0003

17.

Berberian

(2019). Man-machine teaming: A problem of agency. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 51(34), 118–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2019.01.049

18.

Bergquist

Rolandsson

(2022). Everyday automation: Experiencing and anticipating emerging technologies (1st edn.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003170884-12

19.

Bergquist

Rolandsson

Gryska

Laesser

Hoefling

Heckemann

Schneiderman

J. F.

Björkman-Burtscher

I. M.

(2023). Trust and stakeholder perspectives on the implementation of AI tools in clinical radiology. European Radiology, 34(1), 338–347. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-023-09967-5

20.

Caspar

E. A.

Christensen

J. F.

Cleeremans

Haggard

(2016). Coercion changes the sense of agency in the human brain. Current Biology, 26(5), 585–592. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2015.12.067

21.

Ciardo

Beyer

De Tommaso

Wykowska

(2020). Attribution of intentional agency towards robots reduces one’s own sense of agency. Cognition, 194(2019), 104109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2019.104109

22.

Coppola

Faggioni

Gabelloni

De Vietro

Mendola

Cattabriga

Cocozza

M. A.

Vara

Piccinino

Lo Monaco

Pastore

L. V.

Mottola

Malavasi

Bevilacqua

Neri

Golfieri

(2021). Human, all too human? An all-around appraisal of the “artificial intelligence revolution” in medical imaging. Frontiers in Psychology, 12(September), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.710982

23.

Dahlin

(2024). And say the AI responded? Dancing around ‘autonomy’ in AI/human encounters. Social Studies of Science, 54(1), 59–77. https://doi.org/10.1177/03063127231193947

24.

Danish Government. (2019). National strategy for artificial intelligence 2019. https://en.digst.dk/media/lz0fxbt4/305755_gb_version_final-a.pdf .

25.

Danish Government. (2024). Strategy for artificial intelligence 2024. https://www.digmin.dk/Media/638687214351712933/Strategisk%20indsats%20for%20kunstig%20intelligens.pdf.

26.

Dignum

(2022). Relational artificial intelligence. http://arxiv.org/abs/2202.07446.

27.

Driver

C. N.

Bowles

B. S.

Bartholmai

B. J.

Greenberg-Worisek

A. J.

(2020). Artificial intelligence in radiology: A call for thoughtful application. In Clinical and translational science (Vol. 13, Issue 2, pp. 216–218). Blackwell Publishing Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1111/cts.12704

28.

Edwards

(2010). Being an expert professional practitioner the relational turn in expertise. In Gruber

S. B. H.

Harteis

(Eds.), Being an expert professional practitioner (3, pp. 21–37). Springer Dordrecht Heidelberg. https://doi.org/0.1007/978-90-481-3969-9

29.

Edwards

(2011). Building common knowledge at the boundaries between professional practices: Relational agency and relational expertise in systems of distributed expertise. International Journal of Educational Research, 50(1), 33–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2011.04.007

30.

Emirbayer

(1997). Manifesto for a relational sociology. American Journal of Sociology, 103(2), 281–317. https://doi.org/10.1086/231209

31.

Eyal

(2019). The crisis of expertise. Polity Press.

32.

Flyvbjerg

(2006). Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12(2), 219–245. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800405284363

33.

Flyvbjerg

(2012). Social science that matters. In Sampson

(Ed.), Making social science matter: Why social inquiry fails and how it can succeed again. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511810503.011

34.

Fredberg

Schwarz

G. M.

(2024). What AI knows: Shaping work and pushing ideas on changing organizations. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 60(4), 581–588. https://doi.org/10.1177/00218863241285218

35.

Fritz

Kijowski

Recht

M. P.

(2022). Artificial intelligence in musculoskeletal imaging: A perspective on value propositions, clinical use, and obstacles. Skeletal Radiology, 51(2), 239–243. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-021-03802-y

36.

Galsgaard

Doorschodt

Holten

A.-L

Müller

Ploug Boesen

Maas

(2022). Artificial intelligence and multidisciplinary team meetings; a communication challenge for radiologists' sense of agency and position as spider in a web? European Journal of Radiology, 155(Oct), 110–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2022.110231

37.

Gartner Survey. (2023). https://www.gartner.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/2023-07-05-gartner-survey-finds-79-percent-of-corporate-strategists-see-ai-and-analytics-as-critical-to-their-success-over-the-next-two-years .

38.

Gioia

(2021). A systematic methodology for doing qualitative research. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 57(1), 20–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886320982715

39.

Goto

(2022). Accepting the future as ever-changing: Professionals’ sensemaking about artificial intelligence. Journal of Professions and Organization, 9(1), 77–99. https://doi.org/10.1093/jpo/joab022

40.

Haggard, P., & Eitam, B. (Eds.) (2015). Introduction. In The sense of agency. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190267278.001.0001

41.

Hopwood

Day

Edwards

(2016). Partnership practice as collaborative knowledge work: Overcoming common dilemmas through an augmented view of professional expertise. Journal of Children’s Services, 11(2), 111–123. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCS-08-2015-0027

42.

Huang

Wittbrodt

M. T.

Teague

C. N.

Karl

Galal

Thompson

Chapa

Chiu

M. L.

Herynk

Linchangco

Serhal

Heller

J. A.

Abboud

S. F.

Etemadi

(2025). Efficiency and quality of generative AI-assisted radiograph reporting. JAMA Network Open, 8(6), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.13921

43.

Huisman

Ranschaert

Parker

Mastrodicasa

Koci

Pinto de Santos

Coppola

Morozov

Zins

Bohyn

Koç

Veean

Fleischmann

Leiner

Willemink

M. J.

(2021). An international survey on AI in radiology in 1,041 radiologists and radiology residents part 1: Fear of replacement, knowledge, and attitude. European Radiology, 31(9), 7058–7066. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-021-07781-5

44.

Kamarova

Gagné

Holtrop

Dunlop

P. D.

(2025). Integrating behavior and organizational change literatures to uncover crucial psychological mechanisms underlying the adoption and maintenance of organizational change. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 46(2), 263–287. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2832

45.

Kristensen

C. J.

(2016). Shadowing—Observationer af enkeltpersoners praksis. In Kristensen

C. J.

Hussain

(Eds.), Metoder i samfundsvidenskaberne (pp. 169–184). Samfundslitteratur.

46.

Kronblad

Jensen

S. H.

(2023). Being a professional is not the same as acting professionally—How digital technologies have empowered the creation and enactment of a new professional identity in law. Journal of Professions and Organization, 10(2), 99–119. https://doi.org/10.1093/jpo/joad005

47.

Kronblad

Jonsson

Pemer

(2024). Generative AI beyond the hype—New technologies in the face of organizing and organizations. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 60(4), 623–630. https://doi.org/10.1177/00218863241285454

48.

Kvale

Brinkmann

(2015). Interview - Det kvalitative forskningsinterview som Håndværk (3rd ed). Hans Reitzels Forlag.

49.

Lebovitz

Lifshitz-Assaf

Levina

(2022). To engage or not to engage with AI for critical judgments: How professionals deal with opacity when using AI for medical diagnosis. Organization Science, 33(1), 126–148. https://doi.org/10.1287/ORSC.2021.1549

50.

Lewis

M. W.

Smith

W. K.

(2014). Paradox as a metatheoretical perspective: Sharpening the focus and widening the scope. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 50(2), 127–149. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886314522322

51.

Liu

Faes

Kale

A. U.

Wagner

S. K.

D. J.

Bruynseels

Mahendiran

Moraes

Shamdas

Kern

Ledsam

J. R.

Schmid

M. K.

Balaskas

Topol

E. J.

Bachmann

L. M.

Keane

P. A.

Denniston

A. K.

(2019). A comparison of deep learning performance against health-care professionals in detecting diseases from medical imaging: A systematic review and meta-analysis. The Lancet Digital Health, 1(6), e271–e297. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2589-7500(19)30123-2

52.

Moore

J. W.

(2016). What is the sense of agency and why does it matter?. In Frontiers in Psychology (Aug, pp. 1–9). Frontiers Psych. Sec. Consciousness Research. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01272 .

53.

Neff

Nagy

(2018). Agency in the digital age: Using symbiotic agency to explain human-technology interaction. In Papacharissi

Zizi

(Ed.), A networked self and human augmentics, artificial intelligence, sentience (Vol. 2018, pp. 97–107). https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315202082

54.

Neri

Coppola

Miele

Bibbolino

Grassi

(2020). Artificial intelligence: Who is responsible for the diagnosis? Radiologia Medica, 125(6), 517–521. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-020-01135-9

55.

Noordegraaf

(2020). Protective or connective professionalism? How connected professionals can (still) act as autonomous and authoritative experts. Journal of Professions and Organization, 7(2), 205–223. https://doi.org/10.1093/jpo/joaa011

56.

Oreg

Vakola

Armenakis

(2011). Change recipients’ reactions to organizational change: A 60-year review of quantitative studies. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 47(4), 461–524. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886310396550

57.

Pagliari

Chambon

Berberian

(2022). What is new with artificial intelligence? Human–agent interactions through the lens of social agency. Frontiers in Psychology, 13(September), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.954444

58.

Pakarinen

Huising

(2023). Relational expertise: What machines can’t know. Journal of Management Studies, 62(5), 2053–2082. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12915

59.

Pesapane

Volonté

Codari

Sardanelli

(2018). Artificial intelligence as a medical device in radiology: Ethical and regulatory issues in Europe and the United States. Insights into Imaging, 9(5), 745–753. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13244-018-0645-y

60.

Pink

(2022). Trust, ethics and automation anticipatory imaginaries in everyday life. In Pink

Berg

Lupton

Ruckenstein

(Eds.), Everyday automation: Experiencing and anticipating emerging technologies (1st edn). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003170884-4

61.

Recht

M. P.

Dewey

Dreyer

Langlotz

Niessen

Prainsack

Smith

J. J.

(2020). Integrating artificial intelligence into the clinical practice of radiology: Challenges and recommendations. European Radiology, 30(6), 3576–3584. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-06672-5

62.

Schatzki

T. R.

(2025). Agency, information and organization. Information and Organization, 35(1), 100553. ISSN 1471-7727. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infoandorg.2024.100553

63.

Scheetz

Rothschild

McGuinness

Hadoux

Soyer

H. P.

Janda

Condon

J. J. J.

Oakden-Rayner

Palmer

L. J.

Keel

van Wijngaarden

(2021). A survey of clinicians on the use of artificial intelligence in ophthalmology, dermatology, radiology and radiation oncology. Scientific Reports, 11(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-84698-5

64.

Schneider

Sting

F. J.

(2020). Employees’ perspectives on digitalization-induced change: Exploring frames of industry 4.0. Academy of Management Discoveries, 6(3), 406–435. https://doi.org/10.5465/amd.2019.0012

65.

Searle

J. R.

(1980). Minds and brains, and programs. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3(3), 417–424. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00005756

66.

Silva

(2019). Increasing perceived agency in human-AI interactions learnings from piloting a voice user interface with drivers on Uber. Ethnographic Praxis in Industry Conference Proceedings, 2019(1), 441–456.

67.

Smith

Lewis

Jarzabkowski

Langley

(2017). Introduction: The paradoxes of Paradox. In Smith

Lewis

Jarzabkowski

Langley

(Eds.), The oxford handbook of organizational paradox (pp. 1–24). Oxford University Press.

68.

Sonenshein

(2010). We’re changing-or are we? Untangling the role of progressive, regressive, and stability narratives during strategic change implementation. Academy of Management Journal, 53(3), 477–512. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.51467638

69.

Strohm

Hehakaya

Ranschaert

E. R.

Boon

W. P. C.

Moors

E. H. M.

(2020). Implementation of artificial intelligence (AI) applications in radiology: Hindering and facilitating factors. European Radiology, 30(10), 5525–5532. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-06946-y

70.

Susskind

(2022). The future of the professions: How technology will transform the work of human experts, updated edition. Oxford University Press.

71.

Tang

P. M.

Koopman

Mai

K. M.

De Cremer

Zhang

J. H.

Reynders

C. T. S.

Chen

I.-H.

(2023). No person is an island: Unpacking the work and after-work consequences of interacting with artificial intelligence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 108(11), 1766–1789. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001103

72.

Timmermans

Tavory

(2022). Data analysis in qualitative research: Theorizing with abductive analysis. University of Chicago Press.

73.

Ulfert

A. S.

Georganta

Centeio Jorge

Mehrotra

Tielman

(2023). Shaping a multidisciplinary understanding of team trust in human-AI teams: A theoretical framework. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 33(2), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2023.2200172

74.

U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2019). Proposed regulatory framework for modifications to artificial intelligence/machine learning (AI/ML)-based software as a medical device (SaMD): Discussion paper and request for feedback. https://www.fda.gov/media/122535/download.

75.

van Hoek

Huber

Leichtle

Härmä

Hilt

von Tengg-Kobligk

Heverhagen

Poellinger

(2019). A survey on the future of radiology among radiologists, medical students and surgeons: Students and surgeons tend to be more skeptical about artificial intelligence and radiologists may fear that other disciplines take over. European Journal of Radiology, 121(November), 108742. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2019.108742

76.

van Leeuwen

K. G.

de Rooij

Schalekamp

van Ginneken

Rutten

M. J. C. M.

(2022). How does artificial intelligence in radiology improve efficiency and health outcomes? Pediatric Radiology, 52(11), 2087–2093. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-021-05114-8

77.

Vila-Henninger

Dupuy

Van Ingelgom

Caprioli

Teuber

Pennetreau

Bussi

Le Gall

(2022). Abductive coding: Theory building and qualitative (re)analysis. Sociological Methods and Research, 53(2), 968–1001. https://doi.org/10.1177/00491241211067508

78.

Wesche

J. S.

Hennig

Kollhed

C. S.

Quade

Kluge

Sonderegger

(2024). People’s reactions to decisions by human vs. Algorithmic decision-makers: The role of explanations and type of selection tests. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 33(2), 146–157. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2022.2132940

79.

Kurien

van Wyk

B. J.

Liu

(2024). The sense of agency in human–machine interaction systems. Applied Sciences (Switzerland), 14(16), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14167327

80.

Zając

H. D.

Andersen

T. O.

Kwasa

Wanjohi

Onyinkwa

M. K.

Mwaniki

E. K.

Gitau

S. N.

Yaseen

S. S.

Carlsen

J. F.

Fraccaro

Nielsen

M. B.

Chen

(2024). Towards clinically useful AI: From radiology practices in global south and north to visions of AI support. Submitted to ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 32(2), 1–38. https://doi.org/10.1145/3715115

81.

Zajac

H. D.

Dai

Carlsen

J. F.

Kensing

Andersen

T. O.

(2023). Clinician-Facing AI in the wild: Taking stock of the sociotechnical challenges and opportunities for HCI. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 30(2), 1–39. https://doi.org/10.1145/3582430

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.02 MB