In the digital & intelligent era, integrating AI technology into library services has spurred innovation but also brought potential risks. This paper identifies and assesses AI-related risks in smart libraries from a technostress perspective, proposing governance strategies to enhance service quality and provide a reference for smart library development. Using content analysis and technostress theory, potential risk sources of AI applications in smart libraries are analyzed across five dimensions: techno-overload, techno-invasion, techno-complexity, techno-insecurity, and techno-uncertainty. The Decision Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL) method is then applied to assess causal relationships among risks, revealing two categories: technical-level risks (AI malfunction, emotional disconnection, AI misjudgement, algorithmic bias, and responsibility ambiguity) and societal-level risks (security threat, fairness challenges, regulatory ambiguity, copyright concern, and occupational maladaptation). Key findings highlight AI malfunction and misjudgment as driving risks, while regulatory ambiguity and occupational maladaptation are resultant risks. The paper proposes hierarchical risk governance strategies, including prioritizing high-driven risks, managing resultant risks, and dynamically adjusting adaptation rules.
AdetayoAJ (2023) Artificial intelligence chatbots in academic libraries: The rise of ChatGPT. Library Hi Tech News40(3): 18–21.
2.
AhmadUNUAminSM (2012) The dimensions of technostress among academic librarians. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences65: 266–271.
3.
AittolaMRyhänenTOjalaT (2003) Smartlibrary–location-aware mobile library service. In: Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services: 5th International Symposium, Mobile HCI 2003, Udine, Italy, September 2003. Proceedings 5. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer, pp.411–416.
4.
AkterSMcCarthyGSajibS, et al. (2021) Algorithmic bias in data-driven innovation in the age of AI. International Journal of Information Management60: 102387.
5.
ArnetzBBWiholmC (1997) Technological stress: Psychophysiological symptoms in modern offices. Journal of Psychosomatic Research43(1): 35–42.
6.
AsemiAKoANowkariziM (2020) Intelligent libraries: A review on expert systems, artificial intelligence, and robot. Library Hi Tech39(2): 412–434.
7.
AsimMArifMRafiqM, et al. (2023) Investigating applications of artificial intelligence in university libraries of Pakistan: An empirical study. The Journal of Academic Librarianship49(6): 102803.
8.
AslamSJabeenMJabeenM (2025) Fostering innovation in smart library services: An in-depth exploration of empowered capabilities and dynamic strategies among university librarians in Pakistan. Information Development. https://doi.org/10.1177/02666669241305379
9.
AyyagariRGroverVPurvisR (2011) Technostress: Technological antecedents and implications. MIS Quarterly35(4): 831–858.
10.
BaronMMPate-CornellEB (1999) Designing risk-management strategies for critical engineering systems. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management46(1): 87–100.
11.
BarshaSMunshiSA (2023) Implementing artificial intelligence in library services: A review of current prospects and challenges of developing countries. Library Hi Tech News41(1): 7–10.
12.
BhasinSGargSRegazzoniF (2021) Special section on attacking and protecting artificial intelligence. CAAI Transactions on Intelligence Technology6(1): 1–2.
13.
BiSWangCZhangJ, et al. (2022) A survey on artificial intelligence aided internet-of-things technologies in emerging smart libraries. Sensors22(8): 2991.
14.
BichtelerJ (1987) Technostress in libraries: Causes, effects and solutions. The Electronic Library5(5): 282–287.
15.
BorgohainDJBhardwajRKVermaMK (2024) Mapping the literature on the application of artificial intelligence in libraries (AAIL): A scientometric analysis. Library Hi Tech42(1): 149–179.
16.
BradleyF (2022) Representation of libraries in artificial intelligence regulations and implications for ethics and practice. Journal of the Australian Library and Information Association71(3): 189–200.
17.
BrodC (1984) Technostress: The Human Cost of the Computer Revolution. Reading, USA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
18.
BrownRDuckJJimmiesonN (2014) E-mail in the workplace: The role of stress appraisals and normative response pressure in the relationship between e-mail stressors and employee strain. International Journal of Stress Management21(4): 325.
19.
BusuiocM (2021) Accountable artificial intelligence: Holding algorithms to account. Public Administration Review81(5): 825–836.
20.
Cachat-RossetGKlarsfeldA (2023) Diversity, equity, and inclusion in artificial intelligence: An evaluation of guidelines. Applied Artificial Intelligence37(1): 2176618.
21.
CaliffCBSarkerSSarkerS (2020) The bright and dark sides of technostress: A mixed-methods study involving healthcare IT. MIS Quarterly44(2): 809–856.
22.
CaoGLiangMLiX (2018) How to make the library smart? The conceptualization of the smart library. The Electronic Library36(5): 811–825.
23.
ChenCWuZLaiY, et al. (2023) Challenges and Remedies to Privacy and Security in AIGC: Exploring the Potential of Privacy Computing, Blockchain, and Beyond. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2306.00419
24.
ChestermanS (2020) Artificial intelligence and the limits of legal personality. International & Comparative Law Quarterly69(4): 819–844.
25.
CheungHCLoYYMChiuDK, et al. (2023) Development of smart academic library services with Internet of Things technology: a qualitative study in Hong Kong. Library Hi Tech. https://doi.org/10.1108/LHT-06-2023-0219.
26.
CoombsCStaceyPKawalekP, et al. (2021) What is it about humanity that we can’t give away to intelligent machines? A European perspective. International Journal of Information Management58: 102311.
27.
CoxAM (2021) Exploring the impact of artificial intelligence and robots on higher education through literature-based design fictions. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education18(1): 3.
28.
CoxAM (2022) The ethics of AI for information professionals: Eight scenarios. Journal of the Australian Library and Information Association71(3): 201–214.
29.
CoxAM (2023) How artificial intelligence might change academic library work: Applying the competencies literature and the theory of the professions. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology74(3): 367–380.
30.
CoxAM (2024) Artificial intelligence and the academic library. The Journal of Academic Librarianship50(6): 102965.
31.
CoxAMMazumdarS (2024) Defining artificial intelligence for librarians. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science56(2): 330–340.
32.
DezuanniMOsmanKBurtonAL, et al. (2024) IFLA Trend Report 2024: Facing the Future of Information with Confidence. Brisbane: Digital Media Research Centre.
33.
DollmatKSAbdullahNA (2022) Machine learning in emotional intelligence studies: A survey. Behaviour & Information Technology41(7): 1485–1502.
34.
DubeTVRammutloaMWMatatieleR (2024) Skills and competencies of academic librarians to use information technology tools in the digital era: A systematic literature review. Information Development. https://doi.org/10.1177/02666669241302054
35.
DyerHFosseyDMcKeeK (1993) The impact of automated library systems on job design and staffing structures. Program27(1): 1–16.
36.
EkstrandMStrandbergL (2023) Technological trends in Swedish medical libraries. Health Information & Libraries Journal40(3): 326–331.
37.
FanFLXiongJLiM, et al. (2021) On interpretability of artificial neural networks: A survey. IEEE Transactions on Radiation and Plasma Medical Sciences5(6): 741–760.
38.
FerraraE (2024) The butterfly effect in artificial intelligence systems: Implications for AI bias and fairness. Machine Learning with Applications15: 100525.
39.
FloridiLCowlsJBeltramettiM, et al. (2018) AI4People—An Ethical framework for a good AI society: Opportunities, risks, principles, and recommendations. Minds and Machines28(4): 689–707.
40.
GalazVCentenoMACallahanPW, et al. (2021) Artificial intelligence, systemic risks, and sustainability. Technology in Society67: 101741.
41.
GiorgiGAriza-MontesAMucciN, et al. (2022) The dark side and the light side of technology-related stress and stress related to workplace innovations: From artificial intelligence to business transformations. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health19(3): 1248.
42.
GoldfarbALindsayJR (2022) Prediction and judgment: Why artificial intelligence increases the importance of humans in war. International Security46(3): 7–50.
43.
GulSBanoS (2019) Smart libraries: An emerging and innovative technological habitat of 21st century. The Electronic Library37(5): 764–783.
44.
HamadFAl-FadelMFakhouriH (2023) The provision of smart service at academic libraries and associated challenges. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science55(4): 960–971.
45.
HarisantyDAnnaNEVPutriTE, et al. (2023) Is adopting artificial intelligence in libraries urgency or a buzzword? A systematic literature review. Journal of Information Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/01655515221141034
46.
HervieuxSWheatleyA (2021) Perceptions of artificial intelligence: A survey of academic librarians in Canada and the United States. The Journal of Academic Librarianship47(1): 102270.
47.
HowardHAHabashiMHReedJB (2020) The gender wage gap in research libraries. College & Research Libraries81(4): 662.
48.
HuangYCoxAMCoxJ (2023) Artificial intelligence in academic library strategy in the United Kingdom and the mainland of China. The Journal of Academic Librarianship49(6): 102772.
49.
HussainA (2023) Use of artificial intelligence in the library services: Prospects and challenges. Library Hi Tech News40(2): 15–17.
50.
HussainAAhmadP (2021) Adoption of smart technologies in university libraries of Pakistan: A qualitative review. Library Philosophy and Practice2021(1): 1–10.
51.
JenaRK (2015) Technostress in ICT enabled collaborative learning environment: An empirical study among Indian academician. Computers in Human Behavior51: 1116–1123.
52.
KePWangJLiuQW (2024) The key path of smart library construction in the perspective of generative AI. Journal of Modern Information44(01): 4–10.
KrishnanS (2017) Personality and espoused cultural differences in technostress creators. Computers in Human Behavior66: 154–167.
56.
KwonD (2024) Publishers are selling papers to train AIs—and making millions of dollars. Nature636(8043): 529–530.
57.
La TorreGEspositoASciarraI, et al. (2019) Definition, symptoms and risk of techno-stress: A systematic review. International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health92: 13–35.
58.
LeeGWShaoBVinzeA (2018) The role of ICT as a double-edged sword in fostering societal transformations. Journal of the Association for Information Systems19(3): 1.
59.
LenharoM (2024) ChatGPT turns two: How the AI chatbot has changed scientists’ lives. Nature636(8042): 281–282.
60.
LinYRuanMCaiK, et al. (2023) Identifying and managing risks of AI-driven operations: A case study of automatic speech recognition for improving air traffic safety. Chinese Journal of Aeronautics36(4): 366–386.
61.
LindénMSaloIJanssonA (2018) Organizational stressors and burnout in public librarians. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science50(2): 199–204.
62.
Liu-ThompkinsYOkazakiSLiH (2022) Artificial empathy in marketing interactions: Bridging the human-AI gap in affective and social customer experience. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science50(6): 1198–1218.
63.
LundBDWangT (2023) Chatting about ChatGPT: How may AI and GPT impact academia and libraries?Library Hi Tech News40(3): 26–29.
64.
MaityS (2019) Identifying opportunities for artificial intelligence in the evolution of training and development practices. Journal of Management Development38(8): 651–663.
65.
MirbabaieMBrünkerFMöllmann FrickNRJ, et al. (2022) The rise of artificial intelligence – understanding the AI identity threat at the workplace. Electronic Markets32(1): 73–99.
66.
MoralesMKnowlesECBourgC (2014) Diversity, social justice, and the future of libraries. portal: Libraries and the Academy14(3): 439–451.
67.
NguyenANgoHNHongY, et al. (2023) Ethical principles for artificial intelligence in education. Education and Information Technologies28(4): 4221–4241.
68.
NiteckiDA (1996) Changing the concept and measure of service quality in academic libraries. The Journal of Academic Librarianship22(3): 181–190.
69.
PandaSKaurN (2023) Exploring the viability of ChatGPT as an alternative to traditional chatbot systems in library and information centers. Library Hi Tech News40(3): 22–25.
70.
RiedlR (2012) On the biology of technostress: Literature review and research agenda. ACM SIGMIS Database: The DATABASE for Advances in Information Systems44(1): 18–55.
71.
R-MorenoMDCastañoBBarreroDF, et al. (2014) Efficient services management in libraries using AI and wireless techniques. Expert Systems with Applications41(17): 7904–7913.
72.
RoshanaeiM (2024) Towards best practices for mitigating artificial intelligence implicit bias in shaping diversity, inclusion and equity in higher education. Education and Information Technologies29(14): 18959–18984.
73.
SalanovaMLlorensSVenturaM (2014) Technostress: The dark side of technologies. In: KorunkaCHoonakkerP (eds) The Impact of ICT on Quality of Working Life. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, pp.87–103.
SamiLKPangannaiahNB (2006) “Technostress” A literature survey on the effect of information technology on library users. Library Review55(7): 429–439.
76.
Santoni de SioFMecacciG (2021) Four responsibility gaps with artificial intelligence: Why they matter and how to address them. Philosophy & Technology34(4): 1057–1084.
77.
SasidharanS (2022) Technostress in the workplace: A social network perspective. Information Technology & People35(4): 1219–1238.
78.
SelfRJAquilinaC (2013) Technostress in the 21st century; does it still exist and how does it affect knowledge management and other information systems initiatives. In: 7th International Conference on Knowledge Management in Organizations: Service and Cloud Computing, pp.117–127. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer.
79.
ShenY (2019) Create synergies and inspire collaborations around the development of intelligent infrastructure for human-centered communities. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology70(6): 596–606.
80.
ShiehJIWuHHHuangKK (2010) A DEMATEL method in identifying key success factors of hospital service quality. Knowledge-Based Systems23(3): 277–282.
81.
TaitEPiersonCM (2022) Artificial intelligence and robots in libraries: Opportunities in LIS curriculum for preparing the librarians of tomorrow. Journal of the Australian Library and Information Association71(3): 256–274.
82.
TarafdarMPullinsEBRagu-NathanTS (2015) Technostress: Negative effect on performance and possible mitigations. Information Systems Journal25(2): 103–132.
83.
TarafdarMTuQRagu-NathanBS, et al. (2007) The impact of technostress on role stress and productivity. Journal of Management Information Systems24(1): 301–328.
84.
TarafdarMTuQRagu-NathanTS (2010) Impact of technostress on end-user satisfaction and performance. Journal of Management Information Systems27(3): 303–334.
85.
Teddy-AngSTohA (2020) AI Singapore: Empowering a smart nation. Communications of the ACM63(4): 60–63.
86.
TianZCuiLLiangJ, et al. (2022) A comprehensive survey on poisoning attacks and countermeasures in machine learning. ACM Computing Surveys55(8): 1–35.
87.
TiwariV (2021) Countering effects of technostress on productivity: Moderating role of proactive personality. Benchmarking: An International Journal28(2): 636–651.
TzengGHChiangCHLiCW (2007) Evaluating intertwined effects in e-learning programs: A novel hybrid MCDM model based on factor analysis and DEMATEL. Expert Systems with Applications32(4): 1028–1044.
90.
UpadhyayaPVrindaA (2021) Impact of technostress on academic productivity of university students. Education and Information Technologies26: 1647–1664.
91.
Van EckNJWaltmanL (2017) Citation-based clustering of publications using CitNetExplorer and VOSviewer. Scientometrics111: 1053–1070.
92.
WangMH (2020) The development dilemma and countermeasure of intelligent library. Journal of Academic Library and Information Science38(2): 35–39.
93.
WeilMMRosenLD (1997) Technostress: Coping with Technology@ Work@ Home@ Play, Vol. 13. New York: J. Wiley, p.240.
94.
WheatleyAHervieuxS (2024) Comparing generative artificial intelligence tools to voice assistants using reference interactions. The Journal of Academic Librarianship50(5): 102942.
95.
WuDLiuJ (2022) Analysis and competency framework construction. Journal of Library Science in China48(6): 43–56.
96.
WuDHuXKYangXM (2024) Research on smart feature recognition of information services in smart libraries in China. Library Development 326(2): 9–20.
97.
WuDLiuJ (2022) Algorithmic Literacy in the Era of Artificial Intelligence: Connotation.
98.
WuGHuangX (2021) Study on the design of fair use rules for text and data mining in the age of artificial intelligence. Library and Information Service65(22): 3–13.
99.
WuWWLeeYT (2007) Developing global managers’ competencies using the fuzzy DEMATEL method. Expert Systems with Applications32(2): 499–507.
100.
XuF (2024) Application scenarios and legal issues of generative artificial intelligence in smart libraries. Information and Documentation Services45(2): 24–29.
101.
YamsonG (2023) Immediacy as a better service: Analysis of limitations of the use of ChatGPT in library services. Information Development. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/02666669231206762
102.
YanYC (2022) Research on the infringement risk and countermeasures in the text data mining of smart libraries in China. Journal of the National Library of China31(1): 106–113.
103.
YangJW (2021) Research on key influencing factors of ethical risks in intelligent governance: Based on DEMATEL method. Science and Society11(4): 80–97.
104.
YoonJAndrewsJEWardHL (2022) Perceptions on adopting artificial intelligence and related technologies in libraries: Public and academic librarians in North America. Library Hi Tech40(6): 1893–1915.
105.
YuSCarrollF (2021) Implications of AI in national security: Understanding the security issues and ethical challenges. In: MontasariRJahankhaniH (eds) Artificial Intelligence in Cyber Security: Impact and Implications: Security Challenges, Technical and Ethical Issues, Forensic Investigative Challenges. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing, pp.157–175. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-88040-8_6
106.
YucesanMGulMCelikE (2021) A holistic FMEA approach by fuzzy-based Bayesian network and best–worst method. Complex & Intelligent Systems7: 1547–1564.
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.
