Cat Hicks @grimalkina@mastodon.social
Public

Miller et al. document e.g., that *unrealistic productivity expectations* completely change how someone interprets the meaning of the tool, workplace, and role expectation interaction. This is exactly what I predicted too. We keep converging on this.

arxiv.org/abs/2507.21280

arXiv logo

"Maybe We Need Some More Examples:" Individual and Team Drivers of Developer GenAI Tool Use

Despite the widespread availability of generative AI tools in software engineering, developer adoption remains uneven. This unevenness is problematic because it hampers productivity efforts, frustrates management's expectations, and creates uncertainty around the future roles of developers. Through paired interviews with 54 developers across 27 teams -- one frequent and one infrequent user per team -- we demonstrate that differences in usage result primarily from how developers perceive the tool (as a collaborator vs. feature), their engagement approach (experimental vs. conservative), and how they respond when encountering challenges (with adaptive persistence vs. quick abandonment). Our findings imply that widespread organizational expectations for rapid productivity gains without sufficient investment in learning support creates a "Productivity Pressure Paradox," undermining the very productivity benefits that motivate adoption.

arxiv.org · arXiv.org

Cat Hicks @grimalkina@mastodon.social
Public

I situate my work in the POV of what we know about how people reason about ability, competence, belonging and "innate genius," but we keep all landing at the same place, because it's an overlooked key. When we make software culture inhospitable to how human beings learn, they can't learn.

0
0
0

If you have a fediverse account, you can quote this note from your own instance. Search https://mastodon.social/users/grimalkina/statuses/115674019593540067 on your instance and quote it. (Note that quoting is not supported in Mastodon.)