Certified into the record
The exact text we saved
This is the version exactly as it was saved, character for character. The SHA-256 hash below is a 64-character code worked out from that text. Run the same text through SHA-256 and you get the same code; change a single letter and the code comes out completely different. Each version also stores the previous version’s hash, which chains them together so no version can be swapped out quietly.
TRUVACE RECORD VERSION record: TRV-2026-2671 version: 1 kind: certified reason: Certified into the record timestamp: 2026-11-12T16:58:38.817818Z status: published lens: trace sector: health headline: Work with or work alone? How AI involvement in healthcare consultations shapes consumer responses to service failure dek: As artificial intelligence (AI) becomes increasingly integrated into healthcare services, an important question emerges: should AI be deployed to work with humans physicians' or autonomously to provide healthcare services? This research examines how varying levels of AI involvement influence consumer reactions following healthcare service failures. Across two experiments, results show that when AI assists physicians, consumers report greater intention to reuse the service compared to a human-only medical consult… gain_title: In two experiments on healthcare service failures, consumers reported greater intention to reuse a consultation in which AI assisted the physician than one with a human physician alone. problem_title: In the same two experiments on healthcare service failures, consumers' intention to reuse the service decreased when AI worked autonomously without the physician's oversight. trace_subject: AI involvement level in healthcare consultations and reuse intention after service failure gain_reading: In two experiments on healthcare service failures, consumers reported greater intention to reuse a consultation in which AI assisted the physician than one with a human physician alone. gain_evidence: when AI assists physicians, consumers report greater intention to reuse the service compared to a human-only medical consultation problem_reading: In the same two experiments on healthcare service failures, consumers' intention to reuse the service decreased when AI worked autonomously without the physician's oversight. problem_evidence: when AI works autonomously without the physician's oversight, reuse intention decreases quick_read: Two experiments examined how much AI should be involved in healthcare consultations when the service goes wrong. After a service failure, consumers said they were more likely to use the service again if AI assisted a physician than if the consultation was human-only. Reuse intention fell when AI worked autonomously without physician oversight. Mediation analyses found that trust, rather than attribution of responsibility, drove these differences. The benefit of AI assistance appeared only among consumers low in AI-related anxiety. The authors frame the results as guidance for healthcare providers deciding how to integrate AI while keeping consumer trust and continued use. limitation: The benefit of AI assistance emerged only among consumers low in AI-related anxiety, and the results measure reuse intention in experiments rather than actual patient behaviour. tag: Dual reading key_points: Two experiments tested varying levels of AI involvement in healthcare consultations after a service failure. | AI assisting a physician raised reuse intention compared with a human-only consultation. | Autonomous AI without physician oversight lowered reuse intention. | Trust, not responsibility attribution, mediated the effects. | The benefit of AI assistance appeared only among consumers low in AI-related anxiety. rundown: The research compared consumer reactions to healthcare service failures under different arrangements: a human-only physician, a physician assisted by AI, and AI working autonomously. The outcome measured was intention to reuse the service. Mediation analyses tested two explanations, trust and responsibility attribution, and found trust drove the effects. The findings also showed that AI-related anxiety moderated the results, with assistance helping only low-anxiety consumers. sources: - peer_reviewed | Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services | https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2026.105004 | 2026-07-31 prev: 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
- SHA-256 hash
- 7d03fde7b2f8a680c5fda6d99a727beab2582fffa51731eaad4e2425c8a3cc87
- Previous version’s hash
- 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
How to check it yourself, without trusting this page
Download any version from /api/record/TRV-2026-2671 and hash its canonical field yourself, for example with shasum -a 256. You should get its content_hash. Each version’s text also ends with prev:and the hash of the version before it (version 1 points to 64 zeros). If anyone had changed a single character of any version after it was saved, those hashes wouldn’t line up.
ace