Designed anxiety: AI's impact on workplace autonomy and mental health

The increasing integration of Artificial Intelligence into the workplace, while promising efficiency, carries a significant risk of undermining employee autonomy and exacerbating mental health issues like anxiety and depression. This concern is particularly relevant for the working population, where a sense of control over one's tasks is a fundamental aspect of well-being.

International organizations like the ILO and WHO have highlighted surveillance and the erosion of autonomy as emerging psychosocial risks in the workplace. Research indicates that while moderate automation can improve job satisfaction and reduce burnout, excessive automation, especially in non-repetitive tasks, can paradoxically increase mental workload. When humans are removed from the daily context of tasks, they are often left to handle only the most difficult and exceptional situations, leading to a loss of situational awareness and control. This shift transforms automation from a workload reducer into a source of different, often more stressful, burdens.

Interestingly, some studies suggest that when machines handle only certain decision-making steps, the cognitive load can decrease, and situational awareness can improve. This implies that the *degree* and *type* of automation are more critical than the mere presence of AI. Ensuring that humans retain meaningful control over their work is paramount, not just for happiness but also for effective task management. Simply stating that 'humans make the final decision' is insufficient if the scope and nature of that final decision-making power are unclear or severely limited.

Achieving genuinely human-centric automation requires sophisticated algorithmic design and a deep understanding of industry-specific needs. Crucially, workers must be involved in the process of deciding how and to what extent automation should be implemented. This collaborative approach is essential for designing systems that support, rather than undermine, human capabilities and well-being. The article argues that some anxieties are systemic, stemming from poorly designed work processes, and that blaming individuals for failing to keep pace with machine-driven speeds is unjust. It calls for urgent discussions on how to preserve human judgment and control in an increasingly automated world.