This article explores bias and agency in using generative artificial intelligence, indicating the need for critical engagement in research development.
The emergence of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) has opened up new possibilities for qualitative research. However, in methodological development, GenAI is often treated as a passive tool rather than as an active actant. This article contributes to the emerging field of GenAI in qualitative research by introducing a structured actor-network theory-driven mapping-as-method protocol designed to systematically identify the sociotechnical entanglements of AI tools before their integration into research and to evaluate their role in the research afterwards. We argue that researchers need to engage critically with the contingencies, biases, and entanglements that define contemporary AI systems.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Vigren et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: