When does working with AI empower or entrap university faculty? A dualistic passion perspective on job crafting.

INTRODUCTION: Generative AI is now widely used in teaching, research, and academic writing, leading university faculty to engage in more sustained human-AI collaboration. However, existing research has largely focused on tool-related outcomes, offering limited insight into the psychological experiences and academic work practices associated with such collaboration. METHODS: We conducted two survey-based studies using independent samples of Chinese university faculty. Study 1 (n = 252) examined whether human-AI collaboration engagement was associated with harmonious and obsessive passion, and whether independent self-construal moderated these associations. Study 2 (n = 363) replicated these relationships and further tested whether the two forms of passion were related to job crafting. Data were analyzed using partial least squares structural equation modeling. RESULTS: Across both studies, human-AI collaboration engagement was positively associated with both harmonious and obsessive passion. Independent self-construal strengthened the association between collaboration engagement and harmonious passion, but not the association with obsessive passion. Study 2 further showed that harmonious passion was positively related to job crafting, whereas obsessive passion was negatively related to job crafting. DISCUSSION: Human-AI collaboration may involve different psychological experiences among university faculty, depending on how such collaboration is internalized. Specifically, harmonious passion and greater job crafting reflect an empowerment-related pattern, whereas obsessive passion and reduced job crafting reflect a more constraining pattern of AI collaboration. These results point to the importance of motivational quality in explaining variation in academic work behavior beyond a tool-centered perspective.