If AI is coming for your job, you might start slacking off, or swiping a co-worker's lunch. That's the takeaway from a new WSU study, and it's exactly the kind of research that makes you proud to be a Coug, even when the news isn't flattering. Tahira Probst and her team at WSU Vancouver found that workers who fear their whole occupation could vanish under AI are more likely to justify bad behavior and actually act on it. That means more people showing up late, surfing the web on the clock, and cutting corners. It's a real problem, and it hits hardest in places like finance and insurance, industries where AI exposure is highest. Meanwhile, our football team just put together a postgame story that reminded us what happens when people refuse to check out: Pinnick, Pulalasi, Leaupepetele: Three Cougs, One Postgame Story. The contrast isn't subtle.
Here's what this means for a Coug sitting in an office in Seattle or a cubicle in Spokane: your employer's rollout of AI matters more than the tech itself. Probst's study makes clear that the stress isn't just about losing a job, it's about losing an entire line of work. A bartender can find another bar. A medical transcriptionist? That occupation is getting automated out of existence. When people feel that kind of existential threat, they don't work harder to prove their worth. They disengage. They reframe stealing time or resources as fair payback. That's moral disengagement, and it's a poison for any team. Kirby Moore breaks down what he saw from the Cougs after Utah State, and you can bet he's not talking about players who rationalized skipping a rep. The Cougs who showed up in Texas and gave the home team a scare? WSU Volleyball showed up in Texas and gave the home team a scare. They didn't check out. They pushed.
The practical takeaway here is blunt: if you manage people, stop treating AI like an inevitable upgrade and start treating it like a morale bomb. Probst's research suggests that how you talk about AI matters just as much as whether you use it. Frame it as a tool to make someone's job better, not a replacement for their career, and you might keep them from surfing the web all afternoon. Frame it as efficiency gains and headcount reductions, and you'll get the behavior this study documented. WSU didn't just identify the problem, they gave employers a roadmap. The question is whether anyone will read it before the lunch thief strikes again.