trailUS early-career workers aged 22-25 in the most AI-exposed occupations saw a 16% relative employment decline since generative AI's widespread adoption
Generative AI is beginning to have a significant, disproportionate negative impact on entry-level workers in the US labor market
Generative AI adoption has so far had minimal effects on aggregate employment and wages
Generative AI chatbot adoption has had no detectable effect on worker earnings or hours within two years
+2
ADP measurement and robustness· for
The observed AI-related employment decline is robust to excluding technology firms and remote-work-amenable occupations
atomic
Employment for less AI-exposed workers and more experienced workers in AI-exposed occupations has stayed stable or grown
atomic
Pre-existing hiring slowdown· against
Hiring for AI-exposed occupations began declining before ChatGPT's release in November 2022
Job postings for the most AI-exposed occupations peaked in early 2022 and declined through that year
Unemployment risk in AI-exposed occupations began rising in early 2022, months before ChatGPT's release
assumed
ADP payroll data are broadly representative of overall US labor-market trends
claim · empirical · verifiableA factual claim that could be checked directly against observation or primary records.constitution →claim page ↗︎
US early-career workers aged 22-25 in the most AI-exposed occupations saw a 16% relative employment decline since generative AI's widespread adoption
↑SupportedEvidence favors the claim, but the chain is incomplete or the sources are secondary.constitution →credence 0.72Credence, from 0 to 1: the Steward's probability that the claim, as stated, is true. Stated only where a single number is an honest summary; normative and evaluative claims usually carry none.constitution →
5depended on by
this rests on ↓
claimA box is a claim: a single proposition the graph assesses, with its own page and map. Click any claim to centre the map on it.constitution →argumentA pill is an argument: one line of reasoning stating how the claims beneath it combine to bear on the claim above it, for or against. Arguments are not destinations; click their claims to explore.constitution →✓verifiedThe claim traces to reliable primary sources through a clear chain of evidence.constitution →↑supportedEvidence favors the claim, but the chain is incomplete or the sources are secondary.constitution →⇄contestedCredible evidence or argument exists on multiple sides.constitution →○unsupportedNo credible evidence found, though the claim is not contradicted.constitution →✕contradictedAvailable evidence weighs against the claim.constitution →?unknownInsufficient information to assess.constitution →◌unassessedNo current assessment. Attention goes where its expected value is highest and someone funds it; nothing has funded an assessment of this claim yet, and anyone can.constitution →verified factopen questionvalue premisetheoremprizeA double ring marks a claim with a live prize: an amount in owls offered for a machine-checked proof or disproof of its published formal statement. The amount is in the preview and on the claim page; a prize changes nothing about how the claim is assessed or how important it is judged to be.prize rules →⊢machine-checked⊢ marks a claim whose published formal statement has a machine-checked proof or disproof. The checker confirms the proof; the verdict beside it is still the steward's judgment of the claim as worded.prize rules →supportsthis provides evidence for the parentsteward instructions →contradictsthis argues against the parentsteward instructions →assumesbackground the parent's framing takes as givensteward instructions →requiresa load-bearing premise: the parent is false without itsteward instructions →Fig. Detail falls off with distance; every claim is an address.