AI and the Red Queen Effect (Part 2): The Queen Comes to Life

Key Points (For Readers on the Go)

  • New research shows AI often intensifies work rather than reducing it

  • A real-world study found employees worked faster, took on more tasks, and extended their workday

  • Efficiency gains are quickly absorbed into rising expectations

  • This reflects the Red Queen effect—running faster just to maintain baseline performance

  • Practitioners can take concrete steps to protect their time, role, and workload boundaries

Introduction: From Theory to Evidence

This post builds directly on my earlier work on the Red Queen effect, including my article “The Red Queen Effect of AI in a Rapidly Evolving Technological Landscape” (March/April 2025, NASP Communiqué). The full article can be accessed through NASP’s website.

If you haven’t read the original blog post, you can find it here:
https://lockwoodconsulting.net/blog/the-red-queen-effect-why-ai-might-not-save-us-timeyet

In that piece, I argued that AI might not save us time because increased efficiency often leads to increased expectations.

We are now starting to see empirical evidence supporting that claim.

What the Research Actually Found

A recent Harvard Business Review article—AI Doesn’t Reduce Work—It Intensifies It—reports findings from an eight-month field study conducted in a U.S.-based technology company with approximately 200 employees.

The researchers used:

  • In-person observation multiple days per week

  • Internal communication analysis

  • Over 40 in-depth interviews across roles (engineering, product, research, design, operations)

Their conclusion is straightforward:

AI did not reduce work. It intensified it.

Employees:

  • Worked at a faster pace

  • Took on a broader range of tasks

  • Extended work into more hours of the day

And importantly, this occurred without a formal mandate to use AI.

The Red Queen Comes to Life

This is where the connection becomes clear.

In the original blog and NASP article, the concern was that:

  • AI increases efficiency

  • Efficiency raises expectations

  • Expectations absorb the gains

That is exactly what this study demonstrates in practice.

What looks like progress at the individual level becomes pressure at the system level.

Efficiency Expands Work—It Doesn’t Eliminate It

One of the most important findings is how workers used the time AI “freed up.”

They didn’t:

  • Work less

  • Reduce workload

  • Reclaim time

Instead, they:

  • Took on new responsibilities

  • Filled gaps across roles

  • Attempted tasks they previously would not have attempted

AI increased capacity, and that capacity was immediately consumed.

Three Mechanisms of Intensification

The study identified three consistent patterns:

1. Task Expansion

Workers moved beyond their traditional roles:

  • Non-specialists taking on technical work

  • Professionals expanding into adjacent responsibilities

  • Tasks that once required collaboration becoming individual work

2. Blurred Boundaries

Work extended into:

  • Breaks

  • Evenings

  • Transitional moments

Because interacting with AI feels quick and informal, work becomes easier to continue—but harder to stop.

3. Increased Multitasking

Workers managed:

  • Multiple AI threads

  • Parallel tasks

  • Ongoing monitoring of outputs

This creates a constant sense of juggling—even when productivity increases.

How the Red Queen Cycle Emerges

This pattern creates a self-reinforcing loop:

  1. AI speeds up tasks

  2. Faster work becomes visible

  3. Expectations rise

  4. Workers take on more

  5. AI becomes necessary to keep up

Over time:

  • Productivity increases

  • But workload does not decrease

That is the Red Queen effect in action.

From Individual Choice to System-Level Pressure

This shift does not require policy changes.

It begins with individual behavior:

  • “I’ll use AI to do a bit more”

But quickly becomes collective:

  • “Everyone is doing more”

And eventually becomes structural:

  • “This is now expected”

This is how norms shift—quietly and quickly.

What This Means for School Psychology and Education

These dynamics are already emerging in applied settings.

We are seeing:

  • Faster report writing leading to higher expectations for turnaround

  • AI-assisted data analysis expanding what is expected in evaluations

  • Increased efficiency translating into expanded roles or caseloads

  • Faster communication creating expectations of constant responsiveness

The risk is not just doing more work.

It is that the definition of adequate work shifts upward, often without explicit discussion.

How Practitioners Can Avoid the Red Queen Trap

The research suggests that intensification happens by default—not by design.

That means practitioners need to be intentional about how AI is used.

1. Define What “Good Enough” Looks Like

AI makes it easy to keep improving outputs.

Set limits:

  • What is required vs. optional

  • How many revisions are appropriate

More is not always better.

2. Protect Time Savings

When AI saves time, decide where that time goes.

Use it for:

  • Consultation

  • Direct services

  • Prevention work

Or protect it as buffer time.

If you don’t decide, the system will.

3. Avoid Expanding Your Role by Default

AI makes new tasks possible.

Pause and ask:

  • Is this actually my responsibility?

  • Am I replacing a role that should still exist?

Capability does not equal obligation.

4. Set Boundaries Around “Micro-Work”

Small actions add up:

  • Quick prompts

  • Minor edits

  • Constant checking

Create limits:

  • No AI use during breaks

  • Defined stopping points

Sustainable work requires real recovery time.

5. Limit Multitasking

AI encourages parallel work.

Instead:

  • Work in sequence

  • Limit active tasks

  • Build in pauses

Attention—not just time—is the critical resource.

6. Make Expectations Explicit

AI changes what others assume is possible.

Clarify:

  • Turnaround times

  • Workload expectations

  • Quality standards

If expectations are not discussed, they will still change.

7. Maintain Human Connection

AI can make work more isolated.

Protect:

  • Consultation

  • Collaboration

  • Professional dialogue

These are not inefficiencies—they are safeguards.

Ethical Considerations

This is not just about productivity—it is about professional integrity.

Key concerns include:

  • Workload increases without transparency

  • Equity issues in access and training

  • Pressure to prioritize speed over quality

  • Long-term sustainability and burnout

AI should support professional judgment—not quietly reshape it.

Final Takeaways

  • AI does not automatically reduce workload—it often expands it

  • The Red Queen effect is now supported by real-world evidence

  • Efficiency gains are quickly converted into new expectations

  • Work is becoming more continuous and cognitively demanding

  • Practitioners must actively define boundaries to ensure sustainable use

Original Blog: https://lockwoodconsulting.net/blog/the-red-queen-effect-why-ai-might-not-save-us-timeyet

AI Use Disclosure - Portions of this post were drafted with the assistance of an AI writing tool and revised by the author for accuracy, clarity, and professional judgment.

Next
Next

Artificial Intelligence in Psychology, Part 2: What These Ideas Could Mean for Practice