Context & Lineage
Positioning, not derivation
Agency Attrition Theory (AAT) extends existing work on automation, optimization, and system failure. It does not replace prior frameworks; it shifts analytical emphasis.
Adjacent Traditions
Several traditions clarify how automation reshapes human roles:
- Automation Bias shows how operators defer to automated outputs even when intervention remains possible.
- Technical Debt explains how locally rational optimization can accumulate deferred structural liabilities.
- Normal Accident Theory argues that tightly coupled, complex systems generate failure despite competence.
What AAT Adds
AAT builds on these insights by identifying a distinct dynamic: Optimization can reduce the outcome sensitivity of human intervention before visible failure occurs.
Where prior models focus on error, fragility, or breakdown, AAT focuses on diminishing corrective capacity under stable performance.
Central Distinction
Its central distinction is the divergence between:
- Procedural inclusion of humans, and
- Causal influence of human intervention.
Human presence can persist while structural relevance declines.
Development Note
The AAT and AAT-R framework was developed independently of a systematic literature review. Related work is cited to clarify conceptual alignment and divergence rather than derivation. Further engagement with adjacent literature is planned in subsequent iterations.
This note is about provenance, not legitimacy.