Is Everyone an Artist? A Study on User Experience of AI-Based Painting System
Source abstract
Abstract
Artificial Intelligence (AI) applications in different fields are developing rapidly, among which AI painting technology, as an emerging technology, has received wide attention from users for its creativity and efficiency. This study aimed to investigate the factors that influence user acceptance of the use of AIBPS by proposing an extended model that combines the Extended Technology Acceptance Model (ETAM) with an AI-based Painting System (AIBPS). A questionnaire was administered to 528 Chinese participants, and validated factor analysis data and Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) were used to test our hypotheses. The findings showed that Hedonic Motivation (HM) and Perceived Trust (PE) had a positive effect (+) on users’ Perceived Usefulness (PU) and Perceived Ease of Use (PEOU), while Previous Experience (PE) and Technical Features (TF) had no effect (−) on users’ Perceived Usefulness (PU). This study provides an important contribution to the literature on AIBPS and the evaluation of systems of the same type, which helps to promote the sustainable development of AI in different domains and provides a possible space for the further extension of TAM, thus helping to improve the user experience of AIBPS. The results of this study provide insights for system developers and enterprises to better motivate users to use AIBPS.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Technology Adoption and User Behaviour · Digital Marketing and Social Media · Environmental Sustainability in Business
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Smart Experience Design, Kookmin University, Seoul 02707, Republic of Korea
College of Art and Design, Guangdong University of Technology, Guangzhou 510006, China
College of Fine Arts, Guangxi Normal University, Guilin 541006, China
Funding
Chinese Ministry of Education Collaborative Education Project between Universities and Firms · Guangdong University of Technology Online Course Construction Project
References (100+)
Show source-provided references
1. (2023, March 31). IDC Market Glance: Conversational Artificial Intelligence Tools and Technologies, 1Q23. Available online: https://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=US50013123.
2. Russell, S., and Norvig, P. (2023, May 25). Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach, 4th US Ed. Available online: https://aima.cs.berkeley.edu/.
3. Study on Artificial Intelligence: The State of the Art and Future Prospects
4. A Literature Review on Artificial Intelligence
5. Creativity and Artificial Intelligence10.1016/S0004-3702(98)00055-1 ↗
6. Cao, Y., Li, S., Liu, Y., Yan, Z., Dai, Y., Yu, P.S., and Sun, L. (2023). A Comprehensive Survey of AI-Generated Content (AIGC): A History of Generative AI from GAN to ChatGPT 2023. arXiv.
7. Li, L. (2022, January 19–21). The Impact of Artificial Intelligence Painting on Contemporary Art from Disco Diffusion’s Painting Creation Experiment. Proceedings of the 2022 International Conference on Frontiers of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning (FAIML), Hangzhou, China.10.1109/FAIML57028.2022.00020 ↗
8. ChatGPT Is Fun, but Not an Author10.1126/science.adg7879 ↗
9. Putting the Art in Artificial: Aesthetic Responses to Computer-Generated Art10.1037/aca0000136 ↗
10. Understanding and Creating Art with AI: Review and Outlook10.1145/3475799 ↗
11. Artificial Intelligence, Artists, and Art: Attitudes Toward Artwork Produced by Humans vs. Artificial Intelligence
12. Deng, Y. (2021, January 23–25). Application of Artificial Intelligence in Art Design. Proceedings of the 2021 International Conference on Computer Technology and Media Convergence Design (CTMCD), Sanya, China.10.1109/CTMCD53128.2021.00049 ↗
13. Artistic Reflection on Artificial Intelligence Digital Painting10.1088/1742-6596/1648/3/032125 ↗
14. Artificial Intelligence versus Maya Angelou: Experimental Evidence that People Cannot Differentiate AI-Generated from Human-Written Poetry10.1016/j.chb.2020.106553 ↗
15. AI and Music: From Composition to Expressive Performance
16. AI Art Creation Case Study for AI Film&Video Content
17. Lyu, Y., Wang, X., Lin, R., and Wu, J. (2022). Communication in Human–AI Co-Creation: Perceptual Analysis of Paintings Generated by Text-to-Image System. Appl. Sci., 12.10.3390/app122211312 ↗
18. Dans, E. (2023, May 25). It’s AI: But Is it Art?. Available online: https://medium.com/enrique-dans/its-ai-but-is-it-art-fb7861e799af.
19. Audry, S., and Ippolito, J. (2019). Can Artificial Intelligence Make Art without Artists? Ask the Viewer. Arts, 8.10.3390/arts8010035 ↗
20. Little-Tetteh, K., and Shchyhelska, H. Artificial Intelligence Painting: Is It Art, Really?. Proceedings of the Collection of abstracts of the II International Scientific Conference of Young Scientists and Students "Philosophical Dimensions of Technology”, Available online: https://elartu.tntu.edu.ua/bitstream/lib/30239/2/FVT_2019_Little-Tetteh_K-Artificial_intelligence_73-75.pdf.
21. The Role of AI Attribution Knowledge in the Evaluation of Artwork10.1177/0276237421994697 ↗
22. Hertzmann, A. (2018). Can Computers Create Art?. Arts, 7.10.3390/arts7020018 ↗
23. Zhang, S., and Pan, Y. (2023). Mind over Matter: Examining the Role of Cognitive Dissonance and Self-Efficacy in Discontinuous Usage Intentions on Pan-Entertainment Mobile Live Broadcast Platforms. Behav. Sci., 13.10.3390/bs13030254 ↗
24. What Factors Contribute to the Acceptance of Artificial Intelligence? A Systematic Review10.1016/j.tele.2022.101925 ↗
25. Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology10.2307/249008 ↗
26. Yan, H., Zhang, H., Su, S., Lam, J.F.I., and Wei, X. (2022). Exploring the Online Gamified Learning Intentions of College Students: A Technology-Learning Behavior Acceptance Model. Appl. Sci., 12.10.3390/app122412966 ↗
27. Determinants of Technology Acceptance: Two Model-Based Meta-Analytic Reviews
28. Na, S., Heo, S., Han, S., Shin, Y., and Roh, Y. (2022). Acceptance Model of Artificial Intelligence (AI)-Based Technologies in Construction Firms: Applying the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) in Combination with the Technology–Organisation–Environment (TOE) Framework. Buildings, 12.10.3390/buildings12020090 ↗
29. Castiblanco Jimenez, I.A., Cepeda García, L.C., Marcolin, F., Violante, M.G., and Vezzetti, E. (2021). Validation of a TAM Extension in Agriculture: Exploring the Determinants of Acceptance of an e-Learning Platform. Appl. Sci., 11.10.3390/app11104672 ↗
30. Understanding AI Adoption in Manufacturing and Production Firms Using an Integrated TAM-TOE Model10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120880 ↗
31. Why People Adopt Smart Transportation Services: An Integrated Model of TAM, Trust and Perceived Risk10.1080/03081060.2021.1943132 ↗
32. Wang, G., and Shin, C. (2022). Influencing Factors of Usage Intention of Metaverse Education Application Platform: Empirical Evidence Based on PPM and TAM Models. Sustainability, 14.10.3390/su142417037 ↗
33. Extended TAM Model to Explore the Factors that Affect Intention to Use AI Robotic Architects for Architectural Design10.1080/09537325.2021.1900808 ↗
34. Zhang, C., Lei, K., Jia, J., Ma, Y., and Hu, Z. (2018, January 15). AI Painting: An Aesthetic Painting Generation System. Proceedings of the 26th ACM international conference on Multimedia, Seoul, Republic of Korea.10.1145/3240508.3241386 ↗
35. Reed, S., Akata, Z., Yan, X., Logeswaran, L., Schiele, B., and Lee, H. (2016, January 11). Generative Adversarial Text to Image Synthesis. Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR.
36. (2023, February 12). Christie’s Sells AI-Created Artwork Painted by an Algorithm for $432,000. Available online: https://www.dezeen.com/2018/10/29/christies-ai-artwork-obvious-portrait-edmond-de-belamy-design/.
37. Wu, Y., Yu, N., Li, Z., Backes, M., and Zhang, Y. (2022). Membership Inference Attacks Against Text-to-Image Generation Models. arXiv.
38. Mazzone, M., and Elgammal, A. (2019). Art, Creativity, and the Potential of Artificial Intelligence. Arts, 8.10.3390/arts8010026 ↗
39. Sun, Y., Lyu, Y., Lin, P.-H., and Lin, R. (2022). Comparison of Cognitive Differences of Artworks between Artist and Artistic Style Transfer. Appl. Sci., 12.10.3390/app12115525 ↗
40. Zhang, B., and Romainoor, N.H. (2023). Research on Artificial Intelligence in New Year Prints: The Application of the Generated Pop Art Style Images on Cultural and Creative Products. Appl. Sci., 13.10.3390/app13021082 ↗
41. Sun, Y., Yang, C.-H., Lyu, Y., and Lin, R. (2022). From Pigments to Pixels: A Comparison of Human and AI Painting. Appl. Sci., 12.10.3390/app12083724 ↗
42. User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982 ↗
43. An Acceptance Model for Smart Watches: Implications for the Adoption of Future Wearable Technology10.1108/IntR-05-2014-0126 ↗
44. A Meta-Analysis of the Technology Acceptance Model10.1016/j.im.2006.05.003 ↗
45. Understanding University Students’ Behavioral Intention to Use Edmodo through the Lens of an Extended Technology Acceptance Model10.1111/bjet.13046 ↗
46. Determinants of User Acceptance of Digital Libraries: An Empirical Examination of Individual Differences and System Characteristics10.1080/07421222.2002.11045692 ↗
47. Gerontechnology Acceptance by Elderly Hong Kong Chinese: A Senior Technology Acceptance Model (STAM)10.1080/00140139.2014.895855 ↗
48. Factors Influencing Adoption of Mobile Banking by Jordanian Bank Customers: Extending UTAUT2 with Trus10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2017.01.002 ↗
49. Almajali, D., Al-Okaily, M., Al-Daoud, K., Weshah, S., and Shaikh, A. (2022). Go Cashless! Mobile Payment Apps Acceptance in Developing Countries: The Jordanian Context Perspective. Sustainability, 14.10.3390/su142013524 ↗
50. Psychosocial Factors Affecting Artificial Intelligence Adoption in Health Care in China: Cross-Sectional Study10.2196/14316 ↗
51. Consumers Acceptance of Artificially Intelligent (AI) Device Use in Service Delivery10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.03.008 ↗
52. Li, K. (2023). Determinants of College Students’ Actual Use of AI-Based Systems: An Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model. Sustainability, 15.10.3390/su15065221 ↗
53. Inexperience and Experience with Online Stores: The Importance of Tam and Trust10.1109/TEM.2003.817277 ↗
54. TAM or Just Plain Habit: A Look at Experienced Online Shoppers10.4018/joeuc.2003070101 ↗
55. The Psychological Origins of Perceived Usefulness and Ease-of-Use10.1016/S0378-7206(98)00096-2 ↗
56. Habit as Both a Direct Cause of Intention to Use a Condom and as a Moderator of the Attitude-Intention and Subjective Norm-Intention Relations10.1080/08870440008402000 ↗
57. Examining Teachers’ Behavioral Intention to Use E-Learning in Teaching of Mathematics: An Extended TAM Model10.30935/cedtech/9709 ↗
58. Coppers Context, and Conjoints: A Reassessment of Tam10.1057/jit.2008.36 ↗
59. Ismatullaev, U.V.U., and Kim, S.-H. (2022). Review of the Factors Affecting Acceptance of AI-Infused Systems. Hum Factors, 001872082110647. Available online: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00187208211064707.10.1177/00187208211064707 ↗
60. Improving MOOC Learning Performance in China: An Analysis of Factors from the TAM and TPB10.1002/cae.22310 ↗
61. Wearable Device Adoption Model with TAM and TTF10.1504/IJMC.2016.078726 ↗
62. Applying a Multi-Dimensional Hedonic Concept of Intrinsic Motivation on Social Tagging Tools: A Theoretical Model and Empirical Validation10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2018.11.005 ↗
63. Theorizing Artificial Intelligence Acceptance and Digital Entrepreneurship Model10.1108/IJEBR-01-2021-0052 ↗
64. The Continuation and Recommendation Intention of Artificial Intelligence-Based Voice Assistant Systems (AIVAS): The Influence of Personal Traits10.1108/INTR-06-2020-0327 ↗
65. Psychological Determinants of Users’ Adoption and Word-of-Mouth Recommendations of Smart Voice Assistants10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102413 ↗
66. Dinh, C.-M., and Park, S. (2023). How to Increase Consumer Intention to Use Chatbots? An Empirical Analysis of Hedonic and Utilitarian Motivations on Social Presence and the Moderating Effects of Fear across Generations. Electron. Commer. Res., Available online: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10660-022-09662-5.10.1007/s10660-022-09662-5 ↗
67. Stimulating and Sustaining Interest in a Language Course: An Experimental Comparison of Chatbot and Human Task Partners10.1016/j.chb.2017.05.045 ↗
68. Identifying Relevant Segments of AI Applications Adopters–Expanding the UTAUT2’s Variables10.1016/j.tele.2020.101529 ↗
69. Taking “Fun and Games” Seriously: Proposing the Hedonic-Motivation System Adoption Model (HMSAM)10.17705/1jais.00347 ↗
70. Derivation of Young Children’s Interaction Strategies with Digital Educational Games from Gaze Sequences Analysis10.1016/j.ijhcs.2020.102558 ↗
71. Nasirian, F., and Ahmadian, M. (2023, May 25). AI-Based Voice Assistant Systems: Evaluating from the Interaction and Trust Perspectives. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322665841_AIBased_Voice_Assistant_Systems_Evaluating_from_the_Interaction_and_Trust_Perspectives.
72. Building Technology Trust in ICT Application at a University10.1108/IJoEM-07-2017-0234 ↗
73. Trust in Automation: Designing for Appropriate Reliance10.1518/hfes.46.1.50.30392 ↗
74. Extending the Technology Acceptance Model to Assess Automation10.1007/s10111-011-0194-3 ↗
75. Lockey, S., Gillespie, N., Holm, D., and Someh, I.A. (2023, May 25). A Review of Trust in Artificial Intelligence: Challenges, Vulnerabilities and Future Directions. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/349157208_A_Review_of_Trust_in_Artificial_Intelligence_Challenges_Vulnerabilities_and_Future_Directions.
76. Trust in AI and Its Role in the Acceptance of AI Technologies10.1080/10447318.2022.2050543 ↗
77. Łapińska, J., Escher, I., Górka, J., Sudolska, A., and Brzustewicz, P. (2021). Employees’ Trust in Artificial Intelligence in Companies: The Case of Energy and Chemical Industries in Poland. Energies, 14.10.3390/en14071942 ↗
78. Jacovi, A., Marasović, A., Miller, T., and Goldberg, Y. (2021, January 3). Formalizing Trust in Artificial Intelligence: Prerequisites, Causes and Goals of Human Trust in AI. Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, Virtual Event/Toronto, ON, Canada.10.1145/3442188.3445923 ↗
79. Human Trust in Artificial Intelligence: Review of Empirical Research10.5465/annals.2018.0057 ↗
80. Schnall, R., Higgins, T., Brown, W., Carballo-Dieguez, A., and Bakken, S. (2023, May 25). Trust, Perceived Risk, Perceived Ease of Use and Perceived Usefulness as Factors Related to MHealth Technology Use, Available online: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5588863/.
81. The Roles of Trust, Personalization, Loss of Privacy, and Anthropomorphism in Public Acceptance of Smart Healthcare Services10.1016/j.chb.2021.107026 ↗
82. A Conceptual Model of Trust, Perceived Risk, and Reliance on AI Decision Aids10.1177/10596011221081238 ↗
83. The Technology Acceptance Model: Past, Present, and Future10.17705/1CAIS.01250 ↗
84. A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926 ↗
85. Belda-Medina, J., and Calvo-Ferrer, J.R. (2022). Using Chatbots as AI Conversational Partners in Language Learning. Appl. Sci., 12.10.3390/app12178427 ↗
86. Implementation of Artificial Intelligence in Fashion: Are Consumers Ready?10.1177/0887302X19873437 ↗
87. Tourists’ Attitudes toward the Use of Artificially Intelligent (AI) Devices in Tourism Service Delivery: Moderating Role of Service Value Seeking10.1177/0047287520971054 ↗
88. Remanufactured Products Purchase Intentions and Behaviour: Evidence from Malaysia10.1080/00207543.2016.1194534 ↗
89. Assessed by Machines: Development of a TAM-Based Tool to Measure AI-Based Assessment Acceptance Among Students
90. Five Point vs
91. User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View10.2307/30036540 ↗
92. Technology Acceptance: A Meta-analysis of the TAM: Part 110.1108/17465660710834453 ↗
93. Understanding Information Technology Usage: A Test of Competing Models10.1287/isre.6.2.144 ↗
94. Extending the TAM Model to Explore the Factors That Affect Intention to Use an Online Learning Community10.1016/j.compedu.2009.09.009 ↗
95. Developing a General Extended Technology Acceptance Model for E-Learning (GETAMEL) by Analysing Commonly Used External Factors10.1016/j.chb.2015.11.036 ↗
96. Castiblanco Jimenez, I.A., Cepeda García, L.C., Violante, M.G., Marcolin, F., and Vezzetti, E. (2020). Commonly Used External TAM Variables in E-Learning, Agriculture and Virtual Reality Applications. Future Internet, 13.10.3390/fi13010007 ↗
97. An Empirical Investigation into the Role of Enjoyment, Computer Anxiety, Computer Self-Efficacy and Internet Experience in Influencing the Students’ Intention to Use E-Learning: A Case Study from Saudi Arabian Governmental Universities
98. Consumer Acceptance and Use of Information Technology: Extending the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology10.2307/41410412 ↗
99. Developing and Validating a Service Robot Integration Willingness Scale10.1016/j.ijhm.2019.01.005 ↗
100. The Impact of Perceptions of Interactivity on Customer Trust and Transaction Intentions in Mobile Commerce