Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 4Art, Technology, and CultureDigital Media and Visual ArtArtificial Intelligence Applications

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

AI adoption in the arts–a study of motivations and attitudes among Nordic AI artists

Open access
Kaila, Anna-Kaisa, Jääskeläinen, Petra, Holzapfel, André·2025·Digital Creativity
DOI 10.1080/14626268.2025.2600598
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Adoption of AI technologies in the arts has faced a divided reception and raised controversies—while some artists critique them, others embrace the opportunities they provide. In this paper, we contribute empirical insights into what motivates artists’ adoption of AI art technologies, as well as what kind of worldviews these motivations for AI adoption in artistic contexts embody. We shed light on these questions by presenting results from a qualitative interview study (N = 19) of AI artists practicing in Nordic countries. Five key themes emerged that describe artists’ motivations for using AI in their work, which we analyse in reflection with Kerschner and Ehlers' Attitudes Towards Technology (ATT) framework in terms of underlying attitudes of AI-Enthusiasm, Pragmatism, Romanticism, and Scepticism. Our analysis diversifies the understanding of why artists use AI, surfacing cultural and political tensions inherent in adoption of AI technologies for artistic and creative use.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/14626268.2025.2600598

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 4 references

Research works printed but not linked: 39

  1. 10.1002/9781119171386.ch19 · DOI
  2. 10.1037/0022-3514.43.5.9971 · DOI
  3. 10.7551/mitpress/12832.001.0001 · DOI
  4. Boden, M. A. 2016. AI: Its Nature and Future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  5. 10.1177/1749975510368471 · DOI · Paper page
  6. 10.1515/9781503615861 · DOI
  7. 10.7551/mitpress/10913.001.0001 · DOI
  8. 10.1162/leona02092 · DOI
  9. 10.1145/3555578 · DOI · Paper page
  10. Clancy M. 2021. Reflections on the Financial and Ethical Implications of Music Generated by Artificial Intelligence [PhD Thesis]. Dublin: Trinity College Dublin School of Creative Arts.
  11. Colton S. and Wiggins G. A. (2012) Computational Creativity: The Final Frontier? ECAI'12: Proceedings of the 20th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence: 21–26.
  12. 10.1017/CBO9780511489433 · DOI
  13. Divakaran A. A. Sridhar and R. Srinivasan. 2023. “Broadening AI Ethics Narratives: An Indic art View.” In: Proceedings of the 2023 ACM Conference on Fairness Accountability and Transparency: 2–11. · DOI
  14. Esling P. and N. Devis. 2020. "Creativity in the era of Artificial Intelligence." Proceedings of JIM Conference 2020.
  15. Frith, S. 2007. Taking Popular Music Seriously: Selected Essays. London: Routledge.
  16. 10.3390/digital2010001 · DOI
  17. 10.1002/9780470996744.ch9 · DOI
  18. Iverson, J. 2018. Electronic Inspirations: Technologies of the Cold War Musical Avant-Garde. New York: Oxford University Press.
  19. 10.3389/frobt.2021.577770 · DOI
  20. 10.1145/3600211.3604681 · DOI · Paper page
  21. 10.1007/s00146-023-01852-5 · DOI
  22. Jourdan T. and B. Caramiaux. 2023. "Culture and Politics of Machine Learning in NIME: A Preliminary Qualitative Inquiry Interview Study with NIME Artists." Proceedings of the International Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expressionı (NIME’23).
  23. Kaila, A., A. Holzapfel, and P. Jääskeläinen. 2024. “Gardening Frictions in Creative AI : Emerging Art Practices and Their Design Implications.” Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Computational Creativity (ICCC'24).
  24. 10.1386/jpm000041 · DOI
  25. 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.02.010 · DOI
  26. Lindgren, S. 2024. Critical Theory of AI. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  27. Maio, G. R., J. M. Olson, M. M. Bernard, and M. A. Luke. 2003. “Ideologies, Values, Attitudes, and Behavior.” In Handbook of Social Psychology, edited by DeLamater Je, 283–308. New York: Kluwer-Plenum.
  28. Manovich, L. 2019. Defining AI Arts: Three Proposals. Exhibition Catalog “AI and Dialog of Cultures”. Saint, Petersburg: Hermitage Museum.
  29. 10.1007/978-94-017-9085-7_12 · DOI
  30. 10.1080/24694452.2023.2210647 · DOI · Paper page
  31. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198567424.003.0001 · DOI
  32. Ploin A. R. I. H. Eynon and M. Osborne. 2022. AI and the Arts: How Machine Learning Is Changing Artistic Work. Report from the Creative Algorithmic Intelligence Research Project. Technical report Oxford Internet Institute University of Oxford UK.
  33. Schippers, H. 2015. “Applied Ethnomusicology and Intangible Cultural Heritage: Understanding “Ecosystems of Music” as a Tool for Sustainability.” In The Oxford Handbook of Applied Ethnomusicology, edited by S. Pettan and J. T. Titon, 134–156. New York: Oxford University Press.
  34. 10.9707/2307-0919.1116 · DOI · Paper page
  35. 10.24908/ss.v17i3/4.10821 · DOI
  36. Suchman L. 2007. Human-Machine Reconfigurations: Plans and Situated Actions (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
  37. Titon, J. T. 2009. “Introduction.” The World of Music 51 (1): 7–13.
  38. Winner, L. 1980. “Do Artifacts Have Politics?” Daedalus 109: 121–136.
  39. Zylinska, J. 2020. AI Art: Machine Visions and Warped Dreams. London: Open Humanities Press.

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Kaila, A.-K., Jääskeläinen, P., & Holzapfel, A.
Affiliations
KTH Royal Institute of Technology (SE)
Corresponding author
Kaila, Anna-Kaisa
ORCID
Venue
Digital Creativity
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2025-10-02
Volume
36
Issue
4
Pages
362-379
ISSN
  • 1462-6268 (ISSN-L)
  • 1744-3806
DOI
10.1080/14626268.2025.2600598
OpenAlex
W4417444671
Cited by
4
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 4
FWCI
45.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
Digital Creativity (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
WASP-HS
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Visual Arts and Performing Arts › Art, Technology, and Culture
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Graphics and Computer-Aided Design › Digital Media and Visual Art
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence Applications
Keywords
artistic motivation, attitudes toward technology, pragmatism, Romanticism, skepticism

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review