Generative AI in the Wild: Prospects, Challenges, and Strategies
Open accessAbstract
Propelled by their remarkable capabilities to generate novel and engaging content, Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) technologies are disrupting traditional workflows in many industries. While prior research has examined GenAI from a techno-centric perspective, there is still a lack of understanding about how users perceive and utilize GenAI in real-world scenarios. To bridge this gap, we conducted semi-structured interviews with (N = 18) GenAI users in creative industries, investigating the human-GenAI co-creation process within a holistic LUA (Learning, Using and Assessing) framework. Our study uncovered an intriguingly complex landscape: Prospects – GenAI greatly fosters the co-creation between human expertise and GenAI capabilities, profoundly transforming creative workflows; Challenges – Meanwhile, users face substantial uncertainties and complexities arising from resource availability, tool usability, and regulatory compliance; Strategies – In response, users actively devise various strategies to overcome many of such challenges. Our study reveals key implications for the design of future GenAI tools.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
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?
User experiences of limited controllability in GenAI systems manifest the interoperability challenge.
“This challenge manifests in user experiences of limited controllability in GenAI systems [166].”
From Exploring Collaboration Patterns and Strategies in Human-AI Co-creation through the Lens of Agency: A Scoping Review of the Top-tier HCI Literature (2025) · cites this paper as [166]
Co-creation raises unique authorship questions and copyright concerns, distinct from solely AI outputs.
“Research indicates co-creation raises unique authorship questions and copyright concerns, distinct from solely AI outputs [166].”
From Exploring Collaboration Patterns and Strategies in Human-AI Co-creation through the Lens of Agency: A Scoping Review of the Top-tier HCI Literature (2025) · cites this paper as [166]
GenAI has become a valuable tool in creative industries spanning graphic design, advertising, fashion, writing, and visual arts.
“On top of that, Generative AI has also become a valuable tool in creative industries-spanning graphic design, advertising, fashion, writing, and visual arts [36, 59].”
From Generative AI and Creativity: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis (2025) · cites this paper as [59]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Using thematic analysis in psychology
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006) · Qualitative Research in Psychology · doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa · Cited by 194,414 · see citing works
Wagner, H. R., Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1968) · Social Forces · doi:10.2307/2575405 · Cited by 46,470 · see citing works
Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2019) · Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health · doi:10.1080/2159676x.2019.1628806 · Cited by 19,677 · see citing works
A General Inductive Approach for Analyzing Qualitative Evaluation Data
Thomas, D. R. (2006) · American Journal of Evaluation · doi:10.1177/1098214005283748 · Cited by 10,858 · see citing works
Dwivedi, Y. K., Kshetri, N., Hughes, L., Slade, E. L., Jeyaraj, A., Kar, A. K., Baabdullah, A. M., Koohang, A., Raghavan, V., Ahuja, M., et al. (2023) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102642 · Cited by 4,584 · see citing works
Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback
Ouyang, L., Wu, J., Jiang, X., Almeida, D., Wainwright, C. L., Mishkin, P., Zhang, C., Agarwal, S., Slama, K., Ray, A., et al. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2203.02155 · Cited by 4,208 · see citing works
Sampling in Interview-Based Qualitative Research: A Theoretical and Practical Guide
Robinson, O. C. (2014) · Qualitative Research in Psychology · doi:10.1080/14780887.2013.801543 · Cited by 3,232 · see citing works
Digital divide research, achievements and shortcomings
van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2006) · Poetics · doi:10.1016/j.poetic.2006.05.004 · Cited by 2,046 · see citing works
Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
(2020) · doi:10.1145/3313831 · Cited by 1,951 · see citing works
Plans and Situated Actions: The Problem of Human Machine Communication.
Woolgar, S., & Suchman, L. A. (1989) · Contemporary Sociology A Journal of Reviews · doi:10.2307/2073874 · Cited by 1,600 · see citing works
Consumers acceptance of artificially intelligent (AI) device use in service delivery
Gursoy, D., Chi, O. H., Lu, L., & Nunkoo, R. (2019) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.03.008 · Cited by 1,437 · see citing works
Generative AI and ChatGPT: applications, challenges, and AI-human collaboration
Fui-Hoon Nah, F., Zheng, R., Cai, J., Siau, K., & Chen, L. (2023) · Journal of Information Technology Case and Application Research · doi:10.1080/15228053.2023.2233814 · Cited by 1,363 · see citing works
McDonald, N., Schoenebeck, S., & Forte, A. (2019) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3359174 · Cited by 1,206 · see citing works
Brynjolfsson, E., Li, D., & Raymond, L. (2023) · National Bureau of Economic Research · doi:10.3386/w31161 · Cited by 995 · see citing works
Rise of Machine Agency: A Framework for Studying the Psychology of Human–AI Interaction (HAII)
Sundar, S. S. (2020) · Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication · doi:10.1093/jcmc/zmz026 · Cited by 871 · see citing works
Artificial intelligence in the creative industries: a review
Anantrasirichai, N., & Bull, D. (2022) · Artificial Intelligence Review · doi:10.1007/s10462-021-10039-7 · Cited by 793 · see citing works
Toward understanding the impact of artificial intelligence on labor
Frank, M. R., Autor, D., Bessen, J. E., Brynjolfsson, E., Cebrian, M., Deming, D. J., Feldman, M., Groh, M., Lobo, J., Moro, E., et al. (2019) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1900949116 · Cited by 713 · see citing works
Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction
(1997) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-444-81862-1.x5065-1 · Cited by 654 · see citing works
Re-examining Whether, Why, and How Human-AI Interaction Is Uniquely Difficult to Design
Yang, Q., Steinfeld, A., Rosé, C., & Zimmerman, J. (2020) · Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3313831.3376301 · Cited by 622 · cited 1× · see citing works
“” [35] For instance, Yang et al. [78] interviewed product designers/managers to study how they incorporate or fail to incorporate AI in their products; Sun et al. [67] examined challenges and users’ workarounds of using AutoML tools in real-world settings.”
Generating scholarly content with ChatGPT: Ethical challenges for medical publishing
Liebrenz, M., Schleifer, R., Buadze, A., Bhugra, D., & Smith, A. (2023) · The Lancet Digital Health · doi:10.1016/s2589-7500(23)00019-5 · Cited by 594 · see citing works
Wu, T., Terry, M. A., & Cai, C. J. (2022) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3491102.3517582 · Cited by 536 · see citing works
Artificial Intelligence (AI) Ethics: Ethics of AI and Ethical AI
Siau, K., & Wang, W. (2020) · Journal of Database Management · doi:10.4018/jdm.2020040105 · Cited by 533 · see citing works
Regulating ChatGPT and other Large Generative AI Models
Hacker, P., Engel, A., & Mauer, M. (2023) · 2023 ACM Conference on Fairness Accountability and Transparency · doi:10.1145/3593013.3594067 · Cited by 466 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Our study revealed the intricate ways in which practitioners individually confronted and navigated complex ethical challenges, especially when GenAI was operated in a ‘grey area’ lacking clear policies or regulations [1, 34].”
BackgroundMaglio, P. P., Spohrer, J., & Kieliszewski, C. A. (2010) · Service science: research and innovations in the service economy · doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-1628-0 · Cited by 444 · see citing works
Satchell, C., & Dourish, P. (2009) · doi:10.1145/1738826.1738829 · Cited by 378 · see citing works
Wordcraft: Story Writing With Large Language Models
Yuan, A., Coenen, A., Reif, E., & Ippolito, D. (2022) · 27th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces · doi:10.1145/3490099.3511105 · Cited by 374 · see citing works
Ma, X., & Huo, Y. (2023) · Technology in Society · doi:10.1016/j.techsoc.2023.102362 · Cited by 368 · see citing works
Kuutti, K., & Bannon, L. J. (2014) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/2556288.2557111 · Cited by 362 · see citing works
The Creativity of Text-to-Image Generation
Oppenlaender, J. (2022) · International Academic Mindtrek Conference (Mindtrek) · doi:10.1145/3569219.3569352 · Cited by 339 · see citing works
Interaction design gone wild: striving for wild theory
Rogers, Y. (2011) · interactions · doi:10.1145/1978822.1978834 · Cited by 310 · see citing works
Zhou, J., Zhang, Y., Luo, Q., Parker, A. G., & De Choudhury, M. (2023) · Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3544548.3581318 · Cited by 288 · see citing works
The experience of agency in human-computer interactions: a review
Limerick, H., Coyle, D., & Moore, J. W. (2014) · Frontiers in Human Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnhum.2014.00643 · Cited by 241 · see citing works
A Human Activity Approach to User Interfaces
Bødker, S. (1989) · Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1207/s15327051hci0403_1 · Cited by 232 · see citing works
Passi, S., & Jackson, S. J. (2018) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3274405 · Cited by 225 · see citing works
Predictability and Surprise in Large Generative Models
Ganguli, D., Hernandez, D., Lovitt, L., Askell, A., Bai, Y., Chen, A., Conerly, T., Dassarma, N., Drain, D., Elhage, N., et al. (2022) · 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness Accountability and Transparency · doi:10.1145/3531146.3533229 · Cited by 207 · cited 2× · see citing works
“Several participants [P7, P13] noted that at times, ChatGPT fails to adhere to specific restrictions and inadvertently includes forbidden words or expressions despite being instructed otherwise, which considerably undermines trust in GenAI-created content.”
BackgroundHughes, R. T., Zhu, L., & Bednarz, T. (2021) · Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.3389/frai.2021.604234 · Cited by 178 · see citing works
Strategies for creative industries: an international review
Foord, J. (2009) · Creative Industries Journal · doi:10.1386/cij.1.2.91_1 · Cited by 161 · see citing works
Chamberlain, A., Crabtree, A., Rodden, T. A., Jones, M., & Rogers, Y. (2012) · Designing Interactive Systems Conference · doi:10.1145/2317956.2318078 · Cited by 154 · see citing works
Social Dynamics of AI Support in Creative Writing
Gero, K. I., Long, T., & Chilton, L. B. (2023) · Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3544548.3580782 · Cited by 129 · see citing works
RePrompt: Automatic Prompt Editing to Refine AI-Generative Art Towards Precise Expressions
Wang, Y., Shen, S., & Lim, B. Y. (2023) · Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3544548.3581402 · Cited by 120 · see citing works
Prompting Is Programming: A Query Language for Large Language Models
Beurer-Kellner, L., Fischer, M., & Vechev, M. (2023) · Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages · doi:10.1145/3591300 · Cited by 117 · see citing works
Stages in learning new technology: Naive adult email users
Russell, A. L. (1995) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/0360-1315(95)00073-9 · Cited by 108 · see citing works
Calling BS on ChatGPT: Reflections on AI as a Communication Source
Sundar, S. S., & Liao, M. (2023) · Journalism & Communication Monographs · doi:10.1177/15226379231167135 · Cited by 92 · see citing works
Dang, H., Goller, S., Lehmann, F., & Buschek, D. (2023) · Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3544548.3580969 · Cited by 83 · see citing works
Bozkurt, A., & Sharma, R. C. (2023) · Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · doi:10.5281/zenodo.7755272 · Cited by 77 · see citing works
Beyond self-diagnosis: how a chatbot-based symptom checker should respond
You, Y., Tsai, C.-H., Li, Y., Ma, F., Heron, C., & Gui, X. (2023) · ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction · doi:10.1145/3589959 · Cited by 60 · see citing works
Self-citationUser Perspectives on Ethical Challenges in Human-AI Co-Creativity: A Design Fiction Study
Rezwana, J., & Maher, M. L. (2023) · Creativity and Cognition · doi:10.1145/3591196.3593364 · Cited by 60 · see citing works
Chinh, B., Zade, H., Ganji, A., & Aragón, C. (2019) · CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA) · doi:10.1145/3290607.3312879 · Cited by 57 · see citing works
Fits and Starts: Enterprise Use of AutoML and the Role of Humans in the Loop
Crisan, A., & Fiore-Gartland, B. (2021) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3411764.3445775 · Cited by 56 · see citing works
Developing a Research Agenda for Human-Centered Data Science
Aragon, C., Hutto, C. J., Echenique, A., Fiore-Gartland, B., Huang, Y. K., Kim, J., Neff, G., Xing, W., & Bayer, J. (2016) · ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) · doi:10.1145/2818052.2855518 · Cited by 53 · see citing works
User preferences for ChatGPT-powered conversational interfaces versus traditional methods
Sakirin, T., & Ben Said, R. (2023) · Mesopotamian Journal of Computer Science · doi:10.58496/mjcsc/2023/006 · Cited by 38 · see citing works
Exploring the Design Space of User-System Communication for Smart-home Routine Assistants
Chiang, Y.-S., Chang, R.-C., Chuang, Y.-L., Chou, S.-Y., Lee, H.-P., Lin, I.-J., Chen, J.-H. J., & Chang, Y.-J. (2020) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3313831.3376501 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
AutoML in The Wild: Obstacles, Workarounds, and Expectations
Sun, Y., Song, Q., Gui, X., Ma, F., & Wang, T. (2023) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3544548.3581082 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
Self-citationSun, Y., & Sundar, S. S. (2022) · CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA) · doi:10.1145/3491101.3519668 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Self-citationGenAICHI 2023: Generative AI and HCI at CHI 2023
Muller, M. J., Chilton, L. B., Kantosalo, A., Liao, Q. V., Maher, M. L., Martin, C. P., & Walsh, G. (2023) · CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA) · doi:10.1145/3544549.3573794 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
Rooksby, J. (2013) · ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction · doi:10.1145/2491500.2491507 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
Stojmenović, M., Pilgrim, C., & Lindgaard, G. (2014) · Australian Conference on Computer-Human Interaction (OzCHI) · doi:10.1145/2686612.2686660 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Jordanous, A. (2009) · ACM Conference on Creativity and Cognition (C&C) · doi:10.1145/1640233.1640285 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Who am AI?: Mapping Generative AI Impact and Transformative Potential in Creative Ecosystem
Thibault, M., Kivikangas, T., Roihankorpi, R., et al. (2023) · International Academic Mindtrek Conference (Mindtrek) · doi:10.1145/3616961.3617804 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 19
- [2]2. Hussam Alkaissi and Samy I McFarlane. 2023. Artificial hallucinations in Chat- GPT: Implications in scientific writing. Cureus 15, 2 (2023).
- [6]6. Eric PS Baumer, Jenna Burrell, Morgan G Ames, Jed R Brubaker, and Paul Dourish. 2015. On the importance and implications of studying technology non-use. interactions 22, 2 (2015), 52-56.
- [12]12. Tom Brown, Benjamin Mann, Nick Ryder, Melanie Subbiah, Jared D Kaplan, Prafulla Dhariwal, Arvind Neelakantan, Pranav Shyam, Girish Sastry, Amanda Askell, et al. 2020. Language models are few-shot learners. In Proceedings of the Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems.
- [14]14. Jacques Bughin and Nicolas Van Zeebroeck. 2018. Artificial intelligence: Why a digital base is critical. The McKinsey Quarterly (2018).
- [19]19. Jade Copet, Felix Kreuk, Itai Gat, Tal Remez, David Kant, Gabriel Synnaeve, Yossi Adi, and Alexandre Défossez. 2023. Simple and controllable music generation. ArXiv e-prints (2023).
- [24]24. Editorial. 2023. Generating 'smarter' biotechnology. Nature Biotechnology 41, 2 (2023), 157-157.
- [25]25. Ziv Epstein, Aaron Hertzmann, Investigators of Human Creativity, Memo Akten, Hany Farid, Jessica Fjeld, Morgan R Frank, Matthew Groh, Laura Herman, Neil Leach, et al. 2023. Art and the science of generative AI. Science 380, 6650 (2023), 1110-1111.
- [26]26. Ziv Epstein, Aaron Hertzmann, the Investigators of Human Creativity, Memo Akten, Hany Farid, Jessica Fjeld, Morgan R. Frank, Matthew Groh, Laura Herman, Neil Leach, Robert Mahari, Alex "Sandy" Pentland, Olga Russakovsky, Hope Schroeder, and Amy Smith. 2023. Art and the science of generative AI. Science 380, 6650 (2023), 1110-1111.
- [32]32. Barney G Glaser and Anselm L Strauss. 2017. The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Routledge.
- [35]35. Steve Harrison, Deborah Tatar, and Phoebe Sengers. 2007. The three paradigms of HCI. In Alt. Chi. Session at the SIGCHI Conference on human factors in computing systems San Jose, California, USA. 1-18.
- [37]37. Jörn Hurtienne, Luciënne Blessing, et al. 2007. Design for intuitive use-testing image schema theory for user interface design. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineering Design.
- [40]40. Celeste Kidd and Abeba Birhane. 2023. How AI can distort human beliefs. Science 380, 6651 (2023), 1222-1223.
- [41]41. Rafal Kocielnik, Saleema Amershi, and Paul N Bennett. 2019. Will you accept an imperfect AI? Exploring designs for adjusting end-user expectations of ai systems. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems.
- [52]52. Michael Quinn Patton. 1990. Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods. SAGE.
- [57]57. Yvonne Rogers, Paul Marshall, and John M Carroll. 2017. Research in the Wild. Springer.
- [60]60. Daniel Russo. 2023. Navigating the Complexity of Generative AI Adoption in Software Engineering. ArXiv e-prints (2023).
- [74]74. H. Holden Thorp. 2023. ChatGPT is fun, but not an author. Science 379, 6630 (2023), 313-313.
- [81]81. JD Zamfirescu-Pereira, Richmond Y Wong, Bjoern Hartmann, and Qian Yang. 2023. Why Johnny can't prompt: how non-AI experts try (and fail) to design LLM prompts. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems.
- [82]82. Lvmin Zhang and Maneesh Agrawala. 2023. Adding conditional control to text-to-image diffusion models. ArXiv e-prints (2023).
Cited by
Sorted by citations
"I look at it as the king of knowledge": How Blind People Use and Understand Generative AI Tools
Adnin, R., & Das, M. (2024) · The 26th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility · doi:10.1145/3663548.3675631 · Cited by 73 · see citing works
Zhang, S., Wang, H., & Yi, X. (2025) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3757594 · Cited by 36 · see citing works
Atcheson, A., Khan, O., Siemann, B., Jain, A., & Karahalios, K. (2025) · Proceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3706598.3714121 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
Generative AI and Creativity: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis
Holzner, N., Maier, S., & Feuerriegel, S. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2505.17241 · Cited by 17 · see citing works
Alon, L. (2026) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.6172315
- Authors
- Sun, Y., Jang, E., Ma, F., & Wang, T.
- Affiliations
- University of Florida (US)
- Pennsylvania State University (US)
- Stony Brook University (US)
- Venue
- Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2024-05-11
- Pages
- 1-16
- OpenAlex
- W4394591980
- Semantic Scholar
- ef40add3a2f66266d287c40057eaaf6826f69da9
- Cited by
- 64
- References
- 60
- Citations by year
- 2026: 25 · 2025: 36 · 2024: 3
- FWCI
- 18.89
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- NSF (National Science Foundation) (2212323, 1951729, 1953893)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence Applications
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Graphics and Computer-Aided Design › Digital Media and Visual Art
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Information Systems Theories and Implementation
- Keywords
- generative AI, human-AI co-creation, creative industries, creative workflows, user perceptions of AI, regulatory compliance, resource constraints, AI tool design
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
