”Clay to Play With”: Generative AI Tools in UX and Industrial Design Practice
Open accessAbstract
Generative artificial intelligence (GAI) is transforming numerous professions, not least various fields intimately relying on creativity, such as design. To explore GAI’s adoption and appropriation in design, an interview-based study probed 10 specialists in user experience and industrial design, with varying tenure and GAI experience, for their adoption/application of GAI tools, reasons for not using them, problems with ownership and agency, speculations about the future of creative work, and GAI tools’ roles in design sensemaking. Insight from reflexive thematic analysis revealed wide variation in attitudes toward GAI tools – from threat-oriented negative appraisals to identification of empowerment opportunities – which depended on the sense of agency and perceived control. The paper examines this finding in light of the Coping Model of User Adaptation and discusses designers’ metacognitive skills as possible underpinnings for their attitudes. Avenues for further research are identified accordingly.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
GenAI tools are particularly effective during the divergent phases of design but are less suited for convergent tasks that require precise iteration.
“GenAI tools are particularly effective during the divergent phases of design, helping designers overcome creative blocks and explore new possibilities. However, designers feel they are less suited for convergent tasks that require precise iteration [98].”
From Decoupling of Usefulness and Novelty: Evaluating the Impact of Generative AI on Design Outputs and Novice Designers' Creative Thinking (2026) · cites this paper as [98]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 49 · Cited by 33
- Authors
- Uusitalo, S., Salovaara, A., Jokela, T., & Salmimaa, M.
- Affiliations
- Aalto University (FI)
- Nokia (Finland) (FI)
- Venue
- Designing Interactive Systems Conference
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2024-07
- Pages
- 1566-1578
- OpenAlex
- W4403576065
- Cited by
- 33
- References
- 49
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 3
- FWCI
- 12.89
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Designing Interactive Systems Conference (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Aaltodoc (Aalto University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Graphics and Computer-Aided Design › Digital Media and Visual Art
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Design Education and Practice
- Keywords
- generative AI, user experience design, industrial design, design practice, artificial intelligence adoption, designer attitudes, sensemaking, agency and control, metacognitive skills
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
