Cited by 31Digital Media and Visual ArtArt, Technology, and CultureGenerative Adversarial Networks and Image Synthesis

Exploring the Impact of AI-generated Image Tools on Professional and Non-professional Users in the Art and Design Fields

Open access
Tang, Yuying, Zhang, Ningning, Ciancia, Mariana, Wang, Zhigang·2024·Companion Publication of the 2024 Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing

Abstract

The rapid proliferation of AI-generated image tools is transforming the art and design fields, challenging traditional notions of creativity and impacting both professional and non-professional users. For this paper, we define "professional users" as individuals who self-identified in our survey as "artists," "designers," "filmmakers," or "art and design students," and "non-professional users" as individuals who self-identified as "others." This study explores how AI-generated image tools influence these different user groups. Through an online survey (N=380) comprising 173 professional users and 207 non-professional users, we examine differences in the utilization of AI tools, user satisfaction and challenges, applications in creative processes, perceptions and impacts, and acceptance levels. Our findings indicate persistent concerns about image quality, cost, and copyright issues. Additionally, the usage patterns of non-professional users suggest that AI tools have the potential to democratize creative processes, making art and design tasks more accessible to individuals without traditional expertise. This study provides insights into the needs of different user groups and offers recommendations for developing more user-centered AI tools, contributing to the broader discussion on the future of AI in the art and design fields.

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 · 10.1145/3678884.3681890

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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?

  • AI-generated image tools have impacted workflows, highlighting AI's potential to democratize graphic design and emphasizing the need for interdisciplinary collaboration.

    “the impact of AI-generated image tools on workflows has been explored [71, 95], highlighting AI's potential to democratize graphic design [97] and emphasizing the need for interdisciplinary collaboration to enhance AI systems [68].”

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. [11][11] Pei-Sze Chow. 2020. Ghost in the (Hollywood) machine: Emergent applications of artificial intelligence in the film industry. NECSUS\_European Journal of Media Studies 9, 1 (2020), 193-214. -
  2. [22][22] Sampsa Hyysalo, Virve Hyysalo, and Louna Hakkarainen. 2019. The work of democratized design in setting-up a hosted citizen-designer community. International Journal of Design 13, 1 (2019), 69-82. -
  3. [30][30] Haotian Li, Yun Wang, and Huamin Qu. 2024. Where are we so far? understanding data storytelling tools from the perspective of human-ai collaboration. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . 1-19. -
  4. [31][31] Tianyi Li, Mihaela Vorvoreanu, Derek DeBellis, and Saleema Amershi. 2023. Assessing human-ai interaction early through factorial surveys: A study on the guidelines for human-ai interaction. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 30, 5 (2023), 1-45. -
  5. [33][33] Franka-Marie Meggert. 2024. Art in the age of AI: consumer perceptions and purchase behavior towards human-created and AI-generated artworks . Ph. D. Dissertation. -
  6. [50][50] Theodora Vardouli. 2012. Design-for-empowerment-for-design: computational structures for design democratization . Ph. D. Dissertation. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. -
  7. [58][58] Joanna Zylinska. 2020. AI art: machine visions and warped dreams . Open Humanities Press. Received 20 February 2007; revised 12 March 2009; accepted 5 June 2009

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tang, Y., Zhang, N., Ciancia, M., & Wang, Z.
Affiliations
  • Politecnico di Milano (IT)
  • Tsinghua University (CN)
Venue
Companion Publication of the 2024 Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing
Publisher
ACM
Published
2024-11-11
Pages
451-458
OpenAlex
W4404331663
Cited by
31
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 14
FWCI
12.10
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • Virtual Community of Pathological Anatomy (University of Castilla La Mancha) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Graphics and Computer-Aided Design › Digital Media and Visual Art
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Visual Arts and Performing Arts › Art, Technology, and Culture
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Generative Adversarial Networks and Image Synthesis
Keywords
generative AI in art, art and design, creativity, user satisfaction, image quality, copyright issues, cost concerns

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