ArticlePloS one2024
Users' continuance intention towards an AI painting application: An extended expectation confirmation model.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Factors influencing students' intentions to continue learning in AI-assisted painting courses.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Can AI singing retain users? Examining how experience, ethical acceptance, and affective engagement shape continuance intention.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Human-AI co-creation in generative AI video: content characteristics, flow experience, and continued creation intention-a hybrid SEM-ANN study.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Examining factors affecting the acceptance of AI-powered creativity support tools among the industrial design community in China.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- An empirical study on the use behavior towards AI painting tools based on TAM3 model.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- A Systematic Review of User Attitudes Toward GenAI: Influencing Factors and Industry Perspectives.Journal of Intelligence · 2025Review
- The impact of social media on university students' revisit intention in sports tourism: A hybrid method based on SEM and ANN.PloS one · 2025Article
- Mindfulness and AI adoption: extending the technology acceptance model for Chinese media students.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
With the rapid advancement of technology, Artificial Intelligence (AI) painting has emerged as a leading intelligence service. This study aims to empirically investigate users' continuance intention toward AI painting applications by utilizing and expanding the Expectation Confirmation Model (ECM), Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT), and the Flow Theory. A comprehensive research model is proposed. A total of 443 questionnaires were distributed to users with AI painting experiences for data collection. The hypotheses were tested through structural equation modeling. The primary conclusions drawn from this research include: 1) Confirmation plays a crucial role, significantly and positively predicting satisfaction and social impact. 2) Personal innovativeness has a significant effect on confirmation. 3) Satisfaction, flow experience, and social influence directly and positively predict intention, with social influence showing the most significant impact, while perceived usefulness, perceived enjoyment, and performance expectancy show no significant impact on intention. 4) Habit plays a negative moderating role in the association between social influence and continued intention to use. These findings offer valuable insights and inspiration for users seeking to understand the appropriate utilization of AI painting and provide actionable directions for the development of AI painting.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.