ArticleBehavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Consumer Autonomy in Generative AI Services: The Role of Task Difficulty and AI Design Elements in Enhancing Trust, Satisfaction, and Usage Intention.
Article in Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Leadership and Human-AI Collaboration: A Measurement Scale.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Human-AI co-creation among Gen Z to build knowledge and learning effectiveness.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Identifying conceptual dimensions of trust in artificial intelligence from qualitative content analysis of open-ended responses.Discover artificial intelligence · 2026Article
- Exploring the role of agentic AI in fostering self-efficacy, autonomy support, and self-learning motivation in higher education.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Article
- The impact of intention to adopt generative AI for exercise information on exercise adherence among Chinese college students: the mediating role of autonomous motivation and network analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As generative AI services become increasingly integrated into consumer decision making, concerns have grown regarding their influence on consumer autonomy-the extent to which individuals retain independent control over AI-assisted decisions. Although these services offer efficiency and convenience, they can simultaneously constrain consumer decision making, potentially impacting trust, satisfaction, and usage intention. This study investigates the role of perceived consumer autonomy in shaping consumer responses, specifically examining how task difficulty (Study 1) and AI service design elements-explainability, feedback, and shared responsibility (Study 2)-influence autonomy perceptions and subsequent consumer outcomes. Using two scenario-based experiments involving a total of 708 participants, the results reveal that perceived autonomy significantly enhances consumer trust, particularly in contexts involving high task difficulty. Among the tested AI design interventions, shared responsibility emerged as most effective in enhancing perceived autonomy, trust, satisfaction, and long-term engagement, whereas explainability and feedback alone showed limited impact. These findings underscore the importance of designing AI services that actively support consumer agency through user-involved decision-making frameworks rather than relying solely on passive informational transparency. Theoretical implications for consumer autonomy in AI interactions are discussed, along with practical recommendations for designing consumer-centered AI services.
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.