ArticleScientific reports2025
Factors influencing digital media designers' subscription to premium versions of AI drawing tools through a mixed methods study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Psychological and social factors influencing AI painting tool adoption among young-old adults in the context of creative aging.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Psychological mechanisms linking AI hallucinations to user trust and behavioral intentions toward AI-generated videos: an S-O-R perspective.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Metaverse? No, thanks! Exploring the mechanisms behind Generation Z's resistance behavior.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 continuous advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) technology-particularly the widespread adoption of generative AI-the application of AI tools in the design field has become increasingly prevalent, demonstrating considerable potential for innovation. However, existing research has primarily focused on the acceptance and use of AI technologies by general users, while relatively limited attention has been paid to the behavioral mechanisms of professional creative users, such as digital media designers, in subscribing to advanced AI-assisted drawing tools. Prior studies have often overlooked the nuanced decision-making processes and unique cognitive factors that shape subscription behavior within creative work contexts. To address this gap, the present study draws on the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT), and their extended frameworks, integrating grounded theory's three-stage coding approach with covariance-based structural equation modeling (CB-SEM) to construct and validate an innovative research framework that bridges qualitative exploration with quantitative validation. Seven key variables-perceived trust, perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, social influence, output quality, personal innovativeness, and price value-were identified through semi-structured interviews and empirically examined based on data from 394 participants. The results indicate that perceived ease of use indirectly influences subscription intention through perceived usefulness, while output quality affects it through the mediating role of perceived trust. Social influence, price value, and perceived trust all exhibit significant positive effects on subscription intention, whereas personal innovativeness does not demonstrate a statistically significant impact. Theoretically, this study extends the applicability of TAM and UTAUT to the relatively under-researched context of the creative industry, achieves methodological innovation through the integration of qualitative and quantitative approaches, and provides practical guidance and a decision-making foundation for AI tool developers and the intelligent transformation of the creative sector.
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.