Generative Artificial Intelligence Image Tools among Future Designers: A Usability, User Experience, and Emotional Analysis

Digital Pub Date : 2024-04-17 DOI:10.3390/digital4020016
Joana Casteleiro-Pitrez
{"title":"Generative Artificial Intelligence Image Tools among Future Designers: A Usability, User Experience, and Emotional Analysis","authors":"Joana Casteleiro-Pitrez","doi":"10.3390/digital4020016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) image tools hold the promise of revolutionizing a designer’s creative process. The increasing supply of this type of tool leads us to consider whether they suit future design professionals. This study aims to unveil if three GenAI image tools—Midjourney 5.2, DreamStudio beta, and Adobe Firefly 2—meet future designers’ expectations. Do these tools have good Usability, show sufficient User Experience (UX), induce positive emotions, and provide satisfactory results? A literature review was performed, and a quantitative empirical study based on a multidimensional analysis was executed to answer the research questions. Sixty users used the GenAI image tools and then responded to a holistic evaluation framework. The results showed that while the GenAI image tools received favorable ratings for Usability, they fell short in achieving high scores, indicating room for improvement. None of the platforms received a positive evaluation in all UX scales, highlighting areas for enhancement. The benchmark comparison revealed that all platforms, except for Adobe Firefly’s Efficiency scale, require enhancements in pragmatic and hedonic qualities. Despite inducing neutral to above-average positive emotions and minimal negative emotions, the overall satisfaction was moderate, with Midjourney aligning more closely with user expectations. This study emphasizes the need for significant improvements in Usability, positive emotional resonance, and result satisfaction, even more so in UX, so that GenAI image tools can meet future designers’ expectations.","PeriodicalId":512971,"journal":{"name":"Digital","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Digital","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/digital4020016","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) image tools hold the promise of revolutionizing a designer’s creative process. The increasing supply of this type of tool leads us to consider whether they suit future design professionals. This study aims to unveil if three GenAI image tools—Midjourney 5.2, DreamStudio beta, and Adobe Firefly 2—meet future designers’ expectations. Do these tools have good Usability, show sufficient User Experience (UX), induce positive emotions, and provide satisfactory results? A literature review was performed, and a quantitative empirical study based on a multidimensional analysis was executed to answer the research questions. Sixty users used the GenAI image tools and then responded to a holistic evaluation framework. The results showed that while the GenAI image tools received favorable ratings for Usability, they fell short in achieving high scores, indicating room for improvement. None of the platforms received a positive evaluation in all UX scales, highlighting areas for enhancement. The benchmark comparison revealed that all platforms, except for Adobe Firefly’s Efficiency scale, require enhancements in pragmatic and hedonic qualities. Despite inducing neutral to above-average positive emotions and minimal negative emotions, the overall satisfaction was moderate, with Midjourney aligning more closely with user expectations. This study emphasizes the need for significant improvements in Usability, positive emotional resonance, and result satisfaction, even more so in UX, so that GenAI image tools can meet future designers’ expectations.
未来设计师的人工智能图像生成工具:可用性、用户体验和情感分析
生成式人工智能(GenAI)图像工具有望彻底改变设计师的创作过程。这类工具的供应量不断增加,促使我们思考它们是否适合未来的设计专业人士。本研究旨在揭示三款 GenAI 图像工具--Midjourney 5.2、DreamStudio beta 和 Adobe Firefly 2--是否符合未来设计师的期望。这些工具是否具有良好的可用性、足够的用户体验(UX)、诱发积极情绪并提供令人满意的结果?为了回答这些研究问题,我们进行了文献综述,并基于多维分析开展了一项定量实证研究。60 名用户使用了 GenAI 图像工具,然后对整体评估框架做出了回应。结果表明,虽然 GenAI 图像工具在可用性方面获得了好评,但却未能获得高分,这表明它们还有改进的余地。没有一个平台在所有用户体验方面都获得了积极的评价,这凸显了需要改进的地方。基准比较显示,除了 Adobe Firefly 的效率量表外,所有平台都需要在实用性和享乐性方面进行改进。尽管 "Midjourney "诱发了中性到高于平均水平的积极情绪和极少的消极情绪,但总体满意度一般,更符合用户的期望。本研究强调了在可用性、积极情感共鸣和结果满意度方面进行重大改进的必要性,在用户体验方面更是如此,从而使 GenAI 图像工具能够满足未来设计师的期望。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信