Human-AI co-creation or conflict? Mapping art students' diverse perspectives on creative identity with genAI: A Q methodology study.
Saved in:
| Title: | Human-AI co-creation or conflict? Mapping art students' diverse perspectives on creative identity with genAI: A Q methodology study. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Wu, Xingting1 (AUTHOR) xingtingwu@swin.edu.au, Tran, Tram Thi Minh2 (AUTHOR) tram.tran@sydney.edu.au, Zhou, Qiqi3 (AUTHOR) zhou.q@buas.nl, Sun, Jian4 (AUTHOR) 0120210048@mail.xhu.edu.cn, Wu, Hao4 (AUTHOR) wuhao@mail.xhu.edu.cn, Wang, Xiaoyang4 (AUTHOR) 0720160002@mail.xhu.edu.cn |
| Source: | Education & Information Technologies. Jun2026, Vol. 31 Issue 9, p2837-2876. 40p. |
| Subject Terms: | *Art students, *Authorship, *Creative ability, *Art education, *Q technique, *Generative artificial intelligence, Human-computer interaction |
| Abstract: | Generative AI (GenAI) is rapidly transforming creative fields, raising critical questions about its impact on artistic identity and authorship, which also influence art education. While studies have explored GenAI adoption, the diversity of art students' subjective perspectives on collaborating with these tools remains under-examined. This study uses Q methodology, a mixed-methods approach to investigating subjectivity, to explore the distinct perspectives art students hold regarding their creative identity when collaborating with GenAI. We conducted a Q study with 40 university students from various art-related disciplines (e.g., visual arts, design, music, animation) across different academic levels. Participants sorted 42 statements reflecting diverse viewpoints on GenAI collaboration, authorship, ethics, and creative control. By-person factor analysis revealed five distinct perspectives: (1) Human-centered directors, who treat GenAI as a tool under strong human intention; (2) Authorship guardians, who resist AI co-authorship and prioritise authenticity and ethical boundaries; (3) Conflicted co-creators, who use GenAI but struggle with ownership, disclosure, and earned pride; (4) Pragmatic integrators, who adopt GenAI for workflow efficiency while keeping craft expertise central; and (5) Enthusiastic explorers, who embrace AI's creative possibilities, open to co-agency and novel expression. These findings offer a nuanced typology of student viewpoints, moving beyond simple acceptance or rejection. We further propose a two-dimensional framework that maps these perspectives according to students' openness to GenAI and their sharing of creative agency with it. This research contributes empirical insights into how art students negotiate creative identity with GenAI, provides a valuable framework for educators to develop tailored pedagogical strategies addressing diverse student needs and concerns, and offers implications for designing more human-centered GenAI tools for creative practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Education & Information Technologies is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Education Research Complete |
| FullText | Text: Availability: 0 |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: ehh DbLabel: Education Research Complete An: 194004967 AccessLevel: 6 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: Human-AI co-creation or conflict? Mapping art students' diverse perspectives on creative identity with genAI: A Q methodology study. – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Wu%2C+Xingting%22">Wu, Xingting</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<i> xingtingwu@swin.edu.au</i><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Tran%2C+Tram+Thi+Minh%22">Tran, Tram Thi Minh</searchLink><relatesTo>2</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<i> tram.tran@sydney.edu.au</i><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Zhou%2C+Qiqi%22">Zhou, Qiqi</searchLink><relatesTo>3</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<i> zhou.q@buas.nl</i><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Sun%2C+Jian%22">Sun, Jian</searchLink><relatesTo>4</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<i> 0120210048@mail.xhu.edu.cn</i><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Wu%2C+Hao%22">Wu, Hao</searchLink><relatesTo>4</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<i> wuhao@mail.xhu.edu.cn</i><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Wang%2C+Xiaoyang%22">Wang, Xiaoyang</searchLink><relatesTo>4</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<i> 0720160002@mail.xhu.edu.cn</i> – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22Education+%26+Information+Technologies%22">Education & Information Technologies</searchLink>. Jun2026, Vol. 31 Issue 9, p2837-2876. 40p. – Name: Subject Label: Subject Terms Group: Su Data: *<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Art+students%22">Art students</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Authorship%22">Authorship</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Creative+ability%22">Creative ability</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Art+education%22">Art education</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Q+technique%22">Q technique</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Generative+artificial+intelligence%22">Generative artificial intelligence</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Human-computer+interaction%22">Human-computer interaction</searchLink> – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: Generative AI (GenAI) is rapidly transforming creative fields, raising critical questions about its impact on artistic identity and authorship, which also influence art education. While studies have explored GenAI adoption, the diversity of art students' subjective perspectives on collaborating with these tools remains under-examined. This study uses Q methodology, a mixed-methods approach to investigating subjectivity, to explore the distinct perspectives art students hold regarding their creative identity when collaborating with GenAI. We conducted a Q study with 40 university students from various art-related disciplines (e.g., visual arts, design, music, animation) across different academic levels. Participants sorted 42 statements reflecting diverse viewpoints on GenAI collaboration, authorship, ethics, and creative control. By-person factor analysis revealed five distinct perspectives: (1) Human-centered directors, who treat GenAI as a tool under strong human intention; (2) Authorship guardians, who resist AI co-authorship and prioritise authenticity and ethical boundaries; (3) Conflicted co-creators, who use GenAI but struggle with ownership, disclosure, and earned pride; (4) Pragmatic integrators, who adopt GenAI for workflow efficiency while keeping craft expertise central; and (5) Enthusiastic explorers, who embrace AI's creative possibilities, open to co-agency and novel expression. These findings offer a nuanced typology of student viewpoints, moving beyond simple acceptance or rejection. We further propose a two-dimensional framework that maps these perspectives according to students' openness to GenAI and their sharing of creative agency with it. This research contributes empirical insights into how art students negotiate creative identity with GenAI, provides a valuable framework for educators to develop tailored pedagogical strategies addressing diverse student needs and concerns, and offers implications for designing more human-centered GenAI tools for creative practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] – Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright Label: Group: Ab Data: <i>Copyright of Education & Information Technologies is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=ehh&AN=194004967 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Identifiers: – Type: doi Value: 10.1007/s10639-026-13914-4 Languages: – Code: eng Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 40 StartPage: 2837 Subjects: – SubjectFull: Art students Type: general – SubjectFull: Authorship Type: general – SubjectFull: Creative ability Type: general – SubjectFull: Art education Type: general – SubjectFull: Q technique Type: general – SubjectFull: Generative artificial intelligence Type: general – SubjectFull: Human-computer interaction Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: Human-AI co-creation or conflict? Mapping art students' diverse perspectives on creative identity with genAI: A Q methodology study. Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Wu, Xingting – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Tran, Tram Thi Minh – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Zhou, Qiqi – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Sun, Jian – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Wu, Hao – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Wang, Xiaoyang IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 25 M: 06 Text: Jun2026 Type: published Y: 2026 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 13602357 Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 31 – Type: issue Value: 9 Titles: – TitleFull: Education & Information Technologies Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
