arbiter
JournalsAccount

"Fad, Fraud, or Future? A Qualitative Inquiry into Generative AI Adoption, Resistance, and Ambivalence"

Yi Li et al.

AIS Transactions on Human-Computer Interaction2026https://doi.org/10.17705/1thci.00236article
AJG 2ABDC A
Weight
0.50

Abstract

Generative AI has transformed how we search for and process information in both personal and professional environments. Despite its rapid diffusion, the specific factors driving or hindering individual adoption remain underexplored. To bridge this gap, we conducted a qualitative study focused on ChatGPT and identified a range of technological, personal, organizational, and social factors influencing users’ acceptance, resistance, and ambivalence. We also examined emotional, experiential, and ethical responses that explain divergent usage trajectories. Building on these insights, we propose a comprehensive framework that maps the constructs and relationships that shape generative AI adoption, resistance, and ambivalence. Further, we highlight a series of paradoxes (e.g., simplicity vs. complexity, technophobia vs. technophilia, techno-optimism vs. techno-pessimism, overdependence vs. independence, and mandatory vs. volitional use) that collectively complicate human-generative AI interactions. This study extends technology adoption literature by incorporating emergent themes specific to generative AI while offering practical implications for AI designers and policymakers.

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.17705/1thci.00236

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{yi2026,
  title        = {{"Fad, Fraud, or Future? A Qualitative Inquiry into Generative AI Adoption, Resistance, and Ambivalence"}},
  author       = {Yi Li et al.},
  journal      = {AIS Transactions on Human-Computer Interaction},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.17705/1thci.00236},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

"Fad, Fraud, or Future? A Qualitative Inquiry into Generative AI Adoption, Resistance, and Ambivalence"

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.