Creators’ perceptions and attitudes toward using generative artificial intelligence: Exploring posts and comments related to AIGC design learning on a Chinese social media platform with a mixed-method approach

  • Wenyi Li The School of Computer Science, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China
Keywords: AIGC; design; creator; generative artificial intelligence; word cloud; sentiment analysis; social network analysis; social media
Article ID: 1624

Abstract

Artificial intelligence generated content (AIGC) has been found to play a crucial role in the field of design, where its significance in various creative clusters has been increasingly recognized. However, the lack of in-depth understanding of creators’ AIGC learning experiences and sentiments in the design area has become an obstacle to the further development of targeted educational programs and industry-relevant initiatives. It remains unclear what specific clusters of AIGC design learning creators are focusing on and what kinds of attitudes, positive or negative, they hold towards these different clusters within the field. To bridge these gaps, this study collected 9992 posts and comments related to AIGC design learning on a Chinese social media platform called Xiaohongshu. A mixed-method approach was applied by combining word cloud, sentiment analysis, co-word analysis, and social network analysis. Using word cloud and sentiment analysis, this research aimed to uncover the key perceptions and sentiment orientations creators focused on in their expression. Social network analysis and co-word matrix were used to identify central concepts, their connections and clusters of related terms. The result differentiates creators’ perceptions into the following clusters: tools and technical foundations for AIGC design, application domains of AIGC design, cultural elements used in AIGC, semantic nuances in AIGC terminology, AIGC design methods, creativity and innovation in AIGC design, future-oriented perspectives in AIGC design for professional development, and AIGC design ethics. Moreover, it presents the tendencies and proportions of creators’ attitudes in the above clusters in four main sentiment categories: positive, moderately positive, moderately negative, and negative. This study is expected to have implications in providing practical guidance for educators to optimize AIGC design teaching strategies, thereby better meeting learners’ emotional needs and increasing their willingness to learn AIGC design knowledge, as well as helping the industry develop better AIGC-designed products.

References

1. Weng X, Xia Q, Gu M, et al. Assessment and learning outcomes for generative AI in higher education: A scoping review on current research status and trends. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology. 2024. doi: 10.14742/ajet.9540

2. Huangfu J, Li R, Xu J, et al. Fostering Continuous Innovation in Creative Education: A Multi-Path Configurational Analysis of Continuous Collaboration with AIGC in Chinese ACG Educational Contexts. Sustainability. 2024; 17(1): 144. doi: 10.3390/su17010144

3. Tan L, Luhrs M. Using Generative AI Midjourney to enhance divergent and convergent thinking in an architect’s creative design process. The Design Journal. 2024; 27(4): 677-699. doi: 10.1080/14606925.2024.2353479

4. Wang Y, Xi Y, Liu X, et al. Exploring the Dual Potential of Artificial Intelligence-Generated Content in the Esthetic Reproduction and Sustainable Innovative Design of Ming-Style Furniture. Sustainability. 2024; 16(12): 5173. doi: 10.3390/su16125173

5. Jiang Q, Zhang J, Wang PH, et al. Technology Acceptance and Innovation Diffusion: Are Users More Inclined Toward AIGC-Assisted Design? International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction. 2024: 1-15. doi: 10.1080/10447318.2024.2408513

6. Huang KL, Liu Y chen, Dong MQ. Incorporating AIGC into design ideation: A study on self-efficacy and learning experience acceptance under higher-order thinking. Thinking Skills and Creativity. 2024; 52: 101508. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2024.101508

7. Shanshan S, Sen G. Empowering learners with AI‐generated content for programming learning and computational thinking: The lens of extended effective use theory. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 2024; 40(4): 1941-1958. doi: 10.1111/jcal.12996

8. Lin H, Jiang X, Deng X, et al. Comparing AIGC and traditional idea generation methods: Evaluating their impact on creativity in the product design ideation phase. Thinking Skills and Creativity. 2024; 54: 101649. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2024.101649

9. He W. AI‐Generated Content: From Conception to Communal Engagement. Architectural Design. 2024; 94(3): 110-117. doi: 10.1002/ad.3062

10. Yin H, Zhang Z, Liu Y. The Exploration of Integrating the Midjourney Artificial Intelligence Generated Content Tool into Design Systems to Direct Designers towards Future-Oriented Innovation. Systems. 2023; 11(12): 566. doi: 10.3390/systems11120566

11. Li W. A Study on Factors Influencing Designers’ Behavioral Intention in Using AI-Generated Content for Assisted Design: Perceived Anxiety, Perceived Risk, and UTAUT. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction. 2024; 41(2): 1064-1077. doi: 10.1080/10447318.2024.2310354

12. Gupta P, Mahajan R, Badhera U, et al. Integrating generative AI in management education: A mixed-methods study using social construction of technology theory. The International Journal of Management Education. 2024; 22(3): 101017. doi: 10.1016/j.ijme.2024.101017

13. Smith-Mutegi D, Mamo Y, Kim J, et al. Perceptions of STEM education and artificial intelligence: a Twitter (X) sentiment analysis. International Journal of STEM Education. 2025; 12(1). doi: 10.1186/s40594-025-00527-5

14. Fu X, Brinkley C, Sanchez TW, et al. Text mining public feedback on urban densification plan change in Hamilton, New Zealand. Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science. 2024. doi: 10.1177/23998083241272097

15. Tan J. A Critical Research on Xiaohongshu for Information Sharing for Chinese Teenagers. Profesional de la información. 2024; 33(1). doi: 10.3145/epi.2024.0017

16. Fraile-Rojas B, De-Pablos-Heredero C, Mendez-Suarez M. Female perspectives on algorithmic bias: implications for AI researchers and practitioners. Management Decision. 2025. doi: 10.1108/md-04-2024-0884

17. Hosseini E, Taghizadeh Milani K, Sabetnasab MS. Development and maturity of co-word thematic clusters: the field of linked data. Library Hi Tech. 2023; 43(1): 81-113. doi: 10.1108/lht-10-2022-0488

18. Liu D, Zhao Y, Wang G, et al. Thirty Years of Service Failure and Recovery Research: Thematic Development and Future Research Opportunities From a Social Network Perspective. Journal of Service Research. 2023; 27(2): 268-282. doi: 10.1177/10946705231194006

19. Li Y, Lee FL. Social media and the negotiation of travel photo authenticity in the making of Wanghongjingdian in China. Tourist Studies. 2024; 24(3): 221-245. doi: 10.1177/14687976241274807

20. Tao H, Peiying S, Huihui W, et al. How do affective and cognitive involvement affect tourism intentions: a perspective on blogger impact. Current Issues in Tourism. 2024: 1-20. doi: 10.1080/13683500.2024.2392763

21. Chivers BR, Garad RM, Boyle JA, et al. Perinatal Distress During COVID-19: Thematic Analysis of an Online Parenting Forum. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 2020; 22(9): e22002. doi: 10.2196/22002

22. Adeshola I, Adepoju AP. The opportunities and challenges of ChatGPT in education. Interactive Learning Environments. 2023; 32(10): 6159-6172. doi: 10.1080/10494820.2023.2253858

23. Amin SM, El‐Gazar HE, Zoromba MA, et al. Sentiment of Nurses Towards Artificial Intelligence and Resistance to Change in Healthcare Organisations: A Mixed‐Method Study. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 2024; 81(4): 2087-2098. doi: 10.1111/jan.16435

24. Blazkova T, Pedersen ERG, Andersen KRR. Sentiments and sustainability: stakeholder perceptions of sustainable fashion on social media. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal. 2025; 29(4): 585-604. doi: 10.1108/jfmm-05-2024-0184

25. Chen J, Shi Y, Yi C, et al. Generative-AI-Driven Human Digital Twin in IoT Healthcare: A Comprehensive Survey. IEEE Internet of Things Journal. 2024; 11(21): 34749-34773. doi: 10.1109/jiot.2024.3421918

26. Chen J, Yi C, Du H, et al. A Revolution of Personalized Healthcare: Enabling Human Digital Twin With Mobile AIGC. IEEE Network. 2024; 38(6): 234-242. doi: 10.1109/mnet.2024.3366560

27. Chen J, Shi Y. Generative AI over Mobile Networks for Human Digital Twin in Human-Centric Applications: A Comprehensive Survey. 2024. doi: 10.36227/techrxiv.172349525.50239637/v2

Published
2025-06-26
How to Cite
Li, W. (2025). Creators’ perceptions and attitudes toward using generative artificial intelligence: Exploring posts and comments related to AIGC design learning on a Chinese social media platform with a mixed-method approach. Artificial Intelligence and Education, 1(1), 1624. https://doi.org/10.62617/aie1624
Section
Article