Artificial intelligence in UX/UI design: a

survey on current adoption and [future]

practices
Renato Antonio Bertão, Jaewoo Joo*
Kookmin University
*
Corresponding author e-mail: [email protected]

Abstract:
Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology has been disseminated across various industries,
and algorithm-based activities are becoming common in design disciplines. Despite
high expectations of collaborating with intelligent systems, whether designers are
actually interested in working with algorithms has been little discussed. This paper
summarises ongoing research findings that have probed the use of AI features in
design practices. A survey of Brazilian UX/UI professionals was conducted to map
their AI-supported activities and explore their perspectives on interacting with AI
systems and future adoption scenarios. The findings indicate a low usage rate of AI
tools in the Brazilian UX/UI industry and a limited operational perspective regarding
the role, application, and impact of intelligent technologies on design. Surveyed
UX/UI designers are more prone to adopt AI as a virtual assistant to facilitate practice
and increase process efficiency rather than as a creative collaborator.

Keywords: UX/UI design; artificial intelligence (AI); adoption; design tool

1. Introduction
In his seminal paper on computer systems and design practices, Cross (2001) suggests that one
should pay attention to human design cognition to probe issues related to machines’ ability to
deliver designs. This research builds upon this direction and explores design practitioners’
perceptions of adding Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies to their practices. Even at their early
stages, AI systems are becoming accessible for designers and changing design practices without
undermining fundamental principles of design (Verganti, Vendraminelli and Iansiti, 2020).
According to Boden (2016, p. 1), “AI seeks to make computers do the sorts of things that minds can
do.” Russel & Norvig (2016) further clarified that intelligent systems’ operation encompasses thinking
and acting humanly and rationally. Among the five types of AI—classical, artificial neural networks,
evolutionary programming, cellular automata, and dynamical systems (Boden, 2016)—, currently,

Copyright © 2021. The copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s). Permission
is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference, provided that the author(s),
source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses please contact the author(s).
RENATO ANTONIO BERTÃO, JAEWOO JOO

design practitioners primarily have classical AI and machine learning features available for working
and explore neural networks (Pfeiffer, 2018).
Despite anecdotes regarding AI threats to design disciplines (Girling, 2016, 2017), research on AI-
based design is gaining ground. It has already covered topics such as AI’s impact on design practices
(Cautela et al., 2019; Liao et al., 2020; Verganti et al., 2020) and practitioners’ roles in interacting
with AI (Angell, 2019; Liu & Nah, 2019). While investigating these complex issues, scholars listened to
design practitioners (Main & Grierson, 2020; Pfeiffer, 2018) such as UX designers (Churchill et al.,
2018; Dove et al., 2017).
Our paper follows this latter path and summarises findings of an ongoing project investigating
designer practices associated with AI. More specifically, we focus on UX/UI professionals aiming to
understand how they are currently using intelligent systems and obtain their perspectives on AI
adoption.
We surveyed Brazilian UX/UI designers to map current practices supported by AI tools. Although
designing with algorithms is not widely popular currently, we delved into individual perceptions on AI
capabilities and applications and their impact on UX/UI design activities. In addition, we examined a
scenario where AI tools evolve into systems functioning as AI design assistants and explored
designer’s perspectives on their role when interacting with AI technologies.
The findings reveal that the Brazilian UX/UI design industry is in the early stages of adopting
algorithms to support design practices. Practitioners lack understanding of AI potential but had few
opportunities to experience intelligent systems. They thus perceive AI as an operational tool that
facilitates developing stages of the UX/UI design process and impacts design efficiency. However,
from a medium-run perspective, individuals reckon AI features to be a common approach when
developing design activities. Although currently viewing AI systems as virtual assistants, they suggest
that they would be open to working collaboratively with intelligent technologies.
AI’s diffusion among design practitioners involves understanding algorithms not only as a new design
material (Dove et al., 2017) but also changing attitudes towards creative collaboration with AI
technologies (McCormack et al., 2020). Despite the study’s limitations, we expect these findings to
provide avenues for further investigation of the challenges designers face when embracing
technologies that add to their natural intelligence.

2. Background
Computational systems have significantly impacted design disciplines. Bernal et al. (2015)
investigated computers’ roles in design practices and proposed categorising design processes as
computer-aided, computer-based, and computer-augmented. However, in the context of the Fourth
Industrial Revolution, a profound impact is expected to come due to the expansion and integration of
computer systems used by designers (García Ferrari, 2017).
AI systems are still in development and not fully available to designers. But a computer-augmented
approach tends to challenge design activities, and AI is expected to play a critical role in the future. In
a so-called ‘AI design’ context, solutions are delivered through intelligent systems during the design
process. Notwithstanding, current approaches are restricted to employment of generative algorithms
to support the creative process (L. Chen et al., 2019) or apply algorithms to automatise design tasks
that used to require intense manipulation (Cautela et al., 2019). Since humans still mediate these
processes, AI-empowered design (Verganti et al., 2020) might better describe the contemporary use
of AI in the design area.
 Artificial intelligence in UX/UI design: a survey on current adoption and [future] practices

Research on AI in design practices has taken different directions. Cautela et al. (2019) pointed out
that AI can facilitate teamwork, empower research development, and automatise test and feedback
phases. They expect AI algorithms to fit intelligent data processing activities, including image and
language processing, virtual assistance, and recommendations for solutions. Examining current AI
systems, Liu and Nah (2019) refer to the AI functions and advantages that affect practitioners.
According to them, design efficiency is improved by data processing and automation, communication
is promoted by concept visualisation and solution generation and a generative design approach
expands the imagination.
Main and Grierson (2020) surveyed designers to investigate AI capabilities that might support the
design process and enhance creativity. They suggested that tasks related to creativity—generating,
reviewing, selecting, and translating concepts into final design outcomes—are less tackled by AI tools
compared to tasks as project planning and management, problem research, and testing and
feedback. Conducting extensive research in three continents, Pfeiffer (2018) interviewed designers to
explore attitudes toward AI-based creative assistants. The results showed that a majority of
respondents valued AI for its streamlining of the operational aspects of practice, such as reducing
drudgery. As Main and Grierson (2020) found, they had little expectation that AI will provide creative
solutions.
Despite practitioners’ perception of AI as enabling improved performance, scholars show room to
explore creative issues. Liao, Hansen and Chai (2020) proposed a framework of AI-augmented design
support for early stages where AI's role in ideation is related to creating representation, triggering
empathy, and promoting engagement. Similarly, McCormack et al. (2020) characterised AI as a
creative agent system that provokes, challenges, and enhances human creativity. Verganti,
Vendraminelli and Iansit (2020) further claimed that AI reinforces design principles such as people-
centredness, leading to potentially more creative solutions.
As AI evolves, it goes beyond being a design tool and becomes integrated into systemic solutions
such as Adobe Sensei (Adobe, n.d.). In this context, the role of designers in the design process will
change. McCormack et al. (2020) described AI as systems that allow creative collaboration with
designers. Similarly, Churchill, Allen and Kuniavsky (2018) presented AI as collaborators in delivering
shared outcomes. Main and Grierson's (2020) research proposed that AI can perform as an assistant,
collaborator, researcher, or facilitator but might also play the role of future co-creator. As AI comes
to be actively embraced in design tasks, Angell (2019) pointed out that practitioners need to include
data science in their skillsets. Conversely, Girling (2017) observed that designers would become
curators and not necessarily be creators in future AI contexts.

2.1 Analytical framework

To address issues related to the adoption of AI tools not fully developed and available to all
designers, we draw upon Marketing literature that explores the adoption of soon-to-be-launched
products. Of the new product adoption literature (e.g., X. Chen et al., 2019; Nguyen & Joo, 2019), we
built upon Ma, Gill and Jiang's (2015) research investigating the effect of innovation depending on
whether it is core (e.g., when it is integrated with a base product) or peripheral (e.g., when it is a
detachable accessory).
We extended this approach to the context of AI in design practices to help designers understand the
AI systems currently available. We have characterised Adobe Sensei (Adobe, n.d.) as a core tool
because it is integrated into Adobe software. We designated tools such as Remove.bg (Kaleido AI,
n.d.) as a peripheral tool because it removes an image background as a detachable accessory

RENATO ANTONIO BERTÃO, JAEWOO JOO

powering the design process. To clarify differences between AI tools, we use 'AI-integrated design
tool' to refer to a core tool and 'AI-powered design tool' to refer to a peripheral tool.

3. Methodology
This study was devised to probe the current context and perspectives on AI adoption by UX/UI
designers. The research design followed Dove et al. (2017) and Main and Grierson's (2020)
approaches and was based on an online survey conducted among Brazilian UX/UI practitioners.
Connected via social media, professionals working in cities with an established design industry
answered a questionnaire encompassing 47 questions, of which 29 are covered in this paper.
As a survey strategy, no prior definition of AI was provided to avoid influencing respondents when
obtaining their understanding of the topic. Conversely, multiple-choice and open-ended questions
elaborated on current literature regarding AI in design practices and covered topics such as AI’s role,
capability (Main & Grierson, 2020) and application (Cautela et al., 2019); they also explored
perceptions of future scenarios for the use of AI features.
The survey reached 132 practitioners during December 2020 and January 2021, and 123 respondents
were selected for the sample (Figure 1) under the criterion of a minimum of one year of professional
experience developing UX/UI-related activities, either as a hired worker or as a
consultant/freelancer. This criterion was assessed by an open-ended question where the respondent
was required to describe her/his main UX/UI designer activity. After responses were translated into
English, a mixed-method research approach (Creswell, 2009) guided their analysis. In addition to
using descriptive statistics to examine the survey results, we adopted a Grounded Theory (Corbin &
Strauss, 1990) procedure to interpret the answers to open-ended questions.

3.1 Participants
The strategy of sending a personal invitation via LinkedIn helped reach practitioners working in the
Brazilian UX/UI design industry. Based on Figure 1, we may characterise the participants as Millenial
designers (on average 31 years old) with educational backgrounds or training in a design-related
area. They are employed in large companies in the Southern part of Brazil and have worked (on
average five years) in-house UX/UI design departments, mainly in mid-level positions.

DEMOGRAPHICS UX/UI DESIGNER (n = 123)

Gender Male (55%) Female (42%) *

Generation Millennials (71%) Gen. Z (17%) Gen. X (12%)

Undergraduate degree Design (75%) *

Graduate degree/training UX/UI design-related (79%) *

Job position Mid-level (33%) Junior (24%) Senior (23%) *

Hired worker (62%) Consultant (18%) Freelancer (12%) *

Workplace Large company (48%) Start-up (18%) Medium (13%) Small (13%) *

In-house UX/UI design department (53%) Other dept (14%) Freelancer (11%) *

Southern Brazil (57%) South Brazil (29%) *

* Other alternatives cited by less than 10% of the respondents.

Figure 1. Respondents’ profile.

 Artificial intelligence in UX/UI design: a survey on current adoption and [future] practices

4. Results
4.1 UX/UI designer’s AI awareness
The questionnaire initially explored UX/UI designers’ knowledge of AI by asking for a brief definition.
Essentially, they described AI based on two contexts. The technology-oriented answers centred on
the computational system, highlighting features such as programming and training algorithms to
recognise patterns within a machine learning process. Conversely, responses focusing on AI
operation and application referred to autonomous systems able to analyse data emulating human
reasoning to help problem-solving and decision making.

4.2 AI adoption in UX/UI design’s current practices

To date, as shown in Figure 2, Brazilian UX/UI practitioners had few opportunities to develop projects
where AI either supported the design process or was embedded in the solution. Also, the adoption
rate of any AI design tool has been low. When an open-ended question investigated regular use,
Remove.bg was the most cited feature by the 22 respondents who had adopted AI-powered tools.
Regarding the use of AI-integrated systems, only six respondents referred to Adobe Sensei.

AI IN UX/UI DESIGN [CURRENT PRACTICE] UX/UI DESIGNER (n = 123)

Developed project supported by AI No (79%) Yes (21%)

Developed project embedding AI No (67%) Yes (33%)

Used AI-powered design tool (e.g., remove.bg) No (82%) Yes (18%)

Used an AI-integrated design system (e.g., Adobe Sensei) No (95%)

Figure 2. Current AI adoption in UX/UI design

4.3 Future adoption of AI in UX/UI design

The questionnaire investigated participants’ perceptions about adoption within a decade. The
majority considered that they would be familiar with AI features. Besides, when asked which AI
design approach they would choose in such a context, most professionals leaned toward adopting AI-
integrated design systems in their practices rather than AI-powered tools.

UX/UI DESIGNER (n = 123)

FUTURE SCENARIO [PERCEPTION] Not at all familiar Extremely familiar

Familiarity with AI features 3% 6% 12% 47% 32%

ADOPTION SCENARIO [PERCEPTION]

Use of AI features Integrated system (64%) Powered tool (24%) *

* Other alternatives cited by less than 10% of the respondents.

Figure 3. Perception on future AI adoption in UX/UI design

4.4 Perspectives on AI-based UX/UI design

Figure 4 summarises the designers’ perspectives on topics elaborated on in research literature and
explored through multiple-choice questions. Concerning the primary role of AI in UX/UI design
practices, most respondents suggested it is related to optimisation (47%) and automatisation (40%)

RENATO ANTONIO BERTÃO, JAEWOO JOO

of processes and tasks, disregarding aspects such as the generation of design solutions. A similar
attitude was shown concerning AI applications. The majority of the respondents (63%) emphasised
data processing rather than generating designs (18%) or virtual assistance (13%).
When exploring specific activities in the UX/UI design process where AI might be helpful, participants
suggested that AI would support planning (21%) and research (23%) but primarily refer to the testing
and feedback phases (37%). Again, AI elements related to the generation of design concepts and
solutions were not regarded as valuable. Such an operational perspective on AI was confirmed
concerning the impact of AI systems in design activities. The majority of the respondents (74%)
considered that AI would affect design process efficiency, but few suggested that it would influence
the solution quality (11%).

AI-BASED UX/UI DESIGN [PERCEPTION] UX/UI DESIGNER (n = 123)

AI systems primary role Process facilitation/optimisation (47%) Task automatization (40%) *

AI systems application General data processing (63%) Design (18%) Assist. (13%) *

AI systems capability Test/feedback (37%) Research (23%) Planning (21%) *

AI systems impact Design process efficiency (74%) Quality (11%) *

* Other alternatives cited by less than 10% of the respondents.

Figure 4. Perspectives on AI-based UX/UI design

AI-based UX/UI design was also touched on in open-ended questions. One investigated the types of
projects that might include intelligent systems as tools to develop the design process. Overall, the
respondents did not name a specific project type. Instead, they cited AI features that benefit project
development. Their answers covered AI’s role in automatising, optimising, and facilitating tasks and
processes and its applicability to data processing. Practitioners also commented on particular UX/UI
design steps that might use AI tools and their answers endorsed findings from the multiple-choice
questions presented in Figure 4.
A second question elaborated on projects that might include AI as a feature in a UX/UI solution.
Although the suggestions encompassed general or customised projects, most respondents referred
to virtual assistants, and some addressed a voice-use interface (VUI) or the digital accessibility
features of such AI devices.

4.5 Perspectives on the role of UX/UI designers

The questionnaire explored perceptions of the UX/UI designer’s role when interacting with AI-
integrated design systems. The majority of respondents considered they would co-create or
collaborate with intelligent systems to deliver solutions. This perspective aligns with participants’
self-evaluations regarding working style. Most practitioners assumed an interdependent approach to
their practices, i.e., collaborating with other designers to develop UX/UI projects.
 Artificial intelligence in UX/UI design: a survey on current adoption and [future] practices

UX/UI DESIGNER (n = 123)

UX/UI DESIGN [CURRENT PRACTICE] Autonomous Collaborative

Working style [self-evaluation] 30% 70%

AI-BASED UX/UI DESIGN [PERCEPTION]

Designer's role [in the process] Co-creator (41%) Collaborator (26%) Curator (19%) *

* Other alternatives cited by less than 10% of the respondents.

Figure 5. The role of UX/UI designers working with AI-integrated design systems

5. Discussion
Reviewing the participants’ profiles (Figure 1), we believe that the survey gathered the perceptions
from a representative sample of Brazilian UX/UI designers. Most of their demographic characteristics
are confirmed by the Panorama UX 2021 (Leslie et al., 2021), an annual survey on the Brazilian UX
industry developed since 2015 and well regarded among local professionals. Our survey respondents
demonstrated reasonable knowledge about an AI system’s operation and application; however, their
answers lack an awareness of how to work with AI. Similar results were obtained by Dove et al.
(2017) and Main and Grierson's (2020) surveys.
Notwithstanding, in the context of our research, when probing UX/UI practices, we suggest Brazilian
practitioners face a primary challenge regarding AI: the lack of opportunities to work with it. Our
findings revealed that most respondents did not touch on AI issues in their workplaces (Figure 2),
either in connection with the development of an AI-based project (67%) or using any AI tools as
supports (79%). These numbers contrast with Dove et al.'s (2017) findings in the US, UK, and
Scandinavia, where 63% of the respondents claim to have worked with AI. This context is evidenced
by Brazilian practitioners’ low usage rate of AI-powered design tools (18%) or AI-integrated ones
(5%). Although the local UX/UI design industry follows global practices, we observe that AI in Brazil
does not reach half of civil society and the business ecosystem (Mont et al., 2020).
Despite the current limitations to accessing and working with intelligent systems, we claim design
supported by AI is a one-way ticket for designers. As a new design material, professionals will be
required to manage AI’s quirks and opportunities (Holmquist, 2017). For instance, concerning
machine learning, challenges will arise in understanding its capabilities and purposeful use (Dove et
al., 2017). Nonetheless, Brazilian designers shared favorable perspectives when the survey
investigated future adoption scenarios (Figure 3). In total, 79% expect to become moderately or
extremely familiar with AI tools and features. These results are consistent with findings identified
among UK designers in Main and Grierson (2020). In the UK, 68% of the practitioners considered that
AI would have a high or very high impact on their work.
Regarding future AI-based UX/UI design, we noticed practitioners apply similar operational lenses to
describe general AI systems. They perceive AI primarily as a functional tool in design (Figure 4) aimed
at data processing that would facilitate and optimise processes and tasks such as planning, research,
testing, etc. Main and Grierson (2020) identified a similar orientation when exploring activities to be
shared with AI systems. This perspective is reinforced in our study participants’ comments about the
kinds of UX/UI projects that might include AI as a feature of solutions. The limited awareness of AI
systems’ potential led most designers to cite virtual assistance and data processing projects as the
primary AI application. Only a few referred to AI’s application to specific areas, such as finance,
healthcare, urbanism, etc. Curiously, these findings stress the perception that AI systems will change

RENATO ANTONIO BERTÃO, JAEWOO JOO

design practices by empowering practitioners (Verganti et al., 2020) on operational processes

(Cautela et al., 2019; Liu & Nah, 2019) rather than creative ones.
In contrast, when exploring the designer’s role in AI-based design practices (Figure 5), Brazilian UX/UI
designers’ perceptions seemed to overcome AI application boundaries. In total, 41% suggested they
might consider co-creating, and 26% would collaborate with AI systems. These findings reflected
Pfeiffer's (2018) research that 62% of respondents were willing to work with AI-based creative
assistants. Nonetheless, considering most practitioners are still getting introduced to intelligent
systems’ potential and AI-integrated design tools are not fully accessible, we doubt they can make
sense of AI as a creative agent (McCormack et al., 2020). In this sense, at present, designers can only
understand AI systems as virtual assistants.
Exploring the topic further, we argue that even Brazilian designers favourably perceive co-creating
with AI, their approach to co-creation does not necessarily encompass computational creativity
(McCormack et al., 2020) that might lead to conceiving solutions together with AI. Main and Grierson
(2020) showed that designers tend to rank AI low in terms of capability to generate concepts or final
designs. Analysing individual comments about future AI-based UX/UI design practices, we found
most practitioners refer to AI assistance in the context of automatising tasks and processing data to
facilitate several steps in the design process. In essence, such an approach refers to collaborative
work. However, few respondents referred to AI’s recommendation of a design solution, or more
specifically, to generative design with AI, in a co-creation context.
As for future research, we opened the door to investigate the effect of designers' working practices
on AI technologies' adoption. The survey results show that most respondents define themselves as
collaborative in work style (Figure 5), and in a future AI scenario, they would use core systems as
Adobe Sensei (Figure 3). In sum, collaborative working designers embrace AI-integrated design tools.
Note that we viewed Adobe Sensei as more innovative than Remove.bg because the former offers an
integrated AI approach, whereas the latter is a peripheral AI tool that can be applied to specific tasks.
Interestingly, however, this is inconsistent with the findings of a marketing study about new product
adoption. Ma, Yang and Mourali (2014) demonstrated that independent mindset customers are
prone to adopt really new products, whereas interdependent ones lean toward incrementally new
products. Although this research did not probe correlations, our findings seem to oppose marketing
scholars’ inferences. We identified that expectations of collaboration-minded UX/UI design
practitioners about AI-based tools are related to an innovative [and integrated] AI assistant that goes
beyond current applications.

6. Concluding remarks
Our research mapped UX/UI designer’s perceptions of AI in Brazil. It expanded coverage of the topic
previously developed by similar surveys in the mainstream of the design industry (Dove et al., 2017;
Main & Grierson, 2020; Pfeiffer, 2018). Although it employs a distinct approach and recruited
different participants compared to previous research, it illustrates Brazilian professionals’
perspective on AI adoption in their design activities.
However, even while providing a glimpse of AI’s insertion into the design domain, this paper is
constrained to UX/UI activities. Further research might explore AI issues in other design disciplines.
In addition, this research covers a specific geographical region lacking AI diffusion. Such aspects of
the study limit comparisons with the existing research. Future initiatives should encompass countries
 Artificial intelligence in UX/UI design: a survey on current adoption and [future] practices

with different design industries and technological backgrounds to provide a comprehensive map of
the topic.

References
Adobe. (n.d.). Adobe Sensei. https://www.adobe.com/sensei.html
Angell, C. A. (2019). Artificial Intelligence, Design Thinking and the Future of Designers as
Programmers. Innovation (IDSA Industrial Design Society of America), 37–40.
Bernal, M., Haymaker, J. R., & Eastman, C. (2015). On the role of computational support for designers
in action. Design Studies, 41, 163–182.
Boden, M. A. (2016). AI - Its nature and future. Oxford University Press.
Cautela, C., Mortati, M., Dell’Era, C., & Gastaldi, L. (2019). The impact of artificial intelligence on
design thinking practice: Insights from the ecosystem of startups. Strategic Design Research
Journal, 12(1), 114–134.
Chen, L., Wang, P., Dong, H., Shi, F., Han, J., Guo, Y., Childs, P. R. N., Xiao, J., & Wu, C. (2019). An
artificial intelligence based data-driven approach for design ideation. Journal of Visual
Communication and Image Representation, 61, 10–22.
Chen, X., Kim, S., & Joo, J. (2019). How do we nudge people to choose aesthetically pleasing
products? Archives of Design Research, 32(1), 61–73.
Churchill, E. F., Allen, P. van, & Kuniavsky, M. (2018). Designing AI. Interactions, Nov-Dec, 34–37.
Corbin, J. M., & Strauss, A. (1990). Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative
criteria. Qualitative Sociology, 13(1), 3–21.
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. In
Sage Publications (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Cross, N. (2001). Can a Machine Design? Design Issues, 17(4), 44–50.
Dove, G., Halskov, K., Forlizzi, J., & Zimmerman, J. (2017). UX design innovation: Challenges for
working with machine learning as a design material. Conference on Human Factors in
Computing Systems - Proceedings, 2017-May, 278–288.
García Ferrari, T. (2017). Design and the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Dangers and opportunities for
a mutating discipline. The Design Journal, 20(sup1), S2625–S2633.
Girling, R. (2016). AI and the future of design : What skills do we need to compete against the
machines? O’Reilly Media, 1–16. https://www.oreilly.com/ideas/ai-and-the-future-of-design-
what-skills-do-we-need-to-compete-against-the-machines
Girling, R. (2017). AI and the future of design : What will the designer of 2025 look like? O’Reilly
Media. https://www.oreilly.com/ideas/ai-and-the-future-of-design-what-will-the-designer-of-
2025-look-like
Holmquist, L. E. (2017). Intelligence on tap: Artificial Intelligence as a New Design Material.
Interactions, 24(4), 28–33.
Kaleido AI. (n.d.). remove.bg. https://www.remove.bg
Leslie, C., Coli, A., & Fátima, I. de. (2021). O mercado de UX em um ano pandêmico. Panorama UX
2021. https://panoramaux.com.br
Liao, J., Hansen, P., & Chai, C. (2020). A framework of artificial intelligence augmented design
support. Human-Computer Interaction, 35(5–6), 511–544.
Liu, J. J., & Nah, K. (2019). A Study on the Role Change of Designers in the Age of Artificial
Intelligence. Journal of the Korean Society Of Design Culture, 25(4), 339–349.
Ma, Z., Gill, T., & Jiang, Y. (2015). Core versus peripheral innovations: The effect of innovation locus

RENATO ANTONIO BERTÃO, JAEWOO JOO

on consumer Adoption of New Products. Journal of Marketing Research, 52(3), 309–324.

Ma, Z., Yang, Z., & Mourali, M. (2014). Consumer Adoption of New Interdependent Self-Perspectives.
Journal of Marketing, 78(March), 101–117.
Main, A., & Grierson, M. (2020). Guru, Partner, or Pencil Sharpener? Understanding Designers’
Attitudes Towards Intelligent Creativity Support Tools. Computer Science, arXiv abs/(Jul 2020).
McCormack, J., Hutchings, P., Gifford, T., Yee-King, M., Llano, M. T., & D’Inverno, M. (2020). Design
Considerations for Real-Time Collaboration with Creative Artificial Intelligence. Organised
Sound, 25(1), 41–52.
Mont, C. G., Pozo, C. M. Del, Pinto, C. M., & Alcocer, A. V. M. del C. (2020). Artificial Intelligence for
Social Good in Latin America and the Caribbean : The Regional Landscape and 12 Country
Snapshots. Banco Interamericano de Desarollo.
Nguyen, T. T., & Joo, J. (2019). Digital strikes back: Reading digital clocks decreases new product
adoption. Archives of Design Research, 32(2), 103–114.
Pfeiffer, A. (2018). Creativity and technology in the age of AI. https://www.pfeifferreport.com/wp-
content/uploads/2018/11/Creativity_and_AI_Report_INT.pdf
Russel, S., & Norvig, P. (2016). Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach. Pearson Education Limited.
Verganti, R., Vendraminelli, L., & Iansiti, M. (2020). Innovation and Design in the Age of Artificial
Intelligence. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 37(3), 212–227.

Author Bios:

Renato Antonio Bertão is a Ph.D. candidate in the Graduate School of Techno Design,
Kookmin University. His educational background encompasses degrees in Business,
Information Management, Design, and Visual Arts. He worked for several years in design
education in Brazil and nowadays researches on design methods and innovation.

Jaewoo Joo is an Associate Professor of Marketing in the College of Business

Administration, Kookmin University. He earned his Ph.D. in Marketing at Rotman School of
Management, University of Toronto. Jaewoo teaches and writes about design thinking and
behavioural economics for new product development and new product adoption.

Acknowledgements: The authors would like to express sincere gratitude to the Brazilian
UX/UI designers who answered the online survey and shared their perspectives on
adopting AI technologies. We very much appreciate their sharing of their time and
expertise.