LLM-based Interaction for Content Generation: A Case Study on the Perception of Employees in an IT department
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
In the past years, AI has seen many advances in the field of NLP. This has led to the emergence of LLMs, such as the now famous GPT-3.5, which revolutionise the way humans can access or generate content. Current studies on LLM-based generative tools are mainly interested in the performance of such tools in generating relevant content (code, text or image). However, ethical concerns related to the design and use of generative tools seem to be growing, impacting the public acceptability for specific tasks. This paper presents a questionnaire survey to identify the intention to use generative tools by employees of an IT company in the context of their work. This survey is based on empirical models measuring intention to use (TAM by Davis, 1989, and UTAUT2 by Venkatesh and al., 2008). Our results indicate a rather average acceptability of generative tools, although the more useful the tool is perceived to be, the higher the intention to use seems to be. Furthermore, our analyses suggest that the frequency of use of generative tools is likely to be a key factor in understanding how employees perceive these tools in the context of their work. Following on from this work, we plan to investigate the nature of the requests that may be made to these tools by specific audiences.
Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 2 of its 18 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 18 Apr 2023.
Builds on
2 of 18 references.
References · 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 2; 2025: 4.
6 papers.
- 2024An Empirical Study on Usage and Perceptions of LLMs in a Software Engineering Projectcited by 28
- 2025Can LLMs Correct Themselves? A Benchmark of Self-Correction in LLMscited by 12
- 2025HuggingGraph: Understanding the Supply Chain of LLM Ecosystemcited by 8
- 2025Do Prompt Patterns Affect Code Quality? A First Empirical Assessment of ChatGPT-Generated Codecited by 4
- 2025xLLM Technical Reportcited by 3
- 2024Quantifying Similarity: Text-Mining Approaches to Evaluate ChatGPT and Google Bard Content in Relation to BioMedical Literaturecited by 0
- 2025Can LLMs Correct Themselves? A Benchmark of Self-Correction in LLMs17 Oct 2025
- 2025xLLM Technical Report16 Oct 2025
- 2025HuggingGraph: Understanding the Supply Chain of LLM Ecosystem17 Jul 2025
- 2025Do Prompt Patterns Affect Code Quality? A First Empirical Assessment of ChatGPT-Generated Code18 Apr 2025
- 2024An Empirical Study on Usage and Perceptions of LLMs in a Software Engineering Project29 Jan 2024
- 2024Quantifying Similarity: Text-Mining Approaches to Evaluate ChatGPT and Google Bard Content in Relation to BioMedical Literature19 Jan 2024