An Investigation Into The Integration Of Artificial

Intelligence In The Art And Design Industry:

Implications And Innovations.

Abstract

Contents

1. Introduction

2. Literature Review

2.1. Introduction

This chapter generally aims to review AI in a wider context, explaining the tool’s full power, not
just for art and design use, also taking examples from other waves of technology to indicate
emergent patterns which AI can be expected to fit into, and discuss more specifically how AI
does and will impact the art and design industry through the lens of these identified patterns.
This will begin with identifying the full scope of what AI is and what it can do, and what it is
expected to be able to do in the future. This is important because, even though this dissertation
is focused on the art and design industry, it is not comprehensive or representative of the whole
truth to limit discussion of such a widespread, significant technology to one area of its use. The
next section of the chapter discusses how AI is already impacting the art and design industry,
and how these impacts might form trends of further impact in the future. The final section
evaluates the impact that the last major technology (the digital revolution) had on the design
industry in order to inform on how this relates to and predicts how AI might impact the art and
design industry in the future.

2.2. What implications does AI have toward the present and the future?

At the time of writing, there are two forms of AI which have developed at
exponential speeds in the last decade, and for the first time, the public have access to these
tools: large language models (LLM) and deep learning. LLM’s such as ChatGPT (OpenAI, 2023)
can write anything the user requests, having access to unfathomable amounts of information
from across the internet. The quality of its writing and comprehension of prompts still has faults,
but it is improving rapidly (Eloundou et al., 2023, p.1). Deep learning is the process by which AI
image generation software is trained. It uses “neural networks”, which were loosely modeled on
how human neural networks work, to assess the strength of the relationships between each red,
green and blue pixel of training images. This forms a basis of understanding for the AI which
then allows it to generally know what prompts look like, and replicate them upon demand
(Suleyman and Bhaskar, 2023, p.57).

Mustafa Suleyman, co-founder of both DeepMind (an AI company which was acquired by
Google in 2014) and Inflection AI wrote the book ‘The Coming Wave’ (2023) with assistance
from Michael Bhaskar. This book forms the foundations of the information cited in this section,
as Suleyman has integral industry knowledge and insights on AI to be able to reasonably make
predictions about the impact AI will have on the world as it develops.

Suleyman holds the belief that AI will continue to proliferate to the point where it is cheaply and
easily accessible to all members of the public, and used as an aid in most common and
professional tasks. In Chapter 2, he draws comparisons to the technological advancements
made across human history - from the earliest technologies of language, agriculture and writing,
to the later revolutionary technologies of engines, industrial machinery and smartphones. “From
the very beginning, we are never separate from the waves of technology we create. We evolve
together, in symbiosis.” (2023, p.26). While it’s true that prior to the Industrial Revolution, most
people lived entire lifetimes with the same tools and technologies as when they were born,
when one looks at the big picture it becomes clear that proliferation is the default. Every
technology begins as niche, expensive and limited, and then eventually becomes cheap,
commonplace and highly effective. “In 1996, thirty-six million people used the internet; this year
it will be well over five billion…I believe, AI will become as ubiquitous as the internet itself… yet
even more consequential.” (2023, p.62). He expands on this within the context of ‘the scaling
hypothesis’, explaining that the more data, the more parameters these models are given, the
more they will continue to improve, for the foreseeable future at least - potentially matching or
exceeding human-level intelligence in eventuality.

It is true that during the introductory stages of all technologies, there are consequences that
arise from its creation that were never intended or foreseen by its creators. It is logical to
assume that the same thing will happen with AI as it proliferates. It could be used in the future to
assist advanced cyber crimes. The WannaCry ransomware attack on the NHS (2023), wherin
200,000 NHS PC’s were taken control over by cyber attackers, while devastating, was solved by
identifying and removing the problem causing code rather easily. However, picture a scenario
like WannaCry, but the ransomware is utilising AI which allows it to continually rewrite its code
everytime someone attempts to remove it. These kinds of tools could threaten governments and
institutions integral to society.

Similarly, it is becoming increasingly apparent that AI shall be the most significant asset to
governments in regards to political power in the near future. At the 2022 CCP conference, its
leader Xi Jinping addressed the following: “to meet strategic needs [the country] must adhere to
science and technology as the number-one productive force.” (De Wei, 2022). Suleyman writes
that ‘Tsinghua University now publishes more AI research papers than any other academic
institution in the world. Across China, four and a half times more AI papers have been published
than in the US since 2010’. (Suleyman and Bhaskar, 2023, p.120). The Chinese government is
implementing their AI research into the development of surveillance technology, monitoring the
only authorised messaging service in China, WeChat, and AI facial recognition on half a billion
CCTV cameras. Three US federal agencies, and one hundred U.S. towns have bought such
surveillance technologies from Chinese providers since 2019. (2023, pp.183-205).

It seems that AI can, in the near future, facilitate institutional powers of mass surveillance that
were previously impossible to roll out across entire populations. This obviously has numerous
problematic implications in regards to privacy rights of the public. Putting in place a legal
framework around the use of AI, not just for surveillance, but for every other misuse which will
emerge, seems to be a necessary response in the coming years. The European Commission
has already proposed an artificial intelligence act which would include the prohibition of AI
“social scoring” by governments, undisclosed “deep fake” content and so-called “high-risk”
systems which covers a range of possible governmental misuses (European Commission,
2021).

However, even with the apparent dangers of AI technology, to ban it outright would potentially
come with a lot of issues. The economy relies on a pattern of exponential growth in order to
sustain itself, meaning that new technologies must be continually introduced in order to improve
living standards and a country’s GDP (Harvard, 2024). The changes to numerous professional
practices that AI could facilitate would save companies unprecedented amounts of money in the
coming years, which in turn eventually provides some economic benefits to the average worker.

2.3. AI in the art and design industry.

The emergence of deep learning image generation software is both posing a threat, and
showing signs of promise for the art and design industry. Superunion digital creative director
Jessica Tan believes that when AI is used in a design context, it is just a tool, and the likelihood
of it surpassing human designers’ creative abilities are low. She compares it to the digital
revolution - ‘AI will just mean there is a new set of skills to learn, new ways to design, but human
creativity being at the centre will remain unchanging.’ (2022, cited in Bamford, 2022). Similarly,
the design and creative technology director of NewTerritory, speaking on AI, stated “I’ve never
understood the man vs. machine debate. [...] they have always helped us both functionally and
emotionally.” He also reasons that AI cannot exceed human emotional design intelligence for
now, but acknowledges that it’s a possibility in the far future (Smith, 2022, cited in Bamford,
2022). The creative director of Monopo London is also excited by AI, theorising that it will give
creatives more time to think and take creative concepts further as the time spent on production
is lessened through AI (Hubert-Crozet, 2022, cited in Bamford, 2022).

However, founder and creative director of Blond, James Melia, takes a more measured view. He
says that “AI has the potential to be hugely disruptive to businesses, setting some companies
up for success and others to fail. For design, AI will be an ally to some, but also a threat to
others.” He elaborates on this, explaining that reducing the workload in the design process
would ultimately lead to some redundancies; trend-based, formulaic kinds of design work would
be especially impacted by AI takeover - however, the problem solving and innovative aspects to
the design industry would remain human-led. He also says that “there is no stopping AI’s
influence and therefore designers need to be smart about how they embrace its potential.”
(2022, cited in Bamford, 2022). Similarly, Jess Mireau of Co:collective says that “AI [...] can be
used for good, or for harm. The scale and speed at which harm can happen is where we need
to proceed cautiously.” She reasons that ‘it is important to remember that these things impact
real people with real lives and livelihoods’, but is confident that ‘human compassion and
empathetic responses will be able to respond to this challenge.’ (2022, cited in Bamford, 2022).
Another balanced take comes from Design Partners’ Cormac O’Conaire, who says “AI will
undoubtedly be a threat to some creatives.”, but that the new possibilities this tool will bring to
the design process will “ensure creative excellence is achieved.” He also says that ‘designers
should remain conscious of datasets the AI draws from, and the ethical implications and
consequences that can follow.’ (2022, cited in Bamford, 2022). Meanwhile, Thompson designer
Al Connoly states “designers shouldn’t be afraid of a little creative disruption from AI
technology.”, it will cut out much of the limitations and costs of stock image assets, and reasons
that existing automated tools like drag and drop templates and logo generators, while seeming
threatening, did not replace skilled design work - and neither will this. (2022, cited in Bamford,
2022).

It would seem that experts in the design field are in relative unison that AI is not a real threat - to
them at least. It is obvious that top level, highly sought after design companies with million
pound plus contracts would not be put out of business by a computer programme.Yet, for the
average designer - those who are self employed, those who are in a lower position in a design
firm who fulfil the menial design tasks - AI poses a very real threat to their livelihoods. As of
writing, none of the credible news sources on this topic include opinions from insignificant
designers. However, such opinions can be found in the comments section of a YouTube video
on this exact topic by prominent graphic design channel Will Paterson. One commenter claims
‘logo design makes up a big part of my commissions. This month three small clients sent me
logo examples that they did themselves using AI. They just wanted me to tweak their options. I
sent them some fairly refined work upfront and they responded with 20 AI results they liked
better than my work.’ “The writing is on the wall in terms of logo design.” (Jdikmen, 2023).
Another commenter deduces “I think graphic design will still exist as a job for a while, but only
for really big brands. And one designer will do the work of multiple existing titles today.”
(Robertnight1, 2023). Building on this idea, another commenter wrote that in their sector, they
have noticed ‘an increasing number of companies which cut every possible corner and do not
respect or fairly compensate the designer due to the highly saturated market of desperate
workers.’ They believe that ‘this attitude combined with such a powerful tool could replace a
significant number of design jobs.’ (SpaceshipRocketFuel, 2023). While these sources are
purely anecdotal, they offer a valuable and understated viewpoint on this topic from the “some
creatives'' that O’Conaire (2022, cited in Bamford, 2022) is referring to.

All perspectives considered, the prevailing view is that AI will not replace all creative work. The
question remains though, just how much of the industry will it replace? In the coming years the
small businesses of the world, especially social media businesses which are often run by one
person and have very limited startup funds, would surely rather have a free, albeit generic and
limited, logo than pay a freelancer for one. At this moment in time, this question cannot be
answered conclusively. It would seem that a designer’s feelings towards AI would depend on
how much they use personal creativity in their work. Referring back to Suleyman, he predicts
that ‘AI will be capable of autonomously researching trends on sites like Amazon, making
designs to send to manufacturers on Alibaba, negotiate a contract and respond to buyer
feedback without human intervention probably within three to five years.’ (2023, pp.76-77).
Coming from one of the key figures involved in the past and ongoing development in AI
technology, this prediction bears considerable weight. It is not unreasonable to say that AI will
pose a serious threat to the average small freelance designer within the next few years.

For the creatives whose livelihoods survive this latest technological revolution, it is becoming
clear that AI could prove to be a great asset to their work. Suleyman also predicts that “Within
the next couple of years, whatever your job, you will be able to consult an on-demand expert,
ask it about your latest ad campaign or product design” (2023, p.140). This kind of aid AI could
offer, an advisory role, would overall be a purely beneficial asset to the industry. Having another
voice on hand, another perspective to guide one’s work would maximise the quality while
allowing workers to be more independent, asking the higher ups’ opinion less often. Another,
albeit theoretical, benefit that AI could provide for the creative industries, is providing automated
enforcement of copyright law on the internet. Industry 3.0 unleashed major challenges regarding
piracy and copyright infringement to the creative sector in particular. Artists, filmmakers,
musicians and writers especially find that their work is continually shared and copied on the
internet without their consent. At present there is not an effective solution to this problem. Digital
Rights Management (DRM) attempted an approach to the problem which provided content with
restricted access wherein only those with permission could access content. Unfortunately, DRM
also prevented some instances of legal usage, mainly “exceptions to copyright granted by
statute.” ‘However, the idea of law as computer code could be approached from different ways
which would negate the limitations that DRM had. AI creators could be designed which house
legal frameworks within their coding, being able to adapt behaviour in response to the legal
status of work they come into contact with, meaning the chances of copyright infringement are
greatly reduced.’ (2018). Not only would this mean that content generated by AI’s would be
incapable of digital theft, but it would also mean that AI’s could be used by anyone as a legal
guide for any digital material accessed during their creation process. A lawyer would no longer
need to be consulted to tell someone if they have infringed on digital copyright laws, the AI
could tell them instantly if a copyright is breached. At this stage, AI’s incapable of copyright
infringement are only an informed suggestion, but as AI technology develops, there is no real
foundation to argue that this outcome becoming a reality in the future is implausible.

*After I wrote this paragraph I realised it might be better in the research section, do let me know*
At present, some artists are using AI to assist them in the sketching and realisation phases of
their work. Fig.1. (Agrawal and Kapur, 2016, p.214) shows how simplistic sketches can be
inputted by the user along with a chosen ‘personality’ (e.g. energetic, moody, happy) and artistic
style (e.g. cartoon, impressionism, realism), and the AI responds with a detailed interpretation of
the prompt. Fig. 2 (2016, p.215) shows more specifically how a person’s drawing can interact
with AI (in this case it is the Tandem engine) as a collaborative process. Here, the AI is not just
being told what to do - instead, it is given the opportunity to “‘imagine’ what it sees within a
human input and draw along with it.” (Agrawal and Kapur, 2016, p.215). This skill is, of course,
well within the human artist’s capability, but giving AI a chance to imagine outcomes can lead
the artist to an idea that would have otherwise taken them a lot longer to reach on their own.

There is ongoing philosophical debate as to where the line is drawn in regard to deciding
whether an artwork is human or machine originated - and a further question: can machine
originated art be classified as art? O’Hear argues that art “in the full sense is based in human
experience”, it communicates based on an experience that the artist and the audience can both
relate to, and therefore, if a human did not originate the art, it cannot be art (1995, pp.143-158).
Correspondingly, d’Inverno and McCormack put forward “perhaps one way to identify what we
mean by human creativity is precisely that which automation cannot do, so whenever AI
systems improve it shifts our interpretation to whatever is not currently possible by machine”.
They state the importance of developing two classifications of creative AI: heroic (fully
autonomous), and collaborative. Additionally, reasoning that using AI as an autonomous art
agent is not worthwhile in terms of the development of art as a practice. Used instead as a tool,
“The motivation for the artwork therefore remains human” (2015, pp.2438-2444). These two
arguments align with what the previously cited leads of various design companies stated;
essentially, AI can, and should, be used as an artistic tool to great effect - however, removing
the human element from the process could only be harmful to creative practices.

Fig.1: Showcase of Tandem interface including ‘personality’ and stylistic sliders along with the
results at the bottom.
Fig.2: User inputs sketch resembling a flower (left) selecting a ‘happy’ personality and Tandem
produces the output (right).

2.4. How industry 3.0 affected the design industry, and its parallels to industry 4.0’s
current and future impacts on the design industry.

Just as AI will undoubtedly revolutionise the design industry, so too have previous waves of
technology, namely, the digital revolution. Computers streamlined the design process, cutting
out swathes of middle-men as a consequence. “One great change in the print industry has been
the loss of composition work (text entry on keyboard). This has been directly caused by the new
technology.” (Macdonald-Ross, 1993, p.4). The reasons that computers were so revolutionary to
the design (and print and typography) industry were primarily: they greatly reduced the time it
took to make an outcome, while also automating roles in the design process which were
previously done by experts. Macdonald-Ross explains “The use of specialized staff trained in
the traditional technology of print is becoming optional. One [...] is not forced to by the
circumstances of industrial technology, as used to be the case.“ (1993, p.3). It also led to a
reduction in power that the trade unions had on working practices. ‘This in turn was
consequential in the loss of training quality and quantity, and some operations becoming
deskillled.’ (1993, p.3). Typography used to be a highly specialised skill before it became
digitally accessible, the whole typography process (typesetting and type design) became
obsolete as an industry as soon as word processing and typographic and pagination softwares
were made available (1993 p.4). In essence, “every man his own typographer!” (1993, p.8).
User accessible desktop designs known as “WYSIWYG” (what you see is what you get) and
“WIMP” (windows, icons, mice, pull-downs) were concepts pioneered by Apple Computer Inc
and further proliferated by Microsoft Corporation. Prior to this (from the 1950’s through to the
1980’s), computers were only used by specialised computer departments because their hostile
user-interfaces meant that computers could not be operated without training (1993, p.4). All
these changes to the computer, design and typography industries meant that there was a
convergence of the three skills to eventually become one expertise: modern graphic design.
This had some benefits, namely: ‘increased production speed, reduced cost, control over detail,
easy updating, facilitates ease of communication between creative staff, equal opportunity for
female employees, increased colour and graphic use.’ with the only drawbacks being disruption
to some livelihoods and temporary gaps in skill - training an entire workforce to use new
equipment and learn new skills in typography and editing all at once is challenging. (1993, p.17).

Macdonald-Ross provides a comprehensive overview of the immediate impacts that industry 3.0
had on the design and print industries. One’s view on how much of a positive impact industry
3.0 had would depend somewhat on personal values, i.e. if the loss of a minority of jobs and
historically valued crafts/skills outweighs the growth of a larger surrounding industry.
Economically, the benefits are resounding but if you take another perspective of value (cultural,
individualistic), the answer becomes less objective. Comparing this with the perspectives from
designers in section 2.2, AI will likely create a very similar dilemma (some job losses, changed
working practices, versus reduced cost, increased speed).

Dunn offers a more opinionated account of the digital revolution’s impact on design. She
appeals “To anyone who has been in the graphic arts industry for a reasonable period of time it
becomes pretty apparent that what we have been experiencing has been an evolutionary, rather
than revolutionary process.” (1988, p.55). The distinction being made here is that Dunn
believed, contrary to what some believed at the time, that computers were not bringing about a
drastic change to be fearful of which would make the industry unrecognisable, but rather, a
gradual change for the better - a natural progression. Dunn and Macdonald-Ross were both
correct that the digital revolution would continue to have a positive impact on the design
industry. There is a human tendency to resist and fear change, but over and over again we are
proven wrong, change is usually a progression, as is the case with technological development.
Dunn also estimated that a designer’s role could never extend into print production even if the
technological means were there, because of the difference in the skills needed for design and
print production roles (1998, p.56). However, in hindsight, we now know that computers - more
specifically the internet - has consequently made the print industry more obsolete year on year.
“The number of skilled tradespeople working in the print sector fell by 73% between 2006 and
2021.” (Stuart-Turner, 2023). The majority of outcomes which designers create are now
published exclusively online, with employers expecting designers to have skills in web design
and other such technical applications. Dunn was not wrong that designers were not going to end
up operating industrial printers, but she did not foresee the huge decline of the print industry
itself.

Similarly, Macdonald-Ross also made a significant underestimation about the scale and speed
at which digital technology was going to eradicate the print industry. In his report, he points out
the two “critical problems” which were preventing digital presentation besting printed
presentation in education specifically at the time: issues with text legibility on screens and the
portability of said screens, and the expenses involved in providing personal screen-based
systems to everyone in education. He goes on to say, “All in all, one expects a long and healthy
future for printed texts in education.” (1993, p.9). To defend his statement, Macdonald-Ross
argues ‘these two problems have been seriously underestimated by some computer
technologists who do not understand typography or factor in the budget restrictions of
educational institutions. Those in education should be sceptical about claims that most distance
education could be delivered digitally in the near future.’ (1993, p.16). Again, in hindsight it is
clear that Macdonald-Ross was wrong about this. In the U.S. 98% of surveyed public school
students reported owning a personal device with which they can remotely access schoolwork
(National Centre for Education Statistics, 2015).

In regard to predictions made on the eventual consequences of new technologies, there

appears to be a pattern of inability to factor in the nature of proliferation. Suleyman mentions
this concept in The Coming Wave, writing “understanding technology is, in part, about trying to
understand its unintended consequences.”, and that “fear and suspicion of anything new and
different are endemic.” (2023, pp.35-50). It would seem that when thinking about the future of
technologies, there is a human limitation wherein we have a tendency to assume that a
technology will not progress much in terms of capability and usage beyond what it already has,
and that its invention will not have unforeseen consequences. However, when looking at all
other instances of technology, there is a process of continual development, and a ripple effect of
wider consequences.

*plan to write more in this section if needed*

● Design and technology are fundamentally intertwined. Reference ‘Application of dynamic
logos in modern visual system’ which has quotes about this. Reference ‘Drawing futures’
which gives examples about how technology has always defined artistic disciplines.

2.5. Conclusion

AI is going to continue to become even more relevant. It is difficult to imagine an industry that it
will not change in a significant way as it becomes more powerful and accessible. It is expected
that the work, and the jobs, of some artists and designers will undoubtedly be replaced by AI in
the future, but the industry will survive, and people will remain at the heart of it. Challenging
design problems could not forseeably be solved better by a machine than by a human mind.
The work that artists and designers can produce with the assistance of AI is going to be faster
and more advanced. Just as the digital revolution made design more accessible and widened
what a designer can achieve, so too will AI technology. However, with such significant changes
comes complications that are difficult to imagine.

3. Methodology

3.1. Introduction

This section provides an explanation as to which methods were used and why within this study
in order to achieve the purpose of investigating how the artists/designers who are incorporating
AI into their work use this new tool and how they feel about it. This includes identifying the aims
and objectives, an appropriate research method with justifications, full details of experimental
procedure with data analysis and a summarisation of the general flow of the study.
 3.2. Aims And Objectives Of Research

As covered in the literature review, AI is seeming very likely to completely revolutionise the art
and design industry, but as of right now, we are in the very beginning of the changes that will
unfold. There is considerable disagreement and confusion among artists and designers as to
what, if any, their stance on this technology should be in relation to their work - whether it can be
a good thing at all, is it here to stay, what are its limitations, etc. Of course, this research cannot
give a concrete factual answer to these questions, but it can offer insider perspectives on what
artists/designers are doing right now with this technology, and how it has changed their
approach to creative projects in order to shed some light on the implications of this technology
in the art and design industry, offering a comprehensive and measured approach to uncovering
the most likely outcomes and perspectives of AI art and design in the coming years. There is a
large gap in formal research conducted on this topic - with most discussions about AI’s future in
art and design residing on social media and news articles. It was not possible to find any
academic research which answered the research question, large quantatites of academic
writing about AI are just beginning to be published. In short, the aim of the study is to investigate
how artists and designers are using AI as a part of their creative process, and what are their
opinions about AI’s incorporation into the industry now and for the future.

In order to answer the research question, the objectives are broken down as such:

1. Carry out semi-structured interviews with six participants who are professionally
employed in the art and design industry who use AI in their creative process.

2. Ask questions pertaining to what part(s) of their creative process are now assisted by an
AI tool.

3. Ask questions pertaining to what impact this has had on their work.

4. Ask them in what ways they have noticed AI changing the art and design industry
around them from an anecdotal perspective.

5. Ask them what they think about what impacts AI has had on the art and design industry
already on a wider scale.

6. Ask them their opinions on the ethical implications that AI art has/could have.

7. Ask them how they think AI will positively and negatively affect the art and design
industry and its workers in the future.

8. Use thematic analysis to find commonalities or divergence in the interviewees’

perspectives in order to form a conclusive result.
 3.3. Interview Method: Literature and Justification

*plan, not finished* https://methods.sagepub.com/video/interviews-as-one-type-of-data-source

Sage research video about using interviews as your only data source.^
https://methods.sagepub.com/book/interpreting-interviews
Book about interpreting raw interview data.^
https://methods.sagepub.com/book/doing-interviews-2e
Book about conducting interviews.^
https://methods.sagepub.com/book/qualitative-online-interviews-2e
Book about qualitative interviews online.
}All from Sage Research Methods.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/301738442_Conducting_Semi-Structured_Interviews
Chapter in book: Handbook of Practical Program Evaluation. Guide to conducting
semi-structured interviews.
Mention limitations in critical analysis.

3.4. Details Of The Experimental Procedure

● Snowball sampling - sampling bias, leads to participants having more things in common
and knowing each other.
● Hypothesis: Participants will report a balanced but optimistic view about AI. Is this a
statistical hypothesis? I’m only asking people who use AI so would the alternative
hypothesis be that people who already use AI feel positive about its future - I’m not
getting data on people who don’t use it so perhaps this is wrong. I could change
direction and get some people who don’t use AI if I absolutely have to.
● Semi-structured Interview: demand characteristics of participants - they might answer
according to what they think I want to hear.
● Question Design - no leading or loaded questions. Be wary of order bias of questions.
Researcher bias - I am expecting an outcome and might inadvertently impact results.
● Aiming for 6 interviewees (have 3 with optional 4th since asking around yesterday but
still waiting on some to reply and asking more).
● Explain why participants were chosen? Or is that covered in sampling.
● Independent variables: (controlled) questions, participants, interview environment.
(uncontrolled) mood, technical issues.
● Dependent variables: Interview responses, the work they choose to show.
● Ethics - informed consent, data protection, debrief.
● Data analysis: thematic analysis resulting in ordinal data. Categories mostly would be for
example: negative, mostly negative, balanced, mostly positive, positive. However not all
of them would be (i expect).
● Look at correlations between the reported themes to reach conclusions.
 ● Inferential statistic: Krusal Wallis H test - for multiple ordinal 5 point likert responses.

3.5. Conclusion

To be written when the methodology is complete.

4. Results

5. Discussion

6. Conclusion

7. References

Agrawal, H. and Kapur, A. 2016. Tandem: Human Art in Collaboration with Machine Intelligence.
In: Allen, L. and Pearson, L. C. eds. Drawing Futures: Speculations in Contemporary Drawing
for Art and Architecture. [Online]. London: UCL Press, pp.214-216. [Accessed 1 February 2024].
Available from:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1ht4ws4.8

Bamford, A. 2022. Is AI a threat or an ally to designers and the industry? Design Week. [Online].
24 October. [Accessed 30 January 2024]. Available from:
https://www.designweek.co.uk/issues/24-30-october-2022/ai-threat-or-ally-to-designers/

De Wei, L. 2022. Full Text of Xi Jinping’s Speech at China’s Party Congress. Bloomberg.
[Online]. 18 October. [Accessed 28 January 2024]. Available from:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-10-18/full-text-of-xi-jinping-s-speech-at-china-20
th-party-congress-2022

D’Inverno, M. and McCormack, J. 2015. Heroic versus Collaborative AI for the Arts. In: Yang, Q.
and Wooldridge, M. eds. Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Artificial
Intelligence, 25-31 July 2015, Buenos Aires. [Online]. Massachusetts: AAAI Press, pp. 2438 -
2444. [Accessed 1 February 2024]. Available from:
https://dl.acm.org/doi/proceedings/10.5555/2832747

Dunn, P. M. 1998. Design Systems And Technologies: Debunking The Myths. Computer
publishing magazine. 3(4), pp.55-56.

Eloundou et al. 2023. GPTs are GPTs: An Early Look at the Labor Market Impact Potential
of Large Language Models. [Online]. University of Pennsylvania: OpenAI. [Accessed 28 January
2024]. Available from:
https://openai.com/research/gpts-are-gpts
European Commission. 2021. Europe fit for the Digital Age: Commission proposes new rules
and actions for excellence and trust in Artificial Intelligence. [Press release]. [Accessed 28
January 2024]. Available from:
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_21_1682

Harvard. 2024. Knowledge, Technology and Complexity in Economic Growth. [Online].

[Accessed 28 January 2024]. Available from:
https://rcc.harvard.edu/knowledge-technology-and-complexity-economic-growth#:~:text=Technol
ogical%20progress%20allows%20for%20the,used%20in%20production%20are%20complex.

Jdikmen. 2023. Comment on: Paterson, W. Is Ai Killing the Graphic Design Industry? YouTube.
[Online]. Comment posted on June/July 2023. [30 January 2024]. Available from:
https://youtu.be/fYJstnxdNro?si=ehdKTpTcLyd3ewjQ

Macdonald-Ross, M. 1993. The Revolution in Print Technology. Text & Readers Programme,
Technical Report #1. [Online]. Milton Keynes: The Open University. [Accessed 02 February
2023]. Available from:
https://eric.ed.gov/?q=second+AND+revolution&ff1=subInformation+Technology&pg=2&id=ED3
98863

National Centre for Education Statistics. 2015. Indicator 13: Ownership of Digital Devices.
National Centre for Education Statistics. [Online]. [Accessed 02 February 2023]. Available from:
https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2017/2017098/ind_13.asp

NHS. 2023. NHS England business continuity management toolkit case study: WannaCry
attack. [Online]. United Kingdom: County Durham and Darlington NHS Foundation Trust.
[Accessed 28 January 2024]. Available from:
https://www.england.nhs.uk/long-read/case-study-wannacry-attack/

Niebla Zatarain, J.M. 2018. Copyright on the internet: achieving security through electronic
devices an artificial intelligence approach. Ph.D. thesis, The University of Edinburgh.

O’Hear, A. 1995. Art and technology: An old tension. Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement.
38(1), pp.143-158.

OpenAI. 2023. Generative Pre-trained Transformer (4). [Software].

Robertnight1. 2023. Comment on: Paterson, W. Is Ai Killing the Graphic Design Industry?
YouTube. [Online]. Comment posted on July/August 2023. [30 January 2024]. Available from:
https://youtu.be/fYJstnxdNro?si=ehdKTpTcLyd3ewjQ

SpaceshipRocketFuel. 2023. Comment on: Paterson, W. Is Ai Killing the Graphic Design

Industry? YouTube. [Online]. Comment posted on June/July 2023. [30 January 2024]. Available
from:
https://youtu.be/fYJstnxdNro?si=ehdKTpTcLyd3ewjQ

Stuart-Turner, R. 2023. Is the decline in skilled print workers a cause for concern?. Printweek.
[Online]. 15 February. [Accessed 02 February 2023]. Available from:
https://www.printweek.com/content/briefing/is-the-decline-in-skilled-print-workers-a-cause-for-co
ncern/

Suleyman, M and Bhaskar, M. 2023. The Coming Wave: Technology, Power, And The
Twenty-First Century's Greatest Dilemma. New York:Crown.

8. Appendix