The rapid development of artificial intelligence and its comprehensive application in the contemporary business environment have led to significant changes in the way brands communicate with consumers. However, although the use of generative artificial intelligence in creating promotional campaigns represents one of the newest trends in marketing communications, the number of empirical studies examining this topic is still insufficiently represented in academic literature. Accordingly, this paper aims to identify consumer preferences and attitudes toward advertisements generated by artificial intelligence, with a particular focus on preserving brand identity, consistency, and authenticity of communication. After reviewing the relevant literature, the paper presents the results of an indicative study on the attitudes of Generation Z and Millennial respondents regarding the use of artificial intelligence in brand communication. The research was conducted on a sample of 112 participants using a quantitative research approach, applying descriptive statistics and t-tests to examine statistically significant differences in the perception of traditional advertisements and those generated with the help of artificial intelligence. A specific part of the research consisted of an experiment in which respondents compared two holiday advertisements of the Coca-Cola brand—one created by humans and the other with the help of artificial intelligence—to determine the extent to which AI-generated content conveys brand values, maintains its consistency and recognizability, and how consumers evaluate such content in comparison with traditional formats. The results showed that consumers still tend to perceive traditional advertisements as more authentic and emotionally persuasive, while advertisements generated with the help of artificial intelligence are perceived as innovative and efficient, but with a limited impact on brand loyalty and trust
Panić et al. (Thu,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: