Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly applied to digital art creation; however, its adoption in religious cultural heritage remains insufficiently understood because artistic production involves cultural symbolism, spiritual meaning, and human creativity. This study investigates artists’ perceptions of culturally sensitive AI adoption in Thai Buddhist digital art using survey data from 182 experienced digital Buddhist art designers in Thailand. An exploratory quantitative approach combining Principal Component Analysis (PCA) with Varimax rotation and multiple linear regression analysis was employed. PCA identified two empirically derived perceptual components: Perceived AI Capability and Perceived AI Benefits. Regression analysis revealed that Perceived AI Benefits was positively associated with artists’ evaluations of (a) Expectations for AI in Creating Buddhist Art, (b) Role of AI in Creating Buddhist Art, and (c) Technical Capability and Autonomous Functions of AI, whereas Perceived AI Capability was not significantly associated with any of these outcomes after controlling for perceived benefits. The findings indicate that perceived AI benefits are significantly associated with artists’ expectations and evaluations of AI in Thai Buddhist digital art. The findings also highlight broader considerations regarding cultural values, ethical responsibility, and human creative agency, providing a basis for human-centered and culturally sensitive AI applications in religious cultural heritage.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Boobpachote et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: