The exact text we saved

This is the version exactly as it was saved, character for character. The SHA-256 hash below is a 64-character code worked out from that text. Run the same text through SHA-256 and you get the same code; change a single letter and the code comes out completely different. Each version also stores the previous version’s hash, which chains them together so no version can be swapped out quietly.

TRUVACE RECORD VERSION
record: TRV-2026-2860
version: 1
kind: certified
reason: Certified into the record
timestamp: 2026-11-12T18:01:56.410271Z
status: published
lens: p_space
sector: lifestyle
headline: Novelty or eeriness? Investigating consumer responses to AI-generated product images through expectancy violation theory
dek: Purpose Drawing on Expectancy Violation Theory, this study examines how product image creator identity (AI vs. human) influences purchase intentions and the underlying psychological mechanisms. Design/methodology/approach Three online experiments examined consumers' attitudes toward AI-generated product images and purchase intentions toward the featured products, assessed how these evaluations deviated from expectations associated with human-created images, and identified conditions under which artificial intell…
gain_title: (none)
problem_title: In three online experiments on consumer responses to product images, participants consistently preferred human-created images and found AI-generated ones eerier and less novel, which shaped their purchase intentions.
trace_subject: (none)
gain_reading: (none)
gain_evidence: (none)
problem_reading: In three online experiments on consumer responses to product images, participants consistently preferred human-created images and found AI-generated ones eerier and less novel, which shaped their purchase intentions.
problem_evidence: Consumers consistently prefer human-created product images and perceive them as more novel, whereas AI-generated images evoke greater eeriness.
quick_read: Three online experiments tested how consumers respond to product images labelled as made by AI or by humans. Participants consistently preferred human-created images and rated them as more novel, while AI-generated images evoked greater eeriness.

The differences fed into purchase intention. Perceived novelty, eeriness, positive and negative expectancy violations, and attitudes mediated the link between who created the image and whether people wanted to buy the featured product.

Product type mattered. AI-generated images were judged more favorably for search products than for experience products, which the authors say helps reconcile mixed findings in earlier AI marketing research.
limitation: 
tag: Evidence-backed problem
key_points: The study ran three online experiments on attitudes toward AI-generated product images and purchase intentions for the featured products. | It used Expectancy Violation Theory to compare reactions to AI-made images with expectations tied to human-made images. | Consumers consistently preferred human-created product images and saw them as more novel. | AI-generated images evoked greater eeriness among consumers. | Novelty, eeriness, positive and negative expectancy violations, and attitudes mediated the effect of creator identity on purchase intention. | AI images were rated more favorably for search products than for experience products.
rundown: The researchers drew on Expectancy Violation Theory to ask why people react differently to AI and human product imagery. Across three online experiments, they measured attitudes and purchase intentions and checked how far evaluations departed from what people expect from human-created images.

Data were analysed with multivariate analysis of variance and covariance, plus serial and moderated mediation analyses using the PROCESS macro. These identified positive and negative expectancy violations as central mechanisms behind consumer responses.

The product-type finding gives marketers a practical boundary: AI imagery fared better for search products than for experience products. The authors say this helps explain mixed results in the AI-generated marketing literature.
sources:
- peer_reviewed | Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing | https://doi.org/10.1108/jrim-01-2026-0015 | 2026-11-11
prev: 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

SHA-256 hash

e7ef0491eecbe5aab41e7b1178b0e5f1da8b30eccfc12f5b15811725cc9dec9c

Previous version’s hash

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000