From Perceptual Cues to Screening Judgments: How Users Evaluate AI-Generated Interface Candidates

Description

This dataset supports a sequential empirical study on how users evaluate AI-generated interface candidates after generation. The study examines AI-generated game main-interface candidates as cue-based evaluation objects and investigates how validated perceptual cues are associated with preference selection, post-choice aesthetic appraisal, perceived acceptance, and early-stage screening judgments. The dataset consists of three anonymized supplementary data workbooks. Supplementary Data 1 contains the Stage 3 stimulus-validation dataset and statistical outputs. In this stage, 52 participants independently evaluated 16 AI-generated game main-interface stimuli labeled S1–S16. The stimuli were rated on five perceptual cue dimensions: visual order, visual variation, atmospheric richness, generated-interface credibility, and perceived AI-generated imperfection. The workbook includes stimulus-level validation scores, reliability results, descriptive statistics, and validation checks for the intended visual order × visual variation cue structure. Supplementary Data 2 contains the Stage 4 main user-evaluation dataset and derived analysis results. This stage retained 515 valid responses. Participants selected their preferred interface candidate from the 16 AI-generated stimuli and then evaluated only the selected stimulus using post-choice aesthetic dimensions based on simplicity, diversity, colorfulness, and craftsmanship. The workbook includes anonymized participant-level responses, neutral S1–S16 stimulus-ID coding, stimulus-type mapping, selected-stimulus cue mapping, preference-selection distributions, reliability and construct-adequacy results, cue–rating correlations, composite cue–appraisal associations, perceived-acceptance analyses, and exploratory user-level comparison results. The S1–S16 labels are neutral stimulus identifiers and do not correspond to MBTI types, cognitive-style groups, or personality categories. Supplementary Data 3 contains the Stage 5 follow-up mechanism-check dataset and mixed-effects model outputs. Stage 5 used a voluntary follow-up subsample of 200 participants from the Stage 4 respondent pool. Each participant evaluated eight representative AI-generated interface candidates, resulting in 1,600 stimulus-level observations in long format. The dataset includes item-level responses and scale scores for processing ease, visual cognitive effort, interface trust, continued exploration intention, and development-worthiness. It also includes stimulus metadata, validated cue scores mapped from Stage 3, derived cue indices, reliability and descriptive statistics, correlation checks, mixed-effects model outputs, and carryover-control variables documenting whether a Stage 5 stimulus matched the participant’s originally selected Stage 4 stimulus.

Institutions

• Macau University of Science and Technology

  Macau, Macao

Categories

Funders

• Macau University of Science and Technology

  Macau University of Science and Technology Foundation

  Macao

  Grant ID: FRG-25-038-FA

Licence