e-ISSN: Pending
Negative / Null Result ReportOpen accessDecision Sciences· cited by 14

What Needs Attention? Prioritizing Drivers of Developers’ Trust and Adoption of Generative AI

Rudrajit Choudhuri; Bianca Trinkenreich; Rahul Pandita; Eirini Kalliamvakou; Igor Steinmacher; Marco Aurélio Gerosa; Christopher A. Sanchez; Anita Sarma · 2026 · ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology

WASTE classifies this as Negative / Null Result Report · AI classification, approximate

The study found no significant effect — useful as a negative control or null benchmark for your own design.

Abstract

Generative AI (genAI) tools promise productivity gains, yet developers still struggle to determine when to trust and effectively integrate these tools into their everyday work. Moreover, genAI can be exclusionary, failing to adequately support developers across individual differences. One such difference is cognitive style , which can shape how developers engage with genAI (e.g., risk-averse developers may gate outputs behind tests, whereas risk-tolerant ones may prototype directly and address issues post hoc). When tools fail to accommodate these differences, they can create additional usabil

Abstract by Rudrajit Choudhuri; Bianca Trinkenreich; Rahul Pandita; Eirini Kalliamvakou; Igor Steinmacher; Marco Aurélio Gerosa; Christopher A. Sanchez; Anita Sarma, ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (2026) — licensed CC BY 4.0.

About to run something similar?

Run an AI Precheck on your own design to catch failure modes like this one before you spend the time. Your first desk check is free.

WASTE indexes this work — it does not host or republish it. Failure-type classification is automated and approximate.

Metadata source: OpenAlex · DOI 10.1145/3842739