Guilherme Vaz Pereira

Fabio Calefato, Alexandra Pajonk, Victoria Jackson et al.

Generative AI tools are rapidly transforming software development practice, prompting unprecedented research interest. However, existing studies have predominantly examined initial adoption rather than sustained use. Understanding what drives developers to continue using these tools after initial adoption remains underexplored, particularly in small and medium-sized enterprises where resource constraints shape technology decisions differently than in large organisations. This study investigates factors associated with developers' intentions to continue using GenAI tools, adapting the UTAUT2 framework to post-adoption professional contexts. We employed a two-phase mixed-methods design. Phase 1 comprised a six-month longitudinal pilot study at an Italian software company combining surveys and interviews with 17 developers to explore how perceptions of GenAI evolve as experience accumulates. These insights informed a structural model tested in Phase 2 through a cross-sectional survey of 154 developers across Italian SMEs, analysed using PLS-SEM. The model explained substantial variance in continued use intention (R2 = 0.647), with individual-level perceptions, particularly around productivity, enjoyment, and ease of use, driving sustained adoption, whereas social and organisational factors played no significant role. These findings suggest that, for GenAI tools, post-adoption behaviour differs from initial adoption patterns: in voluntary professional contexts, sustained use is driven primarily by individual-level factors rather than by social and organisational support.

Norman Anderson, Tarek Alakmeh, Victoria Jackson et al.

A rapidly growing body of research is examining how LLMs influence developers when they code. To date, this research has tended to focus on productivity and code quality outcomes, rather than the underlying cognitive processes involved in programming. To address this gap, we report on the results of an exploratory laboratory study of ten advanced student developers (five with support from AI and five without) who had to make a non-trivial extension to a sizable software system. Leveraging Polya's four problem-solving phases and 25 inductively-generated codes detailing distinct problem-solving behaviors as the primary lenses, we examined: (1) how AI impacted the problem-solving approach the developers used to solve the programming task, and (2) how AI impacted their progress when they became stuck. For the analysis, we triangulated data across multiple sources (e.g., think-aloud, code changes, web searches, and LLM prompts). Unexpectedly, while developers in the AI group repeatedly turned to the AI tool to offload certain aspects of the process, all detailed problem-solving behaviors appeared in both groups. We also found that nine out of ten participants found themselves stuck in their work, but with key differences in how they became stuck and unstuck. We highlight seven distinct causes for being stuck and highlight how AI in some cases helped and in other cases hindered becoming unstuck.