Your new experience awaits. Try the new design now and help us make it even better

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Educ.

Sec. Digital Education

This article is part of the Research TopicThe Role of AI in Transforming Literacy: Insights into Reading and Writing ProcessesView all 4 articles

The Paradox of Productive Irritation: Mapping the Stress–Coping Loop that Sustains Generative-AI Engagement

Provisionally accepted
Amrullah  SatotoAmrullah Satoto1Noor  Raihan Ab HamidNoor Raihan Ab Hamid1Norlina  KamudinNorlina Kamudin1Andri Dayarana K.  SilalahiAndri Dayarana K. Silalahi2*
  • 1Asia e University, Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
  • 2Department of Marketing and Logistics Management, College of Management, Chaoyang University of Technology, Taichung, Taiwan

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

Generative AI promises academic efficiency yet often delivers flawed answers, leaving users "irritated but engaged." To explain this paradox, we merge the Transactional Model of Stress and Coping with Cognitive Dissonance Theory and survey Indonesian and Taiwanese academics who had used ChatGPT for at least a month (N = 388). Partial Least Squares analysis shows that response failures and low AI literacy sharply raise frustration; frustration, in turn, both directly sustains continuance intention and indirectly does so through heightened resistance to change. The indirect route dominates in Indonesia, where higher switching costs foster inertia, whereas Taiwanese users convert frustration into exploratory recommitment. These findings re‑cast resistance as an adaptive buffer rather than a mere barrier and reveal culture‑specific coping paths that keep imperfect AI in daily workflows. The study advances stress‑and‑dissonance theory integration and guides institutions toward balanced strategies combining accuracy auditing, literacy scaffolding, and context‑sensitive expectation management.

Keywords: artificial intelligence, continuance intention, resistant to change, Frustration, response failure

Received: 20 Sep 2025; Accepted: 28 Oct 2025.

Copyright: © 2025 Satoto, Ab Hamid, Kamudin and Silalahi. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

* Correspondence: Andri Dayarana K. Silalahi, andridksilalahi@gmail.com

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.