pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.25973 · v1 · pith:JUNUGCJ4new · submitted 2026-05-25 · 💻 cs.SE

From Early Adoption to Sustained Use: Understanding GenAI Usage Among Software Developers in Italian SMEs

Fabio Calefato , Alexandra Pajonk , Victoria Jackson , Guilherme Vaz Pereira , Rafael Prikladnicki , Filippo Lanubile This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-29 20:22 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.SE
keywords generative AIcontinued useUTAUT2software developersSMEsPLS-SEMtechnology adoption
0
0 comments X

The pith

Developers sustain GenAI tool use based on personal productivity gains and enjoyment, not social or organizational pressure.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper adapts the UTAUT2 framework to examine what leads software developers in Italian SMEs to keep using generative AI tools after initial trials. A longitudinal pilot with 17 developers informed a survey of 154 others, which was analyzed with PLS-SEM. The resulting model accounts for nearly two-thirds of the variance in continued-use intention, with productivity, enjoyment, and ease of use as the main drivers. Social influence and facilitating conditions show no significant effect, suggesting that post-adoption patterns in voluntary professional settings differ from those seen in initial adoption.

Core claim

The adapted UTAUT2 structural model explains 64.7 percent of the variance in developers' intention to continue using GenAI tools. Performance expectancy, hedonic motivation, and effort expectancy emerge as significant predictors, while social influence and facilitating conditions do not. This pattern indicates that, once tools are in use, sustained adoption in professional contexts is driven primarily by individual-level perceptions rather than external social or organizational factors.

What carries the argument

An adapted UTAUT2 model tested via partial least squares structural equation modeling on survey data from 154 developers across Italian SMEs.

If this is right

  • Sustained GenAI use hinges on users directly experiencing productivity and enjoyment benefits rather than external encouragement.
  • Organizational promotion efforts may have limited impact compared with ensuring tools deliver immediate individual value.
  • Technology-adoption models require distinct handling of initial versus continued-use phases in professional software settings.
  • SMEs can achieve ongoing GenAI adoption without substantial investment in social norms or infrastructure support.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Training that emphasizes concrete productivity techniques could raise retention rates more effectively than broad awareness campaigns.
  • The dominance of individual factors may apply to other discretionary AI tools where usage is not mandated.
  • Collecting longitudinal usage logs would test whether reported intention reliably predicts actual long-term behavior.

Load-bearing premise

The standard UTAUT2 constructs, after adaptation, remain sufficient to explain continued-use intention for GenAI without needing new or domain-specific factors.

What would settle it

A replication survey that replaces self-reported intention with logged tool-usage frequency and finds that social or organizational variables become significant predictors.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.25973 by Alexandra Pajonk, Fabio Calefato, Filippo Lanubile, Guilherme Vaz Pereira, Rafael Prikladnicki, Victoria Jackson.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: UTAUT2-based model of continued GenAI use in software organisations. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Research design timeline showing Phase 1 (pilot study) and Phase 2 (cross-sectional survey) data [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Types of tasks and GenAI usage frequency (Numbers refer to the number of responses). [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Response distributions for each UTAUT2 construct from the survey S2 (n=17). [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Structural model results. Social Influence (H3) removed from the model. Path coefficients shown with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p033_5.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

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.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper claims that a two-phase mixed-methods study adapting UTAUT2 to post-adoption contexts shows that continued-use intention for GenAI tools among 154 developers in Italian SMEs is substantially explained (R² = 0.647) by individual-level perceptions of productivity, enjoyment, and ease of use, while social and organizational factors are non-significant; Phase 1 longitudinal insights from 17 developers informed the model tested via PLS-SEM in Phase 2.

Significance. If the adapted measurement model holds, the result is significant for distinguishing post-adoption from initial-adoption patterns in voluntary professional settings and for resource-constrained SMEs, where individual perceptions appear to dominate over social/organizational support.

major comments (1)
  1. [Methods (Phase 2)] Methods (Phase 2 survey and model specification): The adaptation of UTAUT2 constructs for GenAI continued-use intention reports no confirmatory factor analysis, item re-development, or pilot validation beyond the n=17 Phase 1 longitudinal study. This is load-bearing because the headline R²=0.647 and the claim that only individual-level paths are significant rest on the measurement model's validity; without evidence that Phase 1 insights produced re-validated scales rather than simple reuse, the non-significant social/organizational paths and overall model interpretation cannot be assessed.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract and results: The phrase 'informed a structural model' is vague; explicit description of which items were retained, dropped, or modified based on Phase 1 would improve traceability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We appreciate the referee's detailed feedback on our manuscript. Below we provide a point-by-point response to the major comment.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Methods (Phase 2)] Methods (Phase 2 survey and model specification): The adaptation of UTAUT2 constructs for GenAI continued-use intention reports no confirmatory factor analysis, item re-development, or pilot validation beyond the n=17 Phase 1 longitudinal study. This is load-bearing because the headline R²=0.647 and the claim that only individual-level paths are significant rest on the measurement model's validity; without evidence that Phase 1 insights produced re-validated scales rather than simple reuse, the non-significant social/organizational paths and overall model interpretation cannot be assessed.

    Authors: We thank the referee for this observation. Our Phase 1 longitudinal study with 17 developers was designed to generate insights into post-adoption perceptions through repeated surveys and interviews over six months. These insights directly informed the adaptation of UTAUT2 constructs, for example by refining items to focus on sustained use rather than initial adoption. Although we did not perform a standalone confirmatory factor analysis or an additional pilot study, the measurement model in Phase 2 was validated using the standard procedures for PLS-SEM, including assessment of indicator reliability, internal consistency reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant validity. We report these metrics in the manuscript to support the model's validity. We acknowledge that more explicit documentation of the adaptation process would strengthen the paper and will revise the methods section to include a table or detailed description mapping Phase 1 findings to specific construct adaptations. This will allow readers to better evaluate the scale development. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity; result from independent survey data via standard PLS-SEM

full rationale

The paper's core claim (R²=0.647 with individual-level factors dominant) is obtained by applying PLS-SEM to a fresh cross-sectional survey (n=154) after a separate longitudinal pilot (n=17). UTAUT2 is cited as an external framework adapted for the context; Phase 1 insights inform item selection but do not substitute for or tautologically define the fitted paths. No self-citation chains, fitted inputs renamed as predictions, or self-definitional constructs appear in the reported derivation. The analysis is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Relies on standard domain assumptions of the UTAUT2 framework and PLS-SEM statistical properties; no free parameters beyond model estimation, no invented entities.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption UTAUT2 constructs are appropriate and sufficient for post-adoption continued-use intention in voluntary professional contexts
    Framework is adapted directly without new validation study for GenAI or SME setting.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5812 in / 1255 out tokens · 71230 ms · 2026-06-29T20:22:17.000598+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

77 extracted references · 41 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Adoption of AI in construction design: Insights from UTAUT2 and TOE frameworks

    Alharthi, S., et al., 2025. Adoption of AI in construction design: Insights from UTAUT2 and TOE frameworks. Results in Engineering doi:10.1016/j.rineng.2025.104576

    work page doi:10.1016/j.rineng.2025.104576 2025

  2. [2]

    Artificial intelligence adoption dynamics and knowledge in SMEs and large firms: A systematic review and bibliometric analysis

    Ayinaddis, S.G., 2025. Artificial intelligence adoption dynamics and knowledge in SMEs and large firms: A systematic review and bibliometric analysis. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge 10, 100682. doi: 10.1016/j.jik.2025.100682

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jik.2025.100682 2025

  3. [3]

    Artificial intelligence adoption by SMEs to achieve sustainable business performance: Application of technology–organization–environment framework

    Badghish, S., Soomro, Y.A., 2024. Artificial intelligence adoption by SMEs to achieve sustainable business performance: Application of technology–organization–environment framework. Sustainability 16, 1864. doi: 10.3390/su16051864

    work page doi:10.3390/su16051864 2024

  4. [4]

    Sampling in software engineering research: A critical review and guidelines

    Baltes, S., Ralph, P., 2022. Sampling in software engineering research: A critical review and guidelines. Empirical Software Engineering 27, 94

    2022

  5. [5]

    World bank sme finance

    Bank, W., 2025. World bank sme finance. URL: https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/smefinance. Accessed: 2026-01-14

    2025

  6. [6]

    Grounded copilot: How programmers interact with code-generating models

    Barke, S., James, M.B., Polikarpova, N., 2023. Grounded copilot: How programmers interact with code-generating models. Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 7. doi:10.1145/3586030

    work page doi:10.1145/3586030 2023

  7. [7]

    Motivation in software engineering: A systematic literature review

    Beecham, S., Baddoo, N., Hall, T., Robinson, H., Sharp, H., 2008. Motivation in software engineering: A systematic literature review. Inf. Softw. Technol. 50, 860–878. doi:10.1016/J.INFSOF.2007.09.004

    work page doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2007.09.004 2008

  8. [8]

    Understanding information systems continuance: An expectation-confirmation model

    Bhattacherjee, A., 2001. Understanding information systems continuance: An expectation-confirmation model. MIS Q. 25, 351–370

    2001

  9. [9]

    Factors affecting ERP system adoption: A comparative analysis between smes and large companies

    Buonanno, G., Faverio, P., Pigni, F., Ravarini, A., Sciuto, D., Tagliavini, M., 2005. Factors affecting ERP system adoption: A comparative analysis between smes and large companies. J. Enterp. Inf. Manag. 18, 384–426. doi:10.1108/ 17410390510609572

    2005

  10. [10]

    Managing human resources in small organizations: What do we know? Human resource management review 14, 295–323

    Cardon, M.S., Stevens, C.E., 2004. Managing human resources in small organizations: What do we know? Human resource management review 14, 295–323

    2004

  11. [11]

    Distinctive characteristics of small businesses as sites for informal learning

    Coetzer, A., Kock, H., Wallo, A., 2017. Distinctive characteristics of small businesses as sites for informal learning. Human Resource Development Review 16, 111–134

    2017

  12. [12]

    Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory

    Corbin, J., Strauss, A., 2014. Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Sage publications

    2014

  13. [13]

    Designing and conducting mixed methods research

    Creswell, J.W., Clark, V.L.P., 2017. Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage publications

    2017

  14. [14]

    The effects of generative ai on high-skilled work: Evidence from three field experiments with software developers

    Cui, Z.K., Demirer, M., Jaffe, S., Musolff, L., Peng, S., Salz, T., 2025. The effects of generative ai on high-skilled work: Evidence from three field experiments with software developers. Available at SSRN 4945566

    2025

  15. [15]

    The 2026 State of Product Security for the AI Era

    Cycode, 2026. The 2026 State of Product Security for the AI Era. Industry Report. Cycode. URL: https://cycode.com/ thank-you-page/state-of-product-security-ai-era-2026/. Accessed: 2026-01-14

    2026

  16. [16]

    Github copilot AI pair programmer: Asset or liability? J

    Dakhel, A.M., Majdinasab, V., Nikanjam, A., Khomh, F., Desmarais, M.C., Jiang, Z.M.J., 2023. Github copilot AI pair programmer: Asset or liability? J. Syst. Softw. 203, 111734. doi:10.1016/J.JSS.2023.111734

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jss.2023.111734 2023

  17. [17]

    An Industry Case Study on Adoption of AI-based Programming Assistants, in: Proc

    Davila, N., Wiese, I., Steinmacher, I., Lucio da Silva, L., Kawamoto, A., Favaro, G.J.P., Nunes, I., 2024. An Industry Case Study on Adoption of AI-based Programming Assistants, in: Proc. of the 46th Intl. Conf. on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Practice, Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA. pp. 92–102. doi: 10. 1145/3639...

    arXiv 2024

  18. [18]

    Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology

    Davis, F.D., 1989. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q. 13, 319–340. doi:10.2307/249008

    work page doi:10.2307/249008 1989

  19. [19]

    Rethinking IT governance for smes

    Devos, J.G., Landeghem, H.V., Deschoolmeester, D.A.K., 2012. Rethinking IT governance for smes. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 112, 206–223. doi:10.1108/02635571211204263

    work page doi:10.1108/02635571211204263 2012

  20. [20]

    Accelerate State of DevOps 2024

    DORA, 2024. Accelerate State of DevOps 2024. Technical Report. Google. URL: https://dora.dev/research/2024/dora- report/. Accessed: 2026-01-14

    2024

  21. [21]

    State of AI-assisted Software Development

    DORA, 2025. State of AI-assisted Software Development. Technical Report. Google. URL: https://dora.dev/research/ai/. Accessed: 2026-01-14

    2025

  22. [22]

    Statistical power analyses using G* Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses

    Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., Lang, A.G., 2009. Statistical power analyses using G* Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior research methods 41, 1149–1160

    2009

  23. [23]

    Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error

    Fornell, C., Larcker, D.F., 1981. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of marketing research 18, 39–50

    1981

  24. [24]

    The shifting sands of motivation: Revisiting what drives contributors in open source, in: 43rd IEEE/ACM Int’l Conf

    Gerosa, M.A., Wiese, I., Trinkenreich, B., Link, G., Robles, G., Treude, C., Steinmacher, I., Sarma, A., 2021. The shifting sands of motivation: Revisiting what drives contributors in open source, in: 43rd IEEE/ACM Int’l Conf. on Software Engineering, ICSE 2021, Madrid, Spain, 22-30 May 2021, IEEE. pp. 1046–1058. doi: 10.1109/ICSE43902.2021.00098

    work page doi:10.1109/icse43902.2021.00098 2021

  25. [25]

    AI Copilot Code Quality: Evaluating 2024’s Increased Defect Rate via Code Quality Metrics

    GitClear, 2025. AI Copilot Code Quality: Evaluating 2024’s Increased Defect Rate via Code Quality Metrics. Technical Report. GitClear. URL: https://www.gitclear.com/coding_on_copilot_data_shows_ais_downward_pressure_on_code_ quality. Accessed: 2026-01-14

    2025

  26. [26]

    Measuring the impact of GitHub Copilot

    GitHub, 2024. Measuring the impact of GitHub Copilot. URL: https://resources.github.com/learn/pathways/copilot/ essentials/measuring-the-impact-of-github-copilot/. Accessed: 2026-01-14. , Vol. 1, No. 1, Article . Publication date: May 2026. 42 Calefato et al

    2024

  27. [27]

    When to use and how to report the results of pls-sem

    Hair, J.F., Risher, J.J., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C.M., 2019. When to use and how to report the results of pls-sem. European Business Review 31, 2–24. doi:10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203

    work page doi:10.1108/ebr-11-2018-0203 2019

  28. [28]

    The State of Software Delivery 2025

    Harness, 2025. The State of Software Delivery 2025. Technical Report. Harness. URL: https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/ 6222ca42ea87e1bd1aa1d10c/677e767b5ad65ea20c02bfe6_The%20State%20of%20Software%20Delivery%20Report.pdf. Accessed: 2026-01-14

    2025

  29. [29]

    An empirical study on challenges for LLM application developers

    He, X., Xu, J., Gao, C., Chen, J., Huang, Z., Yang, L., Zhou, X., 2025. An empirical study on challenges for LLM application developers. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology 34. doi:10.1145/3715007

    work page doi:10.1145/3715007 2025

  30. [30]

    User acceptance of hedonic information systems

    van der Heijden, H., 2004. User acceptance of hedonic information systems. MIS Q. 28, 695–704

    2004

  31. [31]

    A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling

    Henseler, J., Ringle, C.M., Sarstedt, M., 2015. A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the academy of marketing science 43, 115–135

    2015

  32. [32]

    Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives

    Hu, L.t., Bentler, P.M., 1999. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal 6, 1–55

    1999

  33. [33]

    Is github copilot a substitute for human pair-programming? an empirical study, in: 44th IEEE/ACM Intl

    Imai, S., 2022. Is github copilot a substitute for human pair-programming? an empirical study, in: 44th IEEE/ACM Intl. Conf. on Software Engineering: ICSE Companion 2022, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, May 22-24, 2022, ACM/IEEE. pp. 319–321. doi:10.1145/3510454.3522684

    work page doi:10.1145/3510454.3522684 2022

  34. [34]

    Information technology adoption across time: A cross-sectional comparison of pre-adoption and post-adoption beliefs

    Karahanna, E., Straub, D.W., Chervany, N.L., 1999. Information technology adoption across time: A cross-sectional comparison of pre-adoption and post-adoption beliefs. MIS Q. 23, 183–213

    1999

  35. [35]

    Still just personal assistants? - A multiple case study of generative AI adoption in software organizations

    Kemell, K., Saarikallio, M., Nguyen-Duc, A., Abrahamsson, P., 2025. Still just personal assistants? - A multiple case study of generative AI adoption in software organizations. Inf. Softw. Technol. 186, 107805. doi:10.1016/J.INFSOF. 2025.107805

    work page doi:10.1016/j.infsof 2025

  36. [36]

    Determinants of generative AI system adoption and usage behavior in Korean companies: Applying the UTAUT model

    Kim, S., Park, H., Lee, J., 2024. Determinants of generative AI system adoption and usage behavior in Korean companies: Applying the UTAUT model. Systems 12, 468. doi:10.3390/systems12110468

    work page doi:10.3390/systems12110468 2024

  37. [37]

    Extending UTAUT with competitive pressure for smes digitalization adoption in two european nations: a multi-group analysis

    Kwarteng, M.A., Ntsiful, A., Lerma, D.F.P., Novák, P., 2024. Extending UTAUT with competitive pressure for smes digitalization adoption in two european nations: a multi-group analysis. Aslib J. Inf. Manag. 76, 842–868. doi:10.1108/ AJIM-11-2022-0482

    2024

  38. [38]

    Investigating the Role of Cultural Values in Adopting Large Language Models for Software Engineering

    Lambiase, S., Catolino, G., Palomba, F., Ferrucci, F., Russo, D., 2025. Investigating the Role of Cultural Values in Adopting Large Language Models for Software Engineering. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. doi:10.1145/3725529

    work page doi:10.1145/3725529 2025

  39. [39]

    A Large-Scale Survey on the Usability of AI Programming Assistants: Successes and Challenges, in: Proc

    Liang, J.T., Yang, C., Myers, B.A., 2024. A Large-Scale Survey on the Usability of AI Programming Assistants: Successes and Challenges, in: Proc. of the IEEE/ACM 46th Intl. Conf. on Software Engineering, Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA. pp. 1–13. doi:10.1145/3597503.3608128

    work page doi:10.1145/3597503.3608128 2024

  40. [40]

    How habit limits the predictive power of intention: The case of information systems continuance

    Limayem, M., Hirt, S.G., Cheung, C.M.K., 2007. How habit limits the predictive power of intention: The case of information systems continuance. MIS Q. 31, 705–737

    2007

  41. [41]

    On the robustness of code generation techniques: An empirical study on github copilot, in: 45th IEEE/ACM Intl

    Mastropaolo, A., Pascarella, L., Guglielmi, E., Ciniselli, M., Scalabrino, S., Oliveto, R., Bavota, G., 2023. On the robustness of code generation techniques: An empirical study on github copilot, in: 45th IEEE/ACM Intl. Conf. on Software Engineering, ICSE 2023, Melbourne, Australia, May 14-20, 2023, IEEE. pp. 2149–2160. doi: 10.1109/ICSE48619.2023. 00181

    work page doi:10.1109/icse48619.2023 2023

  42. [42]

    Software developers’ perceptions of productivity, in: Cheung, S., Orso, A., Storey, M.D

    Meyer, A.N., Fritz, T., Murphy, G.C., Zimmermann, T., 2014. Software developers’ perceptions of productivity, in: Cheung, S., Orso, A., Storey, M.D. (Eds.), Proc. of the 22nd ACM SIGSOFT Intl. Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering, (FSE-22), Hong Kong, China, November 16 - 22, 2014, ACM. pp. 19–29. doi: 10.1145/2635868.2635892

    work page doi:10.1145/2635868.2635892 2014

  43. [43]

    Development of an instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting an information technology innovation

    Moore, G.C., Benbasat, I., 1991. Development of an instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting an information technology innovation. Inf. Syst. Res. 2, 192–222. doi:10.1287/ISRE.2.3.192

    work page doi:10.1287/isre.2.3.192 1991

  44. [44]

    Instructional manipulation checks: Detecting satisficing to increase statistical power

    Oppenheimer, D.M., Meyvis, T., Davidenko, N., 2009. Instructional manipulation checks: Detecting satisficing to increase statistical power. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 45, 867–872. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2009.03.009

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2009.03.009 2009

  45. [45]

    Early Results from a Study of GenAI Adoption in a Large Brazilian Company: The Case of Globo

    Pereira, G., Prikladnicki, R., Jackson, V., van der Hoek, A., Fortes, L., Macaubas, I., 2024. Early Results from a Study of GenAI Adoption in a Large Brazilian Company: The Case of Globo. Springer Nature Switzerland, Cham. pp. 275–293. doi:10.1007/978-3-031-55642-5\_13

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-031-55642-5 2024

  46. [46]

    Pereira, G.V., Jackson, V., Prikladnicki, R., van der Hoek, A., Fortes, L., Araujo, C., Coelho, A., Chelli, L., Ramos, D.,

  47. [47]

    Exploring GenAI in Software Development: Insights from a Case Study in a Large Brazilian Company , in: 2025 IEEE/ACM 47th Intl. Conf. on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Practice (ICSE-SEIP), IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, CA, USA. pp. 330–341. doi:10.1109/ICSE-SEIP66354.2025.00035

    work page doi:10.1109/icse-seip66354.2025.00035 2025

  48. [48]

    Software process improvement in small and medium software enterprises: a systematic review

    Pino, F.J., García, F., Piattini, M., 2008. Software process improvement in small and medium software enterprises: a systematic review. Softw. Qual. J. 16, 237–261. doi:10.1007/S11219-007-9038-Z

    work page doi:10.1007/s11219-007-9038-z 2008

  49. [49]

    Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies

    Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.Y., Podsakoff, N.P., 2003. Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology 88, 879

    2003

  50. [50]

    Guest editors’ introduction: Why are small software organizations different? IEEE Software 24, 18–22

    Richardson, I., Von Wangenheim, C.G., 2007. Guest editors’ introduction: Why are small software organizations different? IEEE Software 24, 18–22. doi:10.1109/MS.2007.12. , Vol. 1, No. 1, Article . Publication date: May 2026. From Early Adoption to Sustained Use: Understanding GenAI Usage Among Software Developers in Italian SMEs 43

    work page doi:10.1109/ms.2007.12 2007

  51. [51]

    Explaining software developer acceptance of methodologies: A comparison of five theoretical models

    Riemenschneider, C.K., Hardgrave, B.C., Davis, F.D., 2002. Explaining software developer acceptance of methodologies: A comparison of five theoretical models. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 28, 1135–1145. doi: 10.1109/TSE.2002.1158287

    work page doi:10.1109/tse.2002.1158287 2002

  52. [52]

    SmartPLS 4

    Ringle, C.M., Wende, S., Becker, J.M., 2024. SmartPLS 4. URL: https://www.smartpls.com

    2024

  53. [53]

    Diffusion of innovations 5th

    Rogers, E., 2003. Diffusion of innovations 5th

    2003

  54. [54]

    The programmer’s assistant: Conversational interaction with a large language model for software development, in: Proc

    Ross, S.I., Martinez, F., Houde, S., Muller, M., Weisz, J.D., 2023. The programmer’s assistant: Conversational interaction with a large language model for software development, in: Proc. of the 28th Intl. Conf. on Intelligent User Interfaces. doi:10.1145/3581641.3584037

    work page doi:10.1145/3581641.3584037 2023

  55. [55]

    Navigating the complexity of generative ai adoption in software engineering

    Russo, D., 2024. Navigating the complexity of generative ai adoption in software engineering. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 33. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3652154, doi:10.1145/3652154

    work page doi:10.1145/3652154 2024

  56. [56]

    PLS-SEM for Software Engineering Research: An Introduction and Survey

    Russo, D., Stol, K.J., 2021. PLS-SEM for Software Engineering Research: An Introduction and Survey. ACM Comput. Surv. 54, 78:1–78:38. doi:10.1145/3447580

    work page doi:10.1145/3447580 2021

  57. [57]

    Schulze Brock, P., Katsinis, A., Lagüera González, J., Bella, L.D., Odenthal, L., Hell, M., Lozar, B., Secades Casino, B.,

  58. [58]

    Publications Office of the European Union

    Annual Report on European SMEs 2024/2025, SME performance review. Publications Office of the European Union. doi:doi/10.2760/7714438

    work page doi:10.2760/7714438 2024

  59. [59]

    The new normal: The status quo of AI adoption in SMEs

    Schwaeke, J., Peters, A., Kanbach, D.K., Kraus, S., Jones, P., 2025. The new normal: The status quo of AI adoption in SMEs. Journal of Small Business Management 63, 1297–1331

    2025

  60. [60]

    Qualitative methods in empirical studies of software engineering

    Seaman, C.B., 1999. Qualitative methods in empirical studies of software engineering. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 25, 557–572. doi:10.1109/32.799955

    work page doi:10.1109/32.799955 1999

  61. [61]

    Intention—behavior relations: A conceptual and empirical review

    Sheeran, P., 2002. Intention—behavior relations: A conceptual and empirical review. European Review of Social Psychology 12, 1–36. doi:10.1080/14792772143000003

    work page doi:10.1080/14792772143000003 2002

  62. [62]

    Predictive model assessment in PLS-SEM: guidelines for using PLSpredict

    Shmueli, G., Sarstedt, M., Hair, J.F., Cheah, J.H., Ting, H., Vaithilingam, S., Ringle, C.M., 2019. Predictive model assessment in PLS-SEM: guidelines for using PLSpredict. European Journal of Marketing 53, 2322–2347. doi: 10.1108/ EJM-02-2019-0189

    2019

  63. [63]

    The user experience of ChatGPT: Findings from a questionnaire study of early users, in: Proc

    Skjuve, M., Følstad, A., Brandtzaeg, P.B., 2023. The user experience of ChatGPT: Findings from a questionnaire study of early users, in: Proc. of the 5th Intl. Conf. on Conversational User Interfaces. doi:10.1145/3571884.3597144

    work page doi:10.1145/3571884.3597144 2023

  64. [64]

    Stack overflow 2025 developer survey

    StackOverflow, 2025. Stack overflow 2025 developer survey. URL: https://survey.stackoverflow.co/2025/ai

    2025

  65. [65]

    2024 annual report - the state of a nation

    di Statistica, I.N., 2024. 2024 annual report - the state of a nation. URL: https://www.istat.it/en/publication/2024- annual-report-the-state-of-a-nation/

    2024

  66. [66]

    Microsoft internal memo: ’using ai is no longer optional

    Stewart, A., 2025. Microsoft internal memo: ’using ai is no longer optional. ’ - business insider. URL: https://www. businessinsider.com/microsoft-internal-memo-using-ai-no-longer-optional-github-copilot-2025-6

    2025

  67. [67]

    Generative ai in the wild: Prospects, challenges, and strategies, in: Proc

    Sun, Y., Jang, E., Ma, F., Wang, T., 2024. Generative ai in the wild: Prospects, challenges, and strategies, in: Proc. of the 2024 CHI Conf. on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3613904.3642160, doi:10.1145/3613904.3642160

    work page doi:10.1145/3613904.3642160 2024

  68. [68]

    Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: A meta- analytic evaluation of UTAUT2

    Tamilmani, K., Rana, N.P., Dwivedi, Y.K., 2021. Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: A meta- analytic evaluation of UTAUT2. Inf. Syst. Frontiers 23, 987–1005. doi:10.1007/S10796-020-10007-6

    work page doi:10.1007/s10796-020-10007-6 2021

  69. [69]

    hedonic motivation

    Tamilmani, K., Rana, N.P., Prakasam, N., Dwivedi, Y.K., 2019. The battle of brain vs. heart: A literature review and meta-analysis of "hedonic motivation" use in UTAUT2. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 46, 222–235. doi: 10.1016/J.IJINFOMGT. 2019.01.008

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt 2019

  70. [70]

    Project management in small to medium-sized enterprises: fitting the practices to the needs of the firm to deliver benefit

    Turner, R., Ledwith, A., 2018. Project management in small to medium-sized enterprises: fitting the practices to the needs of the firm to deliver benefit. Journal of Small Business Management 56, 475–493

    2018

  71. [71]

    Expectation vs

    Vaithilingam, P., Zhang, T., Glassman, E.L., 2022. Expectation vs. experience: Evaluating the usability of code generation tools powered by large language models, in: CHI Conf. on Human Factors in Computing Systems Extended Abstracts. doi:10.1145/3491101.3519665

    work page doi:10.1145/3491101.3519665 2022

  72. [72]

    User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view

    Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, G.B., Davis, F.D., 2003. User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Q. 27, 425–478. doi:10.2307/30036540

    work page doi:10.2307/30036540 2003

  73. [73]

    Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology

    Venkatesh, V., Thong, J.Y.L., Xu, X., 2012. Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Q. 36, 157–178

    2012

  74. [74]

    Unified theory of acceptance and use of technology: A synthesis and the road ahead

    Venkatesh, V., Thong, J.Y.L., Xu, X., 2016. Unified theory of acceptance and use of technology: A synthesis and the road ahead. J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 17, 1. doi:10.17705/1JAIS.00428

    work page doi:10.17705/1jais.00428 2016

  75. [75]

    Examining the use and impact of an AI code assistant on developer productivity and experience in the enterprise, in: Yamashita, N., Evers, V., Yatani, K., Ding, S.X

    Weisz, J.D., Kumar, S.V., Muller, M.J., Browne, K., Goldberg, A., Heintze, K.E., Bajpai, S., 2025. Examining the use and impact of an AI code assistant on developer productivity and experience in the enterprise, in: Yamashita, N., Evers, V., Yatani, K., Ding, S.X. (Eds.), Proc. of the Extended Abstracts of the CHI Conf. on Human Factors in Computing Syste...

    work page doi:10.1145/3706599.3706670 2025

  76. [76]

    Quantifying developers’ adoption of security tools, in: Proc

    Witschey, J., Zielinska, O., Welk, A., Murphy-Hill, E., Mayhorn, C., Zimmermann, T., 2015. Quantifying developers’ adoption of security tools, in: Proc. of the 2015 10th Joint Meeting on Foundations of Software Engineering, Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA. p. 260–271. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/2786805.2786816, doi: 10. 1145/27868...

    work page doi:10.1145/2786805.2786816 2015

  77. [77]

    Exploring the problems, their causes and solutions of AI pair programming: A study on github and stack overflow

    Zhou, X., Liang, P., Zhang, B., Li, Z., Ahmad, A., Shahin, M., Waseem, M., 2025. Exploring the problems, their causes and solutions of AI pair programming: A study on github and stack overflow. J. Syst. Softw. 219, 112204. doi:10.1016/J.JSS.2024.112204. , Vol. 1, No. 1, Article . Publication date: May 2026. From Early Adoption to Sustained Use: Understand...

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jss.2024.112204 2025