Photographic Psychology in the Age of Generative Artificial Intelligence: Media Authenticity, Visual Judgment, and Identity Construction

Rui Fu

doi:10.62051/ijcsit.v8n6.01

Authors

Rui Fu Beijing Guanshe Cultural Technology Co., Ltd., 100100, Beijing, China

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.62051/ijcsit.v8n6.01

Keywords:

Generative artificial intelligence, Photographic psychology, Visual authenticity, Identity construction, Algorithmic bias, Media ethics

Abstract

Generative artificial intelligence is reshaping the psychological foundations of photography. For a long time, photography gained its persuasive force from physical presence, optical recording, and temporal trace. Viewers tended to read photographs as evidence of an encounter between a camera, a subject, and a moment. AI-generated images disturb this habit. They can look photographic without requiring a photographed object, a shared scene, or bodily participation by the maker. To analyse this shift, this study examines the transformation of photographic psychology across: media authenticity, visual judgment, algorithmic bias, copyright and authorship, memory practice, and identity construction on social platforms. This suggests that generative AI does not simply replace photography. It reorganizes photography into a hybrid visual system where recording and generation coexist. As a result, photographic psychology shifts from the psychology of capturing reality to the psychology of judging sources, negotiating trust, and constructing identity under algorithmic conditions. The continuing value of photography lies not only in visual realism, but also in human experience, ethical responsibility, situated attention, and the durable connection between images and lived reality.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

[1] Barthes, R. (1981). Camera lucida: Reflections on photography. Macmillan.

[2] Neisser, U. (1976). Cognition and reality: Principles and implications of cognitive psychology. W. H. Freeman and Company.

[3] Paivio, A. (2013). Imagery and verbal processes. Psychology Press.

[4] Sontag, S. (2021). On photography. In Illuminations (pp. 230–234). Routledge.

[5] Hausken, L. (2024). Photorealism versus photography. AI-generated depiction in the age of visual disinformation. Journal of Aesthetics & Culture, 16(1), 2340787.

[6] Palmer, D., & Sluis, K. (2024). The automation of style: Seeing photographically in generative AI. Media Theory, 8(1), 159–184.

[7] Frosh, P. (2024). Seeing photographically and the memory of photography. Media Theory, 8(1), 53–78.

[8] Wasielewski, A. (2024). Unnatural images: On AI-generated photographs. Critical Inquiry, 51(1), 1–29.

[9] Benjamin, W. (2008). The work of art in the age of its technological reproducibility, and other writings on media. Harvard University Press.

[10] Peirce, C. S. (1934). Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (Vol. 5). Harvard University Press.

[11] Magnus, P. D. (2025). Generative AI and photographic transparency. AI & Society, 40(3), 1607–1612.

[12] Gibson, J. J. (2014). The ecological approach to visual perception: Classic edition. Psychology Press.

[13] Ogundipe, A. (2025). Generative AI, agency and aesthetic disruption in photographic art. Journal of Aesthetics & Culture, 17(1), 2557675.

[14] Arnheim, R. (1954). Art and visual perception: A psychology of the creative eye. University of California Press.

[15] Farooq, A., & de Vreese, C. (2026). Deciphering authenticity in the age of AI: How AI-generated disinformation images and AI detection tools influence judgements of authenticity. AI & Society, 41(1), 493–504.

[16] Bui, H. T., Filimonau, V., & Sezerel, H. (2024). AI-thenticity: Exploring the effect of perceived authenticity of AI-generated visual content on tourist patronage intentions. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 34, 100956.

[17] Barve, S., Mao, A., Shi, J. M., Juneja, P., & Saha, K. (2026). Social stereotypes in AI text-to-image generation. AI and Ethics, 6(3), 296.

[18] Weinmann, H., Messingschlager, T. V., & Appel, M. (2026). Gender bias in text-to-image generative artificial intelligence: Neglect and stereotypical presentations across three popular platforms. New Media & Society.

[19] Currie, G., Hewis, J., & Ebbs, P. (2025). Gender bias in text-to-image generative artificial intelligence depiction of Australian paramedics and first responders. Australasian Emergency Care, 28(2), 103–109.

[20] Le, V. A. (2025). Copyright of photography and artificial intelligence: A tale of two technologies. Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 20(8), 562–569.

[21] Quintais, J. P. (2025). Generative AI, copyright and the AI Act. Computer Law & Security Review, 56, 106107.

[22] Yaya, G., Talbot, J., Convertino, G., Stockner, M., & Mazzoni, G. (2024). Are we taking too many pictures? An investigation of the impact of smartphone photography on memory. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 36(4), 429–442.

[23] Felig, R. N., & Goldenberg, J. L. (2024). Selfie-evaluation: A meta-analysis of the relationship between selfie behaviors and self-evaluations. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 50(8), 1227–1250.

[24] Pérez-Torres, V. (2024). Social media: A digital social mirror for identity development during adolescence. Current Psychology, 43(26), 22170–22180.

[25] Avci, H., Baams, L., & Kretschmer, T. (2025). A systematic review of social media use and adolescent identity development. Adolescent Research Review, 10(2), 219–236.

[26] Zhu, Y. (2025). Analog photography enhances identity, well-being, and social connection, in Southeastern China. Scientific Reports.