Skip to content
AI News HubLIVE
Source content · Analysis pending2 min read

What Users Think of Generative AI: A Cross-Platform NLP Analysis of Trust and Friction in App Store Reviews

Summary

arXiv:2609.19151v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Generative AI (GenAI) applications have achieved rapid consumer adoption, yet little large-scale research examines user-perceived quality, trust, and adoption barriers. We present one of the first cross-application analyses of app store reviews for six major GenAI applications (ChatGPT, Gemini, Microsoft Copilot, Claude, DeepSeek, and Perplexity), comprising 17,012 English-language reviews from Google Play and the Apple App Store. We combine BERTopic topic modeling with RoBERTa sentiment classification and evaluate cross-application differences using chi-square, Kruskal-Wallis, and multinomial logistic regression with Bonferroni correction. Both components are validated against human coding using a stratified sample of 300 reviews. Results s…

SourcearXiv Computational LinguisticsAuthor: Md Jafrin Hossain, Umme Nusrat Jahan, Shouvaggo Sharif Shammo
What Users Think of Generative AI: A Cross-Platform NLP Analysis of Trust and Friction in App Store Reviews
Report an error

The correction channel is not available yet. You can copy the article reference below for later.

Correction instructions
Read article

[Submitted on 20 Jul 2026]

Title:What Users Think of Generative AI: A Cross-Platform NLP Analysis of Trust and Friction in App Store Reviews

View a PDF of the paper titled What Users Think of Generative AI: A Cross-Platform NLP Analysis of Trust and Friction in App Store Reviews, by Md Jafrin Hossain and 1 other authors

View PDF HTML (experimental)

Abstract:Generative AI (GenAI) applications have achieved rapid consumer adoption, yet little large-scale research examines user-perceived quality, trust, and adoption barriers. We present one of the first cross-application analyses of app store reviews for six major GenAI applications (ChatGPT, Gemini, Microsoft Copilot, Claude, DeepSeek, and Perplexity), comprising 17,012 English-language reviews from Google Play and the Apple App Store. We combine BERTopic topic modeling with RoBERTa sentiment classification and evaluate cross-application differences using chi-square, Kruskal-Wallis, and multinomial logistic regression with Bonferroni correction. Both components are validated against human coding using a stratified sample of 300 reviews. Results show that negative sentiment concentrates in advertising (91%), authentication (89%), server reliability (83%), and subscription pricing (73%). Sentiment differs significantly across applications, with Claude exhibiting the highest negative sentiment (47.7%) alongside a strongly enthusiastic user base, indicating statistically significant polarization. These findings are robust despite unequal review counts across applications. As exploratory observations, a subset of DeepSeek reviews raised geopolitical and data privacy concerns related to its Chinese origin, while a proposed Trust Friction Score summarizes application-specific trust and usability barriers into interpretable dimensions. The study provides validated and actionable evidence on user trust, usability, and adoption barriers in consumer generative AI applications.

Comments: Submitted to Array (Elsevier); currently under peer review

Subjects:

Computation and Language (cs.CL); Human-Computer Interaction (cs.HC); Information Retrieval (cs.IR)

Cite as: arXiv:2609.19151 [cs.CL]

(or arXiv:2609.19151v1 [cs.CL] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.19151

arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite

Submission history

From: Md Jafrin Hossain [view email] [v1] Mon, 20 Jul 2026 14:06:10 UTC (4,166 KB)

Full-text links:

Access Paper:

View a PDF of the paper titled What Users Think of Generative AI: A Cross-Platform NLP Analysis of Trust and Friction in App Store Reviews, by Md Jafrin Hossain and 1 other authors

View PDF

HTML (experimental)

TeX Source

view license

Current browse context:

cs.CL

new | recent | 2026-09

Change to browse by:

cs cs.HC cs.IR

References & Citations

NASA ADS

Google Scholar

Semantic Scholar

Loading...

Data provided by:

Bibliographic Tools

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer Toggle

Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)

Connected Papers Toggle

Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)

Litmaps Toggle

Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)

scite.ai Toggle

scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)

Code, Data, Media

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv Toggle

alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)

Links to Code Toggle

CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)

DagsHub Toggle

DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)

GotitPub Toggle

Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)

Huggingface Toggle

Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)

ScienceCast Toggle

ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)

Demos

Demos

Replicate Toggle

Replicate (What is Replicate?)

Spaces Toggle

Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)

Spaces Toggle

TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)

Related Papers

Recommenders and Search Tools

Link to Influence Flower

Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)

Core recommender toggle

CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)

Author

Venue

Institution

Topic

About arXivLabs

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)

Key points and analysis

Article intelligence

InvestorsAdvanced

Key points

  • AI generation is temporarily unavailable; this entry was preserved with deterministic fallback metadata.
  • arXiv:2609.19151v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Generative AI (GenAI) applications have achieved rapid consumer adoption, yet little large-scale research examines user-perceived q…

Highlights and analysis are generated automatically and may contain errors. Check the original source.