Addressing contemporary debates on the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) in qualitative research, this article proposes a hybrid methodological approach positioned within the “human-in-the-loop” paradigm. This approach preserves interpretive authority while leveraging computational capabilities. When applied to the Album On Line (AOL) method, the use of generative AI (eight different chatbots) and semantic AI, via natural language processing (NLP), improves the interpretation of outcome mapping. Ultimately, the outcomes generated by AI are compared with those derived from researchers’ efforts. This study aims to provide a broader vision of the world of AI and its potential contribution to research. It offers a critical complementarity framework that enhances efficiency, saves time, and improves the quality of results. It enriches the researcher’s toolbox by demonstrating how to leverage AI for research purposes.
AfuahA.TucciC. (2023). Reflections on the 2022 AMR decade award: Crowdsourcing as a solution to distant search. Academy of Management Review, 48(4), 597–610. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2023.0202
2.
AhmedF.Valette-FlorenceP. (2020). Demystifying perceived psychological proximity for hedonic product choices: An abstract. In WuS.PantojaF.KreyN. (Eds.), Marketing opportunities and challenges in a changing global marketplace (pp. 495–496). Springer International Publishing.
3.
Al-FattalA.SinghJ. (2025). Comparative reflections on human-driven and generative artificial intelligence-assisted thematic analysis: A collaborative autoethnography. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 24: 1–10, Article 16094069251337870. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069251337870
4.
AnakokI. K. A.ChewK. J.MatusovichH. (2025). Leveraging generative text models and natural language processing to perform traditional thematic data analysis. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 24, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069251338898
5.
BredaC. (2004). Individual factor’s loyalty in the context of an experiential consumption: Application to tourist organizations. In Doctoral thesis in management sciences (1, pp. 1–477). University of Savoie.
6.
CarrollJ. D.ChangJ.-J. (1970). Analysis of individual differences in multidimensional scaling via an n-way generalization of “Eckart-Young” decomposition. Psychometrika, 35(3), 283–319. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02310791
7.
ChristensenG. L.OlsonJ. C. (2002). Mapping consumers’ mental models with ZMET. Psychology and Marketing, 19(6), 477–501. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.10021
8.
ChubbL. A. (2023). Me and the machines: Possibilities and pitfalls of using artificial intelligence for qualitative data analysis. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 22: 1–16, Article 16094069231193593. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069231193593
9.
CondevauxA. (2015). Rencontres touristiques polynésiennes. In DecrolyJ.-M. (Ed.), Le tourisme comme expérience: Regards interdisciplinaires sur le vécu touristique (pp. 89–100). Presses de l’Université du Québec.
10.
CouderJ.Valette-FlorenceP. (2024). How do customers experience terroir? An investigation of its ability to increase brand relationship quality. Journal of Business Research, 181(Article), 114712. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2024.114712
FoleyK.McLeanC.De ZylvaR.AsaG.MaioJ.BatchelorS.DzandoG.DimassiA. (2025). Developing a critical imagination for how researchers can use artificially intelligent tools reflexively and responsibly during qualitative literature reviews. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 24: 1–17, Article 16094069251316249. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069251316249
13.
GuzikE. B. C.GildeC. (2023). The originality of machines: AI takes the Torrance test. Journal of Creativity, 33(3), Article 100065. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yjoc.2023.100065
14.
HaefnerN. W. J. P. V.WincentJ.ParidaV.GassmannO. (2021). Artificial intelligence and innovation management: A review, framework, and research agenda. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 162, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120392
15.
HamiltonL. E. D. Q. A.ElliottD.QuickA.SmithS.ChoplinV. (2023). Exploring the use of AI in qualitative analysis: A comparative study of guaranteed income data. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 22: 1–13, Article 16094069231201504. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069231201504
16.
HitchD. (2023). Artificial intelligence (AI) augmented qualitative analysis: The way of the future?Qualitative Health Research, 34(7) 595–606. Epub ahead of print. Available at SSRN. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4451740
17.
IanniN.KessousA.Valette-FlorenceP. (2023). Consommation [ostentatoire] socialement responsable: Le comportement paradoxal d’une parade raisonnée. In Responsabilités et pratiques du marketing – 39ème congés international de l’AFM, Vannes, France, may 2023 (pp. 247–259). Association Française De Marketing. https://hal.science/hal-04056863.
18.
Jonas Ag RadderL.Van EykM. (2020). The influence of cognitive dimensions on memorable experiences within a marine tourism context. South African Journal of Economic and Management Sciences, 23(1), a3579. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajems.v23i1.3579
19.
KabirS. M. A. A. F. A. R. L.AliF.AhmedR. L.Sulaiman-HillR. (2025). Exploring the use of AI in qualitative data analysis: Comparing manual processing with avidnote for theme generation. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 24: 1–9Article 16094069251336810. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069251336810
20.
KassambaraA. (2017). Practical guide to cluster analysis in R: Unsupervised machine learning. STHDA.
21.
KessousA.Valette-FlorenceP. (2019). “From Prada to nada”: Consumers and their luxury products: A contrast between second-hand and first-hand luxury products. Journal of Business Research, 102(1), 313–327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.02.033
22.
KessousA.Valette-FlorenceP.De BarnierV. (2017). Luxury watch possession and dispossession from father to son: A poisoned gift?Journal of Business Research, 77(0), 212–222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.12.006
23.
KolomaznikM.PetrikV.SlamaM.JurikV. (2024). The role of socio-emotional attributes in enhancing human-AI collaboration. Frontiers in Psychology, 15(1), 1369957. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1369957
24.
LahbibO.KessousA.Valette-FlorenceP. (2023). Toward a better understanding of the phenomenon of ambivalence in the endorsement of sustainable luxury. Décisions Marketing, 110(2), 217–246. https://doi.org/10.3917/dm.110.0085
25.
LangevinC. (2022). Les technologies de l’intelligence artificielle au service des médias et des éditeurs de contenus: Traitement du langage naturel (TAL). i2D - Information, Données & Documents, 1(1), 30–37. https://doi.org/10.3917/i2d.221.0030
26.
LarsenJ. R. K.LaursenL. L. H. (2012). Family place experience and the making of places in holiday home destinations – A Danish case study. In SharpleyR.StoneP. (Eds.), The contemporary tourist experience: Concepts and consequesnces (pp. 181–200). Routledge.
27.
MohannaS.BasiouniA. (2024). Consumer’s cognitive and affective perceptions of artificial intelligence (AI) in social media: Topic modelling approach. Journal of Electrical Systems, 20(3), 1317–1326. https://doi.org/10.52783/jes.3539
28.
MorganD. L. (2023). Exploring the use of artificial intelligence for qualitative data analysis: The case of ChatGPT. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 22: 1–10, Article 16094069231211248. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069231211248
29.
NaeemM.SmithT.ThomasL. (2025). Thematic analysis and artificial intelligence: A step-by-step process for using ChatGPT in thematic analysis. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 24, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069251333886
30.
NardonL. B. C. V. S.BrüningC.ValgardssonS.BusatoM. (2025). AI-image generation in research interviews: Opportunities and challenges. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 24: 1–11, Article 16094069251333335. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069251333335
31.
NavigliR. C. S.RossB. (2023). Biases in large language models: Origins, inventory, and discussion. Journal of Data and Information Quality, 15(2), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1145/3597307
32.
OrganisciakP. A. S. D. D.AcarS.DumasD.BerthiaumeK. (2023). Beyond semantic distance: Automated scoring of divergent thinking greatly improves with large language models. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 49(1), Article 101356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2023.101356
33.
RaischS.KrakowskiS. (2021). Artificial intelligence and management: The automation–augmentation paradox. Academy of Management Review, 46(1), 192–210. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2018.0072
34.
SmedK. M. (2012). Linking consumer experiences: Exploring narratives of experienced consumption. In Nordic conference on consumer research, Göteborg, Sweden, 30 May–1 June 2012.
35.
StaffordL.PrestonC.PikeA. C. (2024). Participant use of artificial intelligence in online focus groups: An experiential account. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 23(1), Article 16094069241286417. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069241286417
36.
TaiR. H.BentleyL. R.XiaX.SittJ. M.FankhauserS. C.Chicas-MosierA. M.MonteithB. G. (2024). An examination of the use of large language models to aid analysis of textual data. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 23(1), Article 16094069241231168. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069241231168
37.
VernetteE. (2007). Une nouvelle méthode de groupe pour interpréter le sens d’une expérience de consommation: “l’Album on-Line” (AOL). In: Actes de la 12ème journée de recherche en marketing de bourgogne, Dijon, 8–9 November 2007 (pp. 37–55). Centre de Recherche en Marketing de Bourgogne.
Williamson C van RooyenA.DryR. (2025). In tandem with artificial intelligence: A working framework for coding in ATLAS. tiTM. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 24(1), Article 16094069241306551. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069241306551[
40.
YounessC.Valette-FlorenceP.AssafC. (2023). Global corporate reputation: A projective qualitative approach from a customer perspective. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 27(1), 108–128. https://doi.org/10.1108/QMR-04-2023-0052
41.
ZaltmanG. (1997). Rethinking market research: Putting people back in. Journal of Marketing Research, 34(4), 424–437. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151962
