Human Versus AI in Checkout Charity: How Time Pressure, Persuasion Knowledge, and Ulterior Motive Shape Donation and Store Patronage Intentions

Abstract

This research investigates how the source of a checkout charity appeal—human versus artificial intelligence (AI) agent—interacts with contextual (time pressure) and psychological (persuasion knowledge and access to ulterior motives) factors to shape consumer donation and store patronage intentions. Grounded in the self-regulatory resource depletion framework and the Persuasion Knowledge Model (PKM), we conducted four, between-subjects experiments (total N = 898), each designed to isolate a specific boundary condition under which AI versus human appeals differ in effectiveness. Study 1 manipulated situational time pressure and found that AI-led appeals increased donation intentions under high time constraints due to their lower social demands, whereas human-led appeals were more effective when time pressure was low. Study 2 extended this effect by treating time pressure as a chronic trait and replicating the interaction in a different retail context. In Study 3, we manipulated persuasion knowledge and showed that high-knowledge consumers preferred AI appeals due to higher perceived credibility, whereas low-knowledge consumers favored human appeals. Study 4 introduced access to a retailer's ulterior motives and revealed that AI appeals enhanced store patronage intentions under high transparency, whereas human appeals diminished them. These findings refine existing theory by demonstrating how AI agents can reduce social frictions and enhance trust under resource-depleting or skeptical conditions. The results offer actionable guidance for retailers and nonprofits: deploy AI-led appeals in high-pressure or high-skepticism settings, and human agents in contexts that reward warmth and relational engagement.