Xin Wang, Hong Zhu, Di Jiang, Shaoang Xia, Chunqu Xiao
{"title":"“促进者”vs“替代者”:人工智能产品形象对消费者评价的影响","authors":"Xin Wang, Hong Zhu, Di Jiang, Shaoang Xia, Chunqu Xiao","doi":"10.1108/nbri-05-2022-0051","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThe rapid innovation of artificial intelligence (AI) technology promotes the prosperity of the AI product market. However, consumers seem to have negative attitudes (e.g. prejudice, aversion) toward AI products and services. Those negative attitudes are rooted in the fear that AI might replace humans. The authors thus propose that turning the image of AI from substitutes to facilitators can alleviate identity threat perception. This paper aims to examine how the image of AI products (facilitators vs substitutes) influences consumer evaluation and explores the underlying mechanism and boundary conditions.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThis study uses four experiments with between-subjects designs to investigate whether the image of AI products (facilitators vs substitutes) will affect consumer evaluation in specific consumption and service scenarios. The same products (or services) were manipulated as “substitute” or “facilitator” through advertisement slogans. Participants were randomly assigned to a condition and read the advertisement, then they reported their evaluation. The mediator perceived identity threat and the moderator preconceived perceptions of AI risks were measured by scales. The moderator, self-affirmation, was manipulated through the instruction of the experiment.\n\n\nFindings\nThis study demonstrates that consumers give higher evaluation of AI products in the image of the facilitator than in the image of the substitute (Study 1). The underlying mechanism is that the perceived identity threat caused by “facilitator” products is lower than “substitute” products (Study 2). The effect of AI image is moderated by consumers’ preconceived perceptions of AI risks (Study 3) and self-affirmation (Study 4). Specifically, for consumers who have a strong AI risk-perception, this effect exists, but it disappears for consumers who have a weak AI risk perception. When consumers are given a strong self-affirmation, the negative impact of the “substitute” image disappears.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThis paper analyzes the psychological root of consumers’ negative evaluation of AI technology from the perspective of AI’s image. The proposed typology of “substitutes” and “facilitators” helps expand the vision on brand/product image and enriches the research on consumer self-identity in today’s highly informatized market. The findings shed light on how to choose appropriate image for AI products, which will be crucial for increasing consumers’ acceptance of AI products.\n","PeriodicalId":44958,"journal":{"name":"Nankai Business Review International","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"“Facilitators” vs “substitutes”: the influence of artificial intelligence products’ image on consumer evaluation\",\"authors\":\"Xin Wang, Hong Zhu, Di Jiang, Shaoang Xia, Chunqu Xiao\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/nbri-05-2022-0051\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nPurpose\\nThe rapid innovation of artificial intelligence (AI) technology promotes the prosperity of the AI product market. However, consumers seem to have negative attitudes (e.g. prejudice, aversion) toward AI products and services. Those negative attitudes are rooted in the fear that AI might replace humans. The authors thus propose that turning the image of AI from substitutes to facilitators can alleviate identity threat perception. This paper aims to examine how the image of AI products (facilitators vs substitutes) influences consumer evaluation and explores the underlying mechanism and boundary conditions.\\n\\n\\nDesign/methodology/approach\\nThis study uses four experiments with between-subjects designs to investigate whether the image of AI products (facilitators vs substitutes) will affect consumer evaluation in specific consumption and service scenarios. The same products (or services) were manipulated as “substitute” or “facilitator” through advertisement slogans. Participants were randomly assigned to a condition and read the advertisement, then they reported their evaluation. The mediator perceived identity threat and the moderator preconceived perceptions of AI risks were measured by scales. The moderator, self-affirmation, was manipulated through the instruction of the experiment.\\n\\n\\nFindings\\nThis study demonstrates that consumers give higher evaluation of AI products in the image of the facilitator than in the image of the substitute (Study 1). The underlying mechanism is that the perceived identity threat caused by “facilitator” products is lower than “substitute” products (Study 2). The effect of AI image is moderated by consumers’ preconceived perceptions of AI risks (Study 3) and self-affirmation (Study 4). Specifically, for consumers who have a strong AI risk-perception, this effect exists, but it disappears for consumers who have a weak AI risk perception. When consumers are given a strong self-affirmation, the negative impact of the “substitute” image disappears.\\n\\n\\nOriginality/value\\nThis paper analyzes the psychological root of consumers’ negative evaluation of AI technology from the perspective of AI’s image. The proposed typology of “substitutes” and “facilitators” helps expand the vision on brand/product image and enriches the research on consumer self-identity in today’s highly informatized market. The findings shed light on how to choose appropriate image for AI products, which will be crucial for increasing consumers’ acceptance of AI products.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":44958,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nankai Business Review International\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nankai Business Review International\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/nbri-05-2022-0051\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nankai Business Review International","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/nbri-05-2022-0051","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
“Facilitators” vs “substitutes”: the influence of artificial intelligence products’ image on consumer evaluation
Purpose
The rapid innovation of artificial intelligence (AI) technology promotes the prosperity of the AI product market. However, consumers seem to have negative attitudes (e.g. prejudice, aversion) toward AI products and services. Those negative attitudes are rooted in the fear that AI might replace humans. The authors thus propose that turning the image of AI from substitutes to facilitators can alleviate identity threat perception. This paper aims to examine how the image of AI products (facilitators vs substitutes) influences consumer evaluation and explores the underlying mechanism and boundary conditions.
Design/methodology/approach
This study uses four experiments with between-subjects designs to investigate whether the image of AI products (facilitators vs substitutes) will affect consumer evaluation in specific consumption and service scenarios. The same products (or services) were manipulated as “substitute” or “facilitator” through advertisement slogans. Participants were randomly assigned to a condition and read the advertisement, then they reported their evaluation. The mediator perceived identity threat and the moderator preconceived perceptions of AI risks were measured by scales. The moderator, self-affirmation, was manipulated through the instruction of the experiment.
Findings
This study demonstrates that consumers give higher evaluation of AI products in the image of the facilitator than in the image of the substitute (Study 1). The underlying mechanism is that the perceived identity threat caused by “facilitator” products is lower than “substitute” products (Study 2). The effect of AI image is moderated by consumers’ preconceived perceptions of AI risks (Study 3) and self-affirmation (Study 4). Specifically, for consumers who have a strong AI risk-perception, this effect exists, but it disappears for consumers who have a weak AI risk perception. When consumers are given a strong self-affirmation, the negative impact of the “substitute” image disappears.
Originality/value
This paper analyzes the psychological root of consumers’ negative evaluation of AI technology from the perspective of AI’s image. The proposed typology of “substitutes” and “facilitators” helps expand the vision on brand/product image and enriches the research on consumer self-identity in today’s highly informatized market. The findings shed light on how to choose appropriate image for AI products, which will be crucial for increasing consumers’ acceptance of AI products.
期刊介绍:
Nankai Business Review International (NBRI) provides insights in to the adaptation of American and European management theory in China, the differences and exchanges between Chinese and western management styles, the relationship between Chinese enterprises’ management practice and social evolution and showcases the development and evolution of management theories based on Chinese cultural characteristics. The journal provides research of interest to managers and entrepreneurs worldwide with an interest in China as well as research associations and scholars focusing on Chinese problems in business and management.