“促进者”vs“替代者”:人工智能产品形象对消费者评价的影响

IF 1.8 Q3 MANAGEMENT
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}
引用次数: 4

摘要

目的人工智能技术的快速创新促进了人工智能产品市场的繁荣。然而,消费者似乎对人工智能产品和服务持负面态度(如偏见、厌恶)。这些消极的态度源于对人工智能可能取代人类的恐惧。因此,作者提出,将人工智能的形象从替代品转变为促进者可以减轻对身份威胁的感知。本文旨在研究人工智能产品的形象(促进者与替代者)如何影响消费者评价,并探讨其潜在机制和边界条件。设计/方法论/方法本研究使用了四个受试者之间设计的实验,以调查人工智能产品的形象(促进者与替代者)是否会影响特定消费和服务场景中的消费者评价。同样的产品(或服务)通过广告口号被操纵为“替代品”或“促进者”。参与者被随机分配到一个条件下,阅读广告,然后报告他们的评估。中介感知的身份威胁和调节者对人工智能风险的先入为主的感知通过量表进行测量。主持人,自我肯定,是通过实验的指导来操纵的。研究结果这项研究表明,消费者以促进者的形象对人工智能产品的评价高于以替代者的形象(研究1)。潜在机制是,“促进者”产品造成的感知身份威胁低于“替代品”产品(研究2)。人工智能形象的影响受到消费者对人工智能风险的先入为主的感知(研究3)和自我肯定(研究4)的调节。具体来说,对于AI风险感知较强的消费者来说,这种效应是存在的,但对于AI风险认知较弱的消费者来说则消失了。当消费者得到强烈的自我肯定时,“替代品”形象的负面影响就会消失。原创/价值本文从人工智能的形象角度分析了消费者对人工智能技术负面评价的心理根源。所提出的“替代品”和“促进者”的类型学有助于扩大对品牌/产品形象的视野,丰富对当今高度信息化市场中消费者自我认同的研究。这些发现揭示了如何为人工智能产品选择合适的图像,这对提高消费者对人工智能产品的接受度至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
“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.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
3.60%
发文量
32
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.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信