Which recommendation system do you trust the most? Exploring the impact of perceived anthropomorphism on recommendation system trust, choice confidence, and information disclosure

Yanyun (Mia) Wang, Weizi Liu, Mike Yao
{"title":"Which recommendation system do you trust the most? Exploring the impact of perceived anthropomorphism on recommendation system trust, choice confidence, and information disclosure","authors":"Yanyun (Mia) Wang, Weizi Liu, Mike Yao","doi":"10.1177/14614448231223517","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recommendation systems (RSs) leverage data and algorithms to generate a set of suggestions to reduce consumers’ efforts and assist their decisions. In this study, we examine how different framings of recommendations trigger people’s anthropomorphic perceptions of RSs and therefore affect users’ attitudes in an online experiment. Participants used and evaluated one of four versions of a web-based wine RS with different source framings (i.e. “recommendation by an algorithm,” “recommendation by an AI assistant,” “recommendation by knowledge generated from similar people,” no description). Results showed that different source framings generated different levels of perceived anthropomorphism. Participants indicated greater trust in the recommendations and greater confidence in making choices based on the recommendations when they perceived an RS as highly anthropomorphic; however, higher perceived anthropomorphism of an RS led to a lower willingness to disclose personal information to the RS.","PeriodicalId":508039,"journal":{"name":"New Media & Society","volume":"55 7","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Media & Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448231223517","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Recommendation systems (RSs) leverage data and algorithms to generate a set of suggestions to reduce consumers’ efforts and assist their decisions. In this study, we examine how different framings of recommendations trigger people’s anthropomorphic perceptions of RSs and therefore affect users’ attitudes in an online experiment. Participants used and evaluated one of four versions of a web-based wine RS with different source framings (i.e. “recommendation by an algorithm,” “recommendation by an AI assistant,” “recommendation by knowledge generated from similar people,” no description). Results showed that different source framings generated different levels of perceived anthropomorphism. Participants indicated greater trust in the recommendations and greater confidence in making choices based on the recommendations when they perceived an RS as highly anthropomorphic; however, higher perceived anthropomorphism of an RS led to a lower willingness to disclose personal information to the RS.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
您最信任哪个推荐系统?探索感知拟人化对推荐系统信任度、选择信心和信息披露的影响
推荐系统(RS)利用数据和算法生成一系列建议,以减少消费者的工作量并帮助他们做出决策。在本研究中,我们通过在线实验研究了不同的推荐框架如何引发人们对 RS 的拟人化感知,从而影响用户的态度。参与者使用并评估了四种不同来源框架(即 "由算法推荐"、"由人工智能助手推荐"、"由从类似人群中产生的知识推荐"、"无描述")的网络葡萄酒RS。结果显示,不同的来源框架产生了不同程度的拟人化感知。当受试者认为RS高度拟人化时,他们对推荐的信任度更高,根据推荐做出选择的信心也更强;然而,受试者对RS拟人化程度的感知越高,他们向RS披露个人信息的意愿就越低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
How to grow a transnational field: A network analysis of the global fact-checking movement How to grow a transnational field: A network analysis of the global fact-checking movement Flagging as a silencing tool: Exploring the relationship between de-platforming of sex and online abuse on Instagram and TikTok Flagging as a silencing tool: Exploring the relationship between de-platforming of sex and online abuse on Instagram and TikTok The politics of tech responsibility: Understanding companies’ responsibility as representative claims
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1