初次见面时的人机交流:人工智能代理如何影响信任、好感和聊天质量评估

Wenjing Pan, Diyi Liu, Jingbo Meng, Hailong Liu
{"title":"初次见面时的人机交流:人工智能代理如何影响信任、好感和聊天质量评估","authors":"Wenjing Pan, Diyi Liu, Jingbo Meng, Hailong Liu","doi":"10.1177/14614448241259149","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Artificial intelligence (AI) agency plays an important role in shaping humans’ perceptions and evaluations of AI. This study seeks to conceptually differentiate AI agency from human agency and examine how AI’s agency manifested on source and language dimensions may be associated with humans’ perceptions of AI. A 2 (AI’s source autonomy: autonomous vs human-assisted) × 2 (AI’s language subjectivity: subjective vs objective) × 2 (topics: traveling vs reading) factorial design was adopted ( N = 376). The results showed autonomous AI was rated as more trustworthy, and AI using subjective language was rated as more trustworthy and likable. Autonomous AI using subjective language was rated as the most trustworthy, likable, and of the best quality. Participants’ AI literacy moderated the interaction effect of source autonomy and language subjectivity on human trust and chat quality evaluation. Results were discussed in terms of human–AI communication theories and the design and development of AI chatbots.","PeriodicalId":443328,"journal":{"name":"New Media & Society","volume":"30 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Human–AI communication in initial encounters: How AI agency affects trust, liking, and chat quality evaluation\",\"authors\":\"Wenjing Pan, Diyi Liu, Jingbo Meng, Hailong Liu\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14614448241259149\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Artificial intelligence (AI) agency plays an important role in shaping humans’ perceptions and evaluations of AI. This study seeks to conceptually differentiate AI agency from human agency and examine how AI’s agency manifested on source and language dimensions may be associated with humans’ perceptions of AI. A 2 (AI’s source autonomy: autonomous vs human-assisted) × 2 (AI’s language subjectivity: subjective vs objective) × 2 (topics: traveling vs reading) factorial design was adopted ( N = 376). The results showed autonomous AI was rated as more trustworthy, and AI using subjective language was rated as more trustworthy and likable. Autonomous AI using subjective language was rated as the most trustworthy, likable, and of the best quality. Participants’ AI literacy moderated the interaction effect of source autonomy and language subjectivity on human trust and chat quality evaluation. Results were discussed in terms of human–AI communication theories and the design and development of AI chatbots.\",\"PeriodicalId\":443328,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"New Media & Society\",\"volume\":\"30 4\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-12\",\"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/10.1177/14614448241259149\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Media & Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448241259149","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

人工智能(AI)代理在塑造人类对人工智能的认知和评价方面发挥着重要作用。本研究试图从概念上将人工智能的能动性与人类的能动性区分开来,并研究人工智能在源和语言维度上表现出的能动性如何与人类对人工智能的认知相关联。研究采用了 2(人工智能的来源自主性:自主 VS 人工辅助)×2(人工智能的语言主观性:主观 VS 客观)×2(主题:旅行 VS 阅读)因子设计(N = 376)。结果显示,自主人工智能被评为更值得信赖,而使用主观语言的人工智能被评为更值得信赖和更受欢迎。使用主观语言的自主人工智能被评为最值得信赖、最讨人喜欢和质量最好的人工智能。参与者的人工智能素养调节了源自主性和语言主观性对人类信任度和聊天质量评价的交互影响。研究结果从人类-人工智能交流理论以及人工智能聊天机器人的设计和开发方面进行了讨论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Human–AI communication in initial encounters: How AI agency affects trust, liking, and chat quality evaluation
Artificial intelligence (AI) agency plays an important role in shaping humans’ perceptions and evaluations of AI. This study seeks to conceptually differentiate AI agency from human agency and examine how AI’s agency manifested on source and language dimensions may be associated with humans’ perceptions of AI. A 2 (AI’s source autonomy: autonomous vs human-assisted) × 2 (AI’s language subjectivity: subjective vs objective) × 2 (topics: traveling vs reading) factorial design was adopted ( N = 376). The results showed autonomous AI was rated as more trustworthy, and AI using subjective language was rated as more trustworthy and likable. Autonomous AI using subjective language was rated as the most trustworthy, likable, and of the best quality. Participants’ AI literacy moderated the interaction effect of source autonomy and language subjectivity on human trust and chat quality evaluation. Results were discussed in terms of human–AI communication theories and the design and development of AI chatbots.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Performing lowbrowness: How Chinese queer people negotiate visibility on short-video platforms When content moderation is not about content: How Chinese social media platforms moderate content and why it matters “Our advice is to break up”: Douban’s intimate public and the rise of girlfriend culture Unmasking coordinated hate: Analysing hate speech on Spanish digital news media Human–AI communication in initial encounters: How AI agency affects trust, liking, and chat quality evaluation
×
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:481959085
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