了解并改善消费者对服务机器人的反应

IF 5.7 1区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS Journal of Consumer Research Pub Date : 2023-04-03 DOI:10.1093/jcr/ucad023
Noah Castelo, Johannes Boegershausen, Christian Hildebrand, Alexander P. Henkel
{"title":"了解并改善消费者对服务机器人的反应","authors":"Noah Castelo, Johannes Boegershausen, Christian Hildebrand, Alexander P. Henkel","doi":"10.1093/jcr/ucad023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Many firms are beginning to replace customer service employees with bots, from humanoid service robots to digital chatbots. Using real human-bot interactions in lab and field settings, we study consumers’ evaluations of bot-provided service. We find that service evaluations are more negative when the service provider is a bot versus a human—even when the provided service is identical. This effect is explained by consumers’ belief that service automation is motivated by firm benefits (i.e., cutting costs) at the expense of customer benefits (such as service quality). The effect is eliminated when firms share the economic surplus derived from automation with consumers through price discounts. The effect is reversed when service bots provide unambiguously superior service to human employees—a scenario that may soon become reality. Consumers’ default reactions to service bots are therefore largely negative but can be equal to or better than reactions to human service providers if firms can demonstrate how automation benefits consumers.","PeriodicalId":15555,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Consumer Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Understanding and Improving Consumer Reactions to Service Bots\",\"authors\":\"Noah Castelo, Johannes Boegershausen, Christian Hildebrand, Alexander P. Henkel\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jcr/ucad023\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Many firms are beginning to replace customer service employees with bots, from humanoid service robots to digital chatbots. Using real human-bot interactions in lab and field settings, we study consumers’ evaluations of bot-provided service. We find that service evaluations are more negative when the service provider is a bot versus a human—even when the provided service is identical. This effect is explained by consumers’ belief that service automation is motivated by firm benefits (i.e., cutting costs) at the expense of customer benefits (such as service quality). The effect is eliminated when firms share the economic surplus derived from automation with consumers through price discounts. The effect is reversed when service bots provide unambiguously superior service to human employees—a scenario that may soon become reality. Consumers’ default reactions to service bots are therefore largely negative but can be equal to or better than reactions to human service providers if firms can demonstrate how automation benefits consumers.\",\"PeriodicalId\":15555,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Consumer Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Consumer Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucad023\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Consumer Research","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucad023","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

许多公司开始用机器人取代客服人员,从人形服务机器人到数字聊天机器人。通过在实验室和现场环境中真实的人机交互,我们研究了消费者对机器人提供的服务的评价。我们发现,当服务提供者是机器人而不是人类时,服务评价更为负面——即使所提供的服务是相同的。这种影响可以用消费者的信念来解释,即服务自动化是由企业利益(即削减成本)驱动的,而牺牲了客户利益(如服务质量)。当企业通过价格折扣与消费者分享自动化带来的经济盈余时,这种影响就被消除了。当服务机器人为人类员工提供明确的优质服务时,这种效果就会逆转——这种场景可能很快就会成为现实。因此,消费者对服务机器人的默认反应在很大程度上是负面的,但如果企业能够证明自动化如何给消费者带来好处,它们对人类服务提供商的反应可能与之相当,甚至更好。
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
Understanding and Improving Consumer Reactions to Service Bots
Many firms are beginning to replace customer service employees with bots, from humanoid service robots to digital chatbots. Using real human-bot interactions in lab and field settings, we study consumers’ evaluations of bot-provided service. We find that service evaluations are more negative when the service provider is a bot versus a human—even when the provided service is identical. This effect is explained by consumers’ belief that service automation is motivated by firm benefits (i.e., cutting costs) at the expense of customer benefits (such as service quality). The effect is eliminated when firms share the economic surplus derived from automation with consumers through price discounts. The effect is reversed when service bots provide unambiguously superior service to human employees—a scenario that may soon become reality. Consumers’ default reactions to service bots are therefore largely negative but can be equal to or better than reactions to human service providers if firms can demonstrate how automation benefits consumers.
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
12.00
自引率
9.70%
发文量
53
期刊介绍: Journal of Consumer Research, established in 1974, is a reputable journal that publishes high-quality empirical, theoretical, and methodological papers on a wide range of consumer research topics. The primary objective of JCR is to contribute to the advancement of understanding consumer behavior and the practice of consumer research. To be considered for publication in JCR, a paper must make a significant contribution to the existing body of knowledge in consumer research. It should aim to build upon, deepen, or challenge previous studies in the field of consumption, while providing both conceptual and empirical evidence to support its findings. JCR prioritizes multidisciplinary perspectives, encouraging contributions from various disciplines, methodological approaches, theoretical frameworks, and substantive problem areas. The journal aims to cater to a diverse readership base by welcoming articles derived from different orientations and paradigms. Overall, JCR is a valuable platform for scholars and researchers to share their work and contribute to the advancement of consumer research.
期刊最新文献
Moralizing Everyday Consumption: The Case of Self-Care People Believe If 90% Prefer A over B, A Must Be Much Better than B When Is Digital Censorship Permissible? A Conversation Norms Account Brand Teasing: How Brands Build Strong Relationships by Making Fun of Their Consumers Positive Contrast Scope-Insensitivity
×
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