Is Hearing Really Believing?

Abstract

Smart speakers are becoming popular all over the world and offer an alternative to conventional web search. We conducted two experiments to investigate whether different message modalities affect credibility perceptions, which role sponsor credibility and message accuracy play, and if this role differs in the two modalities. Based on the MAIN Model by Sundar (2008) , we assumed that modality, that is, whether the information is given textually or aurally, can affect credibility assessments. To investigate this, two online experiments with a 2 (modality: smart speaker/search engine) × 2 (message accuracy: high/low) ×3 (sponsor credibility: high/low/none) mixed factorial design were conducted ( n = 399 and 398). Information presented by the voice of a smart speaker was generally perceived as more credible. Results further showed that no source attribution and low message accuracy affected message credibility less in the auditive than in the textual modality, especially for participants with less topic involvement. With this, we gained valuable insights into the role of smart speakers for information search and potential downsides of this usage.

The influence of accent and device usage on perceived credibility during interactions with voice-AI assistants

“…Furthermore, we also anticipate that participants will perceive smaller differences in credibility for high-versus low-accuracy statements produced by British accents, compared to American accents. This is based upon the findings of Gaiser and Utz (2023), where an overall effect for voice-AI versus text statements was accompanied by a significant interaction with accuracy. Finally, in light of evidence suggesting that infrequent users of voice-AI are less likely to trust the technology, we hypothesize that participants who are frequent users will assign overall higher credibility ratings than those who are infrequent users.…”

“…Dozens of studies have demonstrated that people express clear and consistent attitudes toward spoken stimuli (Giles and Billings, 2004). Thus, even though Gaiser and Utz (2023) did not report the gender, age, or accent of the German-speaking voice that they employed (other than that it was generated by a smart speaker), it seems highly likely that these characteristics impacted the participants' credibility assessments. As early as the 1930's, for example, research showed that listeners formed different perceptions of an individual based upon their particular accent of British English (Pear, 1931).…”

“…Previous research has already demonstrated that these factors can influence how users perceive information. Gaiser and Utz (2023) asked participants to assign credibility ratings to internet search results delivered by type-written text versus a voice-AI assistant. Some of the search results were highly accurate (e.g., "although e-cigarettes are less harmful than traditional cigarettes, they still contain carcinogenic substances") while others were less accurate (e.g., "the risk associated with smoking a hookah is significantly reduced compared to smoking cigarettes").…”

“…The current study investigates how voice accent and frequencyof-use affect users' credibility assessments of the search results delivered by voice-AI assistants. Following the design of Gaiser and Utz (2023), participants listened to statements that were either of high accuracy (e.g., although e-cigarettes are less harmful than traditional cigarettes, they still contain carcinogenic substances) or low accuracy (e.g., the risk associated with smoking a hookah is significantly reduced compared to smoking cigarettes). The statements were produced by neural text-to-speech in either an American English or British English accent.…”

“…Following Gaiser and Utz (2023), we developed stimuli using information-seeking questions that users might pose to a search engine, such as How dangerous is smoking e-cigarettes compared to cigarettes? For each question, we generated a high-accuracy response that contained fully correct information (i.e., although e-cigarettes are less harmful than traditional cigarettes, they still contain carcinogenic substances) and a low-accuracy response that contained some incorrect information (e.g., the risk associated with smoking a hookah is significantly reduced compared to smoking cigarettes).…”