Trust in humanoid robots: implications for services marketing

Abstract

Purpose Service robots can offer benefits to consumers (e.g. convenience, flexibility, availability, efficiency) and service providers (e.g. cost savings), but a lack of trust hinders consumer adoption. To enhance trust, firms add human-like features to robots; yet, anthropomorphism theory is ambiguous about their appropriate implementation. This study therefore aims to investigate what is more effective for fostering trust: appearance features that are more human-like or social functioning features that are more human-like. Design/methodology/approach In an experimental field study, a humanoid service robot displayed gaze cues in the form of changing eye colour in one condition and static eye colour in the other. Thus, the robot was more human-like in its social functioning in one condition (displaying gaze cues, but not in the way that humans do) and more human-like in its appearance in the other (static eye colour, but no gaze cues). Self-reported data from 114 participants revealing their perceptions of trust, anthropomorphism, interaction comfort, enjoyment and intention to use were analysed using partial least squares path modelling. Findings Interaction comfort moderates the effect of gaze cues on anthropomorphism, insofar as gaze cues increase anthropomorphism when comfort is low and decrease it when comfort is high. Anthropomorphism drives trust, intention to use and enjoyment. Research limitations/implications To extend human–robot interaction literature, the findings provide novel theoretical understanding of anthropomorphism directed towards humanoid robots. Practical implications By investigating which features influence trust, this study gives managers insights into reasons for selecting or optimizing humanoid robots for service interactions. Originality/value This study examines the difference between appearance and social functioning features as drivers of anthropomorphism and trust, which can benefit research on self-service technology adoption.

Alexa, she's not human but… Unveiling the drivers of consumers' trust in voice‐based artificial intelligence

“…Second, the study contributes to trust literature concerning interactions with AI‐based technology (Foehr & Germelmann, 2020; van Pinxteren et al, 2019). Specifically, results highlight the need of understanding peculiarities of the trust development process with and toward VAs, while demonstrating the prominent role of social elements; namely, social presence and social cognition, as unique antecedents for developing users' trust toward VAs (van Doorn et al, 2017).…”

Service robot implementation: a theoretical framework and research agenda

“…As indicated above, previous literature on robotics has mostly focused on aesthetics and physical appearances, often with an assumption of a positive correlation between robot human-likeness and users' acceptance (Walters et al, 2008). However, the optimal level of human-likeness (Tinwell, Grimshaw, & Williams, 2011b) has not been established clearly (Burleigh, Schoenherr, & Lacroix, 2013;Rosenthal-von der Püthen & Kramer, 2014), suggesting the moderating effects of customer features or encounter characteristics, as we address subsequently (Van Pinxteren et al, 2019). In a general sense, higher levels of human appearance seem to amplify emotional attachment, induce positive perceptions and attitudes, and increase trust in and preference for robots (Tussyadiah & Park, 2018;Van Pinxteren et al, 2019).…”

“…However, the optimal level of human-likeness (Tinwell, Grimshaw, & Williams, 2011b) has not been established clearly (Burleigh, Schoenherr, & Lacroix, 2013;Rosenthal-von der Püthen & Kramer, 2014), suggesting the moderating effects of customer features or encounter characteristics, as we address subsequently (Van Pinxteren et al, 2019). In a general sense, higher levels of human appearance seem to amplify emotional attachment, induce positive perceptions and attitudes, and increase trust in and preference for robots (Tussyadiah & Park, 2018;Van Pinxteren et al, 2019). This positive effect likely arises because a human appearance of a technological object increases customers' access to a human schema, due to the human-like congruency (e.g.…”

“…Some recent, small-scale empirical studies address consumers' psychological reactions to robot aesthetics (e.g. human-likeness), which might affect people's comfort during service robot interactions (Mende, Scott, van Doorn, Grewal, & Shanks, 2019;Van Pinxteren, Wetzels, Rüger, Pluymaekers, & Wetzels, 2019). Yet marketing studies of service robots remain scarce, and just a few theoretical works consider the distinctive features of related technologies and their global implications (Huang & Rust, 2018;Wirtz et al, 2018).…”

How context and design shape human-robot trust and attributions

“…In general, robot appearance (from anthropomorphic to functional) influenced users' likeability and empathy: less human looking robots were less liked and users' empathy was stronger toward anthropomorphic robots [22,23]. Further studies revealed that anthropomorphic design features (e.g., facial expression, gestures, communication) increased humans' trust and intention to use robots [24,25].…”