“Why Aren’t You a Sassy Little Thing”: The Effects of Robot-Enacted Guilt Trips on Credibility and Consensus in a Negotiation

Stoll, Brett; Edwards, Chad; Edwards, Autumn

doi:10.1080/10510974.2016.1215339

Cited by 27 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The power of social cues on perceived trustworthiness of technologies has also been corroborated in previous research where bandwagon cues would shape users' evaluation of online products (Sundar et al, 2009). Stoll et al (2016) indicated that a telepresence robot Double was perceived as more credible when it gave up using any guilt-involving conversation skills in negotiation. In addition, Salem et al (2013) found that participants reported greater intention of future use when a robot occasionally made mistakes, which highlights users' preference for an imperfect robot.…”

Section: Social Presence and Social Attitudesmentioning

confidence: 99%

First encounter with robot Alpha: How individual differences interact with vocal and kinetic cues in users’ social responses

2019

New Media & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Computers are Social Actors (CASA) paradigm was proposed more than two decades ago to understand humans’ interaction with computer technologies. Today, as emerging technologies like social robots become more personal and persuasive, questions of how users respond to them socially, what individual factors leverage the relationship, and what constitutes the social influence of these technologies need to be addressed. A lab experiment was conducted to examine the interactions between individual differences and social robots’ vocal and kinetic cues. Results suggested that users developed more trust in a social robot with a human voice than with a synthetic voice. Users also developed more intimacy and interest in the social robot when it was paired with humanlike gestures. Moreover, individual differences including users’ gender, attitudes toward robots, and robot exposure affected their psychological responses. The theoretical, practical, and ethical value of the findings was further discussed in the study.

show abstract

Section: Social Presence and Social Attitudesmentioning

confidence: 99%

First encounter with robot Alpha: How individual differences interact with vocal and kinetic cues in users’ social responses

2019

New Media & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While many studies support CASA, machines do not possess human emotions. However, machines do posses the ability to influence the emotions of people with whom they interact (Stoll, Edwards, & Edwards, 2015). The ability to understand and share the feelings of another is an important quality of effective communicators (Frymier & Thompson, 1992;Nadler & Nadler, 2001).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Research has recently expanded the conceptualization of a "computer" to include websites (Karr-Wisniewski & Prietula, 2010) and social robots (Lee, Park, & Song, 2005;Stoll et al, 2015). Edwards et al (2014) found that the use of Twitterbots resulted in similar perceptions of credibility as that of human agents.…”

Section: Computers Are Social Actors (Casa)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Differences in perceptions of communication quality between a Twitterbot and human agent for information seeking and learning

Edwards

Beattie

Edwards

et al. 2016

Computers in Human Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tTwitter's design allows the implementation of automated programs that can submit tweets, interact with others, and generate content based on algorithms. Scholars and end-users alike refer to these programs to as "Twitterbots." This two-part study explores the differences in perceptions of communication quality between a human agent and a Twitterbot in the areas of cognitive elaboration, information seeking, and learning outcomes. In accordance with the Computers Are Social Actors (CASA) framework (Reeves & Nass, 1996), results suggest that participants learned the same from either a Twitterbot or a human agent. Results are discussed in light of CASA, as well as implications and directions for future studies.

show abstract

“…It underscores the importance of exploring their role as social actors characterised by communicative behaviour and by the level of humanness simulated by the language they use and the emotions they generate in digital users. (Bickmore, 2010;Ho et al, 2018;Isotalus & Muukkonen, 2002;Lee & Nass, 2010;Reeves, 2016;Stoll et al, 2016;Westerman et al, 2019). Defined more as animated agents (Isotalus & Muukkonen, 2002) with an affective function, chatbots can stimulate closeness and immediacy (Isolatus & Muukkonen, 2002) and promote disclosure practices (Ho et al, 2018).…”

Section: Figure 1 Service Dominant Approach To Chatbots: Technologica...mentioning

confidence: 99%

A conversation-based perspective for shaping ethical human–machine interactions: The particular challenge of chatbots

Murtarelli

Gregory

Romenti

2021

Journal of Business Research

107

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“Why Aren’t You a Sassy Little Thing”: The Effects of Robot-Enacted Guilt Trips on Credibility and Consensus in a Negotiation

Cited by 27 publications

References 52 publications

First encounter with robot Alpha: How individual differences interact with vocal and kinetic cues in users’ social responses

First encounter with robot Alpha: How individual differences interact with vocal and kinetic cues in users’ social responses

Differences in perceptions of communication quality between a Twitterbot and human agent for information seeking and learning

A conversation-based perspective for shaping ethical human–machine interactions: The particular challenge of chatbots

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About