IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/joreco/v56y2020ics0969698920308286.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Chatbots in retailers’ customer communication: How to measure their acceptance?

Author

Listed:
  • Rese, Alexandra
  • Ganster, Lena
  • Baier, Daniel

Abstract

Currently, online retailers evaluate whether chatbots—software programs that interact with users using natural languages—could improve their customers' satisfaction. In a retail context, chatbots allow humans to pose shopping-related questions and receive answers in natural language without waiting for a salesperson or using other automated communication forms. However, until now, it has been unclear which customers accept this new communication form and which factors determine their acceptance. In this paper, we contrast the well-known technology acceptance model (TAM) with the lesser known uses and gratifications (U&G) theory, applying both approaches to measure the acceptance of the text-based “Emma†chatbot by its target segment. “Emma†was developed for the prepurchase phase of online fashion retailing and integrated into Facebook Messenger by the major German online retailer Zalando. Data were collected from 205 German Millennial respondents in a usability study. The results show that both utilitarian factors such as “authenticity of conversation†and “perceived usefulness,†as well as hedonic factors such as “perceived enjoyment†, positively influence the acceptance of “Emma†. However, privacy concerns and the immaturity of the technology had a negative effect on usage intention and frequency. The predictive power of both models was similar, showing little deviation, but U&G gives alternative insights into the customers’ motivation to use “Emma†compared to the TAM.

Suggested Citation

  • Rese, Alexandra & Ganster, Lena & Baier, Daniel, 2020. "Chatbots in retailers’ customer communication: How to measure their acceptance?," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:joreco:v:56:y:2020:i:c:s0969698920308286
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102176
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0969698920308286
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102176?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Christina McDowell Marinchak & Edward Forrest & Bogdan Hoanca, 2018. "Artificial Intelligence: Redefining Marketing Management and the Customer Experience," International Journal of E-Entrepreneurship and Innovation (IJEEI), IGI Global, vol. 8(2), pages 14-24, July.
    2. Viswanath Venkatesh, 2000. "Determinants of Perceived Ease of Use: Integrating Control, Intrinsic Motivation, and Emotion into the Technology Acceptance Model," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 11(4), pages 342-365, December.
    3. Fred D. Davis & Richard P. Bagozzi & Paul R. Warshaw, 1989. "User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(8), pages 982-1003, August.
    4. Davidson, Russell & MacKinnon, James G., 1993. "Estimation and Inference in Econometrics," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195060119.
    5. Kieran Mathieson, 1991. "Predicting User Intentions: Comparing the Technology Acceptance Model with the Theory of Planned Behavior," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 173-191, September.
    6. Ivy L.B. Liu & Christy M.K. Cheung & Matthew K.O. Lee, 2016. "User satisfaction with microblogging: Information dissemination versus social networking," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 67(1), pages 56-70, January.
    7. Necmi K. Avkiran & Christian M. Ringle (ed.), 2018. "Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling," International Series in Operations Research and Management Science, Springer, number 978-3-319-71691-6, December.
    8. Etzioni, Amitai, 1986. "The Case for a Multiple-Utility Conception," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(2), pages 159-184, October.
    9. Sotolongo, Nicholas & Copulsky, Jonathan, 2018. "Conversational marketing: Creating compelling customer connections," Applied Marketing Analytics: The Peer-Reviewed Journal, Henry Stewart Publications, vol. 4(1), pages 6-21, April.
    10. Viswanath Venkatesh & Fred D. Davis, 2000. "A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(2), pages 186-204, February.
    11. Segars, A. H., 1997. "Assessing the unidimensionality of measurement: a paradigm and illustration within the context of information systems research," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 107-121, February.
    12. Naresh K. Malhotra & Sung S. Kim & James Agarwal, 2004. "Internet Users' Information Privacy Concerns (IUIPC): The Construct, the Scale, and a Causal Model," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 336-355, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Naresh K. Malhotra & Sung S. Kim & Ashutosh Patil, 2006. "Common Method Variance in IS Research: A Comparison of Alternative Approaches and a Reanalysis of Past Research," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(12), pages 1865-1883, December.
    2. Nistor, Cristian, 2013. "A conceptual model for the use of social media in companies," MPRA Paper 44224, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Gao, Tao (Tony) & Rohm, Andrew J. & Sultan, Fareena & Pagani, Margherita, 2013. "Consumers un-tethered: A three-market empirical study of consumers' mobile marketing acceptance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(12), pages 2536-2544.
    4. Yoon, Jeewhan & Vonortas, Nicholas S. & Han, SungWon, 2020. "Do-It-Yourself laboratories and attitude toward use: The effects of self-efficacy and the perception of security and privacy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    5. Tamara Dinev & Paul Hart, 2006. "An Extended Privacy Calculus Model for E-Commerce Transactions," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 17(1), pages 61-80, March.
    6. Nripendra P. Rana & Yogesh K. Dwivedi & Banita Lal & Michael D. Williams & Marc Clement, 2017. "Citizens’ adoption of an electronic government system: towards a unified view," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 549-568, June.
    7. Kathrin Dudenhöffer, 2013. "Why electric vehicles failed," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 95-124, July.
    8. Hamed Taherdoost, 2019. "Importance of Technology Acceptance Assessment for Successful Implementation and Development of New Technologies," Post-Print hal-02557395, HAL.
    9. Hamed Taherdoost, 2021. "Importance of Technology Acceptance Assessment for Successful Implementation and Development of New Technologies," Post-Print hal-03741844, HAL.
    10. Haque, Md Ziaul & Qian, Aimin & Hoque, Md Rakibul & Lucky, Suraiea Akter, 2022. "A unified framework for exploring the determinants of online social networks (OSNs) on institutional investors’ capital market investment decision," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    11. Agarwal, Reeti & Rastogi, Sanjay & Mehrotra, Ankit, 2009. "Customers’ perspectives regarding e-banking in an emerging economy," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(5), pages 340-351.
    12. Ingrid Gottschalk & Stefan Kirn, 2013. "Cloud Computing As a Tool for Enhancing Ecological Goals?," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 5(5), pages 299-313, October.
    13. Nan Zhang & Xunhua Guo & Guoqing Chen, 2011. "Why adoption and use behavior of IT/IS cannot last?—two studies in China," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 381-395, July.
    14. Albayati, Hayder & Kim, Suk Kyoung & Rho, Jae Jeung, 2020. "Accepting financial transactions using blockchain technology and cryptocurrency: A customer perspective approach," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    15. Nedra, Bahri-Ammari & Hadhri, Walid & Mezrani, Mariem, 2019. "Determinants of customers' intentions to use hedonic networks: The case of Instagram," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 21-32.
    16. Huang, Tony Cheng-Kui & Liu, Chuang-Chun & Chang, Dong-Cheng, 2012. "An empirical investigation of factors influencing the adoption of data mining tools," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 257-270.
    17. Kawsar Ahmad & Arifuzzaman Arifuzzaman & Abdullah Al Mamun & Junayed Md Khaled Bin Oalid, 2021. "Impact of consumer’s security, benefits and usefulness towards cashless transaction within Malaysian university student," International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science (2147-4478), Center for the Strategic Studies in Business and Finance, vol. 10(2), pages 238-250, March.
    18. Jaeki Song & Yong Jin Kim, 2006. "Social influence process in the acceptance of a virtual community service," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 8(3), pages 241-252, July.
    19. Andrei OGREZEANU, 2015. "Models Of Technology Adoption: An Integrative Approach," Network Intelligence Studies, Romanian Foundation for Business Intelligence, Editorial Department, issue 5, pages 55-67, June.
    20. Rajak, Manindra & Shaw, Krishnendu, 2021. "An extension of technology acceptance model for mHealth user adoption," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:joreco:v:56:y:2020:i:c:s0969698920308286. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-retailing-and-consumer-services .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.