IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/mktlet/v33y2022i1d10.1007_s11002-021-09589-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The impact of lay beliefs about AI on adoption of algorithmic advice

Author

Listed:
  • Benjamin von Walter

    (Eastern Switzerland University of Applied Sciences, Institute of Business Management)

  • Dietmar Kremmel

    (Eastern Switzerland University of Applied Sciences, Institute of Business Management)

  • Bruno Jäger

    (Eastern Switzerland University of Applied Sciences, Institute of Business Management)

Abstract

There is little research on how consumers decide whether they want to use algorithmic advice or not. In this research, we show that consumers’ lay beliefs about artificial intelligence (AI) serve as a heuristic cue to evaluate accuracy of algorithmic advice in different professional service domains. Three studies provide robust evidence that consumers who believe that AI is higher than human intelligence are more likely to adopt algorithmic advice. We also demonstrate that lay beliefs about AI only influence adoption of algorithmic advice when a decision task is perceived to be complex.

Suggested Citation

  • Benjamin von Walter & Dietmar Kremmel & Bruno Jäger, 2022. "The impact of lay beliefs about AI on adoption of algorithmic advice," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 143-155, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:mktlet:v:33:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1007_s11002-021-09589-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s11002-021-09589-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11002-021-09589-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11002-021-09589-1?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. Chiara Longoni & Andrea Bonezzi & Carey K Morewedge, 2019. "Resistance to Medical Artificial Intelligence," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 46(4), pages 629-650.
    2. Barbara H. Wixom & Peter A. Todd, 2005. "A Theoretical Integration of User Satisfaction and Technology Acceptance," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 16(1), pages 85-102, March.
    3. Bernd Schmitt, 2020. "Speciesism: an obstacle to AI and robot adoption," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 31(1), pages 3-6, March.
    4. Bernd Schmitt, 2019. "From Atoms to Bits and Back: A Research Curation on Digital Technology and Agenda for Future Research," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 46(4), pages 825-832.
    5. Christian Hildebrand & Anouk Bergner, 2021. "Conversational robo advisors as surrogates of trust: onboarding experience, firm perception, and consumer financial decision making," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 49(4), pages 659-676, July.
    6. Logg, Jennifer M. & Minson, Julia A. & Moore, Don A., 2019. "Algorithm appreciation: People prefer algorithmic to human judgment," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 90-103.
    7. Bonaccio, Silvia & Dalal, Reeshad S., 2006. "Advice taking and decision-making: An integrative literature review, and implications for the organizational sciences," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 101(2), pages 127-151, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Aparna A. Labroo & Natalie Mizik & Russell Winer, 2022. "Sparking conversations: Editors’ Pick with commentaries and thematic article compilations," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 1-4, March.
    2. Zhu, Hui & Vigren, Olli & Söderberg, Inga-Lill, 2024. "Implementing artificial intelligence empowered financial advisory services: A literature review and critical research agenda," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).

    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. Ekaterina Jussupow & Kai Spohrer & Armin Heinzl & Joshua Gawlitza, 2021. "Augmenting Medical Diagnosis Decisions? An Investigation into Physicians’ Decision-Making Process with Artificial Intelligence," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 32(3), pages 713-735, September.
    2. Wang, Cuicui & Li, Yiyang & Fu, Weizhong & Jin, Jia, 2023. "Whether to trust chatbots: Applying the event-related approach to understand consumers’ emotional experiences in interactions with chatbots in e-commerce," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    3. Zhu, Yimin & Zhang, Jiemin & Wu, Jifei & Liu, Yingyue, 2022. "AI is better when I'm sure: The influence of certainty of needs on consumers' acceptance of AI chatbots," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 642-652.
    4. von Walter, Benjamin & Wentzel, Daniel & Raff, Stefan, 2023. "Should service firms introduce algorithmic advice to their existing customers? The moderating effect of service relationships," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 99(2), pages 280-296.
    5. Pascal Oliver Heßler & Jella Pfeiffer & Sebastian Hafenbrädl, 2022. "When Self-Humanization Leads to Algorithm Aversion," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 64(3), pages 275-292, June.
    6. Siliang Tong & Nan Jia & Xueming Luo & Zheng Fang, 2021. "The Janus face of artificial intelligence feedback: Deployment versus disclosure effects on employee performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(9), pages 1600-1631, September.
    7. repec:cup:judgdm:v:15:y:2020:i:3:p:449-451 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Chiara Longoni & Andrea Bonezzi & Carey K. Morewedge, 2020. "Resistance to medical artificial intelligence is an attribute in a compensatory decision process: response to Pezzo and Becksted (2020)," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 15(3), pages 446-448, May.
    9. Chen Yang & Jing Hu, 2022. "When do consumers prefer AI-enabled customer service? The interaction effect of brand personality and service provision type on brand attitudes and purchase intentions," Journal of Brand Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 29(2), pages 167-189, March.
    10. Jochen Wirtz & Valentina Pitardi, 2023. "How intelligent automation, service robots, and AI will reshape service products and their delivery," Italian Journal of Marketing, Springer, vol. 2023(3), pages 289-300, September.
    11. Zhang, Lixuan & Yencha, Christopher, 2022. "Examining perceptions towards hiring algorithms," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    12. Mesbah, Neda & Tauchert, Christoph & Buxmann, Peter, 2021. "Whose Advice Counts More – Man or Machine? An Experimental Investigation of AI-based Advice Utilization," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 124796, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    13. Vlačić, Božidar & Corbo, Leonardo & Costa e Silva, Susana & Dabić, Marina, 2021. "The evolving role of artificial intelligence in marketing: A review and research agenda," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 187-203.
    14. Martin Adam & Konstantin Roethke & Alexander Benlian, 2023. "Human vs. Automated Sales Agents: How and Why Customer Responses Shift Across Sales Stages," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(3), pages 1148-1168, September.
    15. Marina Chugunova & Wolfgang J. Luhan, 2022. "Ruled by robots: Preference for algorithmic decision makers and perceptions of their choices," Working Papers in Economics & Finance 2022-03, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth Business School, Economics and Finance Subject Group.
    16. Petropoulos, Fotios & Apiletti, Daniele & Assimakopoulos, Vassilios & Babai, Mohamed Zied & Barrow, Devon K. & Ben Taieb, Souhaib & Bergmeir, Christoph & Bessa, Ricardo J. & Bijak, Jakub & Boylan, Joh, 2022. "Forecasting: theory and practice," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 705-871.
      • Fotios Petropoulos & Daniele Apiletti & Vassilios Assimakopoulos & Mohamed Zied Babai & Devon K. Barrow & Souhaib Ben Taieb & Christoph Bergmeir & Ricardo J. Bessa & Jakub Bijak & John E. Boylan & Jet, 2020. "Forecasting: theory and practice," Papers 2012.03854, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2022.
    17. Bauer, Kevin & von Zahn, Moritz & Hinz, Oliver, 2022. "Expl(AI)ned: The impact of explainable Artificial Intelligence on cognitive processes," SAFE Working Paper Series 315, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2022.
    18. van Esch, Patrick & Cui, Yuanyuan (Gina) & Das, Gopal & Jain, Shailendra Pratap & Wirtz, Jochen, 2022. "Tourists and AI: A political ideology perspective," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    19. Rebitschek, Felix G. & Gigerenzer, Gerd & Wagner, Gert G., 2021. "People underestimate the errors made by algorithms for credit scoring and recidivism prediction but accept even fewer errors," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 11, pages 1-11.
    20. Merle, Aurélie & St-Onge, Anik & Sénécal, Sylvain, 2022. "Does it pay to be honest? The effect of retailer-provided negative feedback on consumers’ product choice and shopping experience," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 532-543.
    21. Benedikt Berger & Martin Adam & Alexander Rühr & Alexander Benlian, 2021. "Watch Me Improve—Algorithm Aversion and Demonstrating the Ability to Learn," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 63(1), pages 55-68, February.

    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:kap:mktlet:v:33:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1007_s11002-021-09589-1. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.