IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v79y2024ics0160791x2400280x.html

Navigating uncertainty: Exploring consumer acceptance of artificial intelligence under self-threats and high-stakes decisions

Author

Listed:
  • Frank, Darius-Aurel
  • Chrysochou, Polymeros
  • Mitkidis, Panagiotis
  • Otterbring, Tobias
  • Ariely, Dan

Abstract

In an era of transformation fueled by Artificial Intelligence (AI), human resistance to adopt this powerful technology has emerged as one of its most critical barriers. In a series of four studies involving almost 4,000 consumers, this research explores factors that contribute to consumer reluctance toward AI through theories related to algorithm aversion, decision-making under risk, and compensatory decision-making. The results underscore the impact of decision stakes and their adverse outcomes on AI service agent adoption across decision domains. These effects can be attributed to the self-threat experienced by consumers in high-stakes decision scenarios. Together, the current findings advance our understanding of consumer responses in the context of AI adoption, illustrating how perceived stakes and self-threats foster reluctance to rely on AI agents for advice. From a practical standpoint, the results emphasize the need of a hybrid approach—combining AI and human agents—for a successful transition toward AI-powered service industries.

Suggested Citation

  • Frank, Darius-Aurel & Chrysochou, Polymeros & Mitkidis, Panagiotis & Otterbring, Tobias & Ariely, Dan, 2024. "Navigating uncertainty: Exploring consumer acceptance of artificial intelligence under self-threats and high-stakes decisions," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:79:y:2024:i:c:s0160791x2400280x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2024.102732
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X2400280X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2024.102732?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mick, David Glen & Fournier, Susan, 1998. "Paradoxes of Technology: Consumer Cognizance, Emotions, and Coping Strategies," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 25(2), pages 123-143, September.
    2. Gefen, David, 2000. "E-commerce: the role of familiarity and trust," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 725-737, December.
    3. 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.
    4. Darius-Aurel Frank & Christian T. Elbaek & Caroline Kjaer Borsting & Panagiotis Mitkidis & Tobias Otterbring & Sylvie Borau, 2021. "Drivers and social implications of Artificial Intelligence adoption in healthcare during the COVID-19 pandemic," Post-Print hal-03585448, HAL.
    5. Tiberius, Victor & Chen, Nicole & Bartels, Mirko & Oelsnitz, Dietrich von der, 2024. "Breaking out! A netnography study on motives of a digital nomad lifestyle," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    6. Lee, Juhyun & Tommy Gim, Tae-Hyoung, 2024. "Reconsidering AVs future: A socio-spatial perspective," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    7. Sara Loughran Dommer & Vanitha Swaminathan, 2013. "Explaining the Endowment Effect through Ownership: The Role of Identity, Gender, and Self-Threat," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 39(5), pages 1034-1050.
    8. 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.
    9. Simona Botti & Kristina Orfali & Sheena S. Iyengar, 2009. "Tragic Choices: Autonomy and Emotional Responses to Medical Decisions," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 36(3), pages 337-352.
    10. Leilei Gao & S. Christian Wheeler & Baba Shiv, 2009. "The "Shaken Self": Product Choices as a Means of Restoring Self-View Confidence," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 36(1), pages 29-38, June.
    11. Zhu, Ge & Chen, Yuche & Zheng, Jiali, 2024. "Partially autonomous vehicles (PAVs) vs. fully autonomous vehicles (FAVs): A comparative study with adoption models," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    12. Darius-Aurel Frank & Christian T Elbæk & Caroline Kjær Børsting & Panagiotis Mitkidis & Tobias Otterbring & Sylvie Borau, 2021. "Drivers and social implications of Artificial Intelligence adoption in healthcare during the COVID-19 pandemic," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(11), pages 1-11, November.
    13. Xiuping Li & Meng Zhang, 2014. "The Effects of Heightened Physiological Needs on Perception of Psychological Connectedness," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 41(4), pages 1078-1088.
    14. Långstedt, Johnny & Spohr, Jonas & Hellström, Magnus, 2023. "Are our values becoming more fit for artificial intelligence society? A longitudinal study of occupational values and occupational susceptibility to technological substitution," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    15. Patt, Anthony & Zeckhauser, Richard, 2000. "Action Bias and Environmental Decisions," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 45-72, July.
    16. Samuelson, William & Zeckhauser, Richard, 1988. "Status Quo Bias in Decision Making," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 7-59, March.
    17. D. Harrison McKnight & Vivek Choudhury & Charles Kacmar, 2002. "Developing and Validating Trust Measures for e-Commerce: An Integrative Typology," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 13(3), pages 334-359, September.
    18. Daniel Kahneman & Jack L. Knetsch & Richard H. Thaler, 1991. "Anomalies: The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 193-206, Winter.
    19. Callari, Tiziana C. & Vecellio Segate, Riccardo & Hubbard, Ella-Mae & Daly, Angela & Lohse, Niels, 2024. "An ethical framework for human-robot collaboration for the future people-centric manufacturing: A collaborative endeavour with European subject-matter experts in ethics," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    20. Sylvie Borau & Tobias Otterbring & Sandra Laporte & Samuel Fosso Wamba, 2021. "The most human bot: Female gendering increases humanness perceptions of bots and acceptance of AI," Post-Print hal-03648092, HAL.
    21. Schiavo, Gianluca & Businaro, Stefano & Zancanaro, Massimo, 2024. "Comprehension, apprehension, and acceptance: Understanding the influence of literacy and anxiety on acceptance of artificial Intelligence," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    22. Grewal, Dhruv & Kroschke, Mirja & Mende, Martin & Roggeveen, Anne L. & Scott, Maura L., 2020. "Frontline Cyborgs at Your Service: How Human Enhancement Technologies Affect Customer Experiences in Retail, Sales, and Service Settings," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 9-25.
    23. Tiberius, Victor & Gojowy, Robin & Dabić, Marina, 2022. "Forecasting the future of robo advisory: A three-stage Delphi study on economic, technological, and societal implications," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    24. Coccia, Mario, 2020. "Deep learning technology for improving cancer care in society: New directions in cancer imaging driven by artificial intelligence," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    25. Mao, Yuanyi & Hu, Bo & Kim, Ki Joon, 2024. "When AI doctors lie about diagnosis: The effects of varying degrees of prosocial lies in patient–AI interactions," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    26. Derek D. Rucker & Adam D. Galinsky, 2008. "Desire to Acquire: Powerlessness and Compensatory Consumption," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 35(2), pages 257-267, April.
    27. Rice, Stephen & Crouse, Sean R. & Winter, Scott R. & Rice, Connor, 2024. "The advantages and limitations of using ChatGPT to enhance technological research," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    28. Schaerer, Michael & du Plessis, Christilene & Nguyen, My Hoang Bao & van Aert, Robbie C.M. & Tiokhin, Leo & Lakens, Daniël & Giulia Clemente, Elena & Pfeiffer, Thomas & Dreber, Anna & Johannesson, Mag, 2023. "On the trajectory of discrimination: A meta-analysis and forecasting survey capturing 44 years of field experiments on gender and hiring decisions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    29. Frank, Darius-Aurel & Otterbring, Tobias, 2023. "Being seen… by human or machine? Acknowledgment effects on customer responses differ between human and robotic service workers," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    30. Xiuping Li & Meng Zhang, 2014. "The Effects of Heightened Physiological Needs on Perception of Psychological Connectedness," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 41(4), pages 1078-1088.
    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. Deng, Ruolan & Ahmed, Saifuddin, 2025. "Perceptions and paradigms: An analysis of AI framing in trending social media news," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 81(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. Geoff Tomaino & Jasper Teow & Ziv Carmon & Leonard Lee & Moshe Ben-Akiva & Charlene Chen & Wai Yan Leong & Shanjun Li & Nan Yang & Jinhua Zhao, 2020. "Mobility as a service (MaaS): the importance of transportation psychology," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 31(4), pages 419-428, December.
    2. 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.
    3. Donald R. Lehmann & Jeffrey R. Parker, 2017. "Disadoption," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 7(1), pages 36-51, June.
    4. Daniel Villanova, 2019. "The extended self, product valuation, and the endowment effect," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 9(3), pages 357-371, December.
    5. Joyita Banerji & Kaushik Kundu & Parveen Ahmed Alam, 2023. "The Impact of Behavioral Biases on Individuals’ Financial Choices under Uncertainty: An Empirical Approach," Business Perspectives and Research, , vol. 11(3), pages 401-424, September.
    6. Huang, Xiaozhi & Wu, Xitong & Cao, Xin & Wu, Jifei, 2023. "The effect of medical artificial intelligence innovation locus on consumer adoption of new products," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    7. Frank, Darius-Aurel & Otterbring, Tobias, 2023. "Being seen… by human or machine? Acknowledgment effects on customer responses differ between human and robotic service workers," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    8. Huang, Dan & Jin, Xin & Coghlan, Alexandra, 2021. "Advances in consumer innovation resistance research: A review and research agenda," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    9. Li, Jian & Zhao, Jingdi & Huang, Jinsong, 2025. "Social avoidance needs boost AI's nonsocial attribute valuation in secret consumption," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    10. Philippe Fevrier & Sebastien Gay, 2005. "Informed Consent Versus Presumed Consent The Role of the Family in Organ Donations," HEW 0509007, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Wiebke Roß & Jens Weghake, 2018. "Wa(h)re Liebe: Was Online-Dating-Plattformen über zweiseitige Märkte lehren," TUC Working Papers in Economics 0017, Abteilung für Volkswirtschaftslehre, Technische Universität Clausthal (Department of Economics, Technical University Clausthal).
    12. Boyce, Christopher & Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Hanley, Nick, 2019. "Personality and economic choices," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 82-100.
    13. Karle, Heiko & Schumacher, Heiner & Vølund, Rune, 2023. "Consumer loss aversion and scale-dependent psychological switching costs," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 214-237.
    14. Ahmed Ibrahim Alzahrani & T. Ramayah & Nalini Suppiah & Osama Alfarraj & Nasser Alalwan, 2020. "Modeling Blog Usage From a Developing Country Perspective Using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM)," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(3), pages 21582440209, July.
    15. Chadwick J. Miller & Daniel C. Brannon & Jim Salas & Martha Troncoza, 2021. "Advertising, incentives, and the upsell: how advertising differentially moderates customer- vs. retailer-directed price incentives’ impact on consumers’ preferences for premium products," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 49(6), pages 1043-1064, November.
    16. Walter Bossert & Yves Sprumont, 2009. "Non‐Deteriorating Choice," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 76(302), pages 337-363, April.
    17. 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.
    18. Barr, Rhona F. & Mourato, Susana, 2014. "Investigating fishers' preferences for the design of marine Payments for Environmental Services schemes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 91-103.
    19. repec:osf:socarx:a9436_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Daniele Pennesi, 2013. "Endogenous Status Quo," Carlo Alberto Notebooks 314, Collegio Carlo Alberto.
    21. Hasan-Basri, Bakti & Yahya, Nurul & Musa, Rusmani, 2013. "Status Quo Effect and Preferences Uncertainty: A Heteroscedastic Extreme Value (HEV) Model," Jurnal Ekonomi Malaysia, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, vol. 47(1), pages 163-172.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:teinso:v:79:y:2024:i:c:s0160791x2400280x. 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/technology-in-society .

    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.