IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v20y2023i4p3772-d1075021.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

When Artificial Intelligence Voices Human Concerns: The Paradoxical Effects of AI Voice on Climate Risk Perception and Pro-Environmental Behavioral Intention

Author

Listed:
  • Binbin Ni

    (College of Media and International Culture, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China)

  • Fuzhong Wu

    (School of Journalism and Communication, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China)

  • Qing Huang

    (College of Media and International Culture, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China)

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled text-to-speech transformation has been widely employed to deliver online information in various fields. However, few studies have investigated the effect of the AI voice in environmental risk communication, especially in the field of climate change, an issue that poses a severe threat to global public health. To address this gap, the current study examines how the AI voice impacts the persuasive outcome of climate-related information and the potential mechanism that underlies this process. Based on the social and affect heuristics of voice, we propose a serial mediation model to test the effect of climate-related information delivered by different voice types (AI voice vs. human voice) in eliciting risk perception and motivating pro-environmental behavioral intention. Through an online auditory experiment (N = 397), we found the following. First, the AI voice was as effective as the human voice in eliciting risk perception and motivating pro-environmental behavioral intention. Second, compared with human voice, the AI voice yielded a listener’s lower level of perceived identity oneness with the speaker, which decreased risk perception and subsequently inhibited pro-environmental behavioral intention. Third, compared with human voice, the AI voice produced a higher level of auditory fear, which increased risk perception and thereby led to stronger pro-environmental behavioral intention. The paradoxical role of the AI voice and its wise use in environmental risk communication for promoting global public health are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Binbin Ni & Fuzhong Wu & Qing Huang, 2023. "When Artificial Intelligence Voices Human Concerns: The Paradoxical Effects of AI Voice on Climate Risk Perception and Pro-Environmental Behavioral Intention," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-20, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:4:p:3772-:d:1075021
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/4/3772/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/4/3772/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Farrow, Katherine & Grolleau, Gilles & Ibanez, Lisette, 2017. "Social Norms and Pro-environmental Behavior: A Review of the Evidence," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 1-13.
    2. Adam Corner & Lorraine Whitmarsh & Dimitrios Xenias, 2012. "Uncertainty, scepticism and attitudes towards climate change: biased assimilation and attitude polarisation," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 114(3), pages 463-478, October.
    3. Lerner, Jennifer & Han, Seunghee & Keltner, Dacher, 2007. "Feelings and Consumer Decision Making: Extending the Appraisal-Tendency Framework," Scholarly Articles 37143006, Harvard Kennedy School of Government.
    4. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/61ih2qtadc8g1894enmudd2f09 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Wouter Poortinga & Nick F. Pidgeon, 2003. "Exploring the Dimensionality of Trust in Risk Regulation," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(5), pages 961-972, October.
    6. Farrow, Katherine & Grolleau, Gilles & Ibanez, Lisette, 2017. "Social Norms and Pro-environmental Behavior: A Review of the Evidence," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 1-13.
    7. Hasan, Rajibul & Shams, Riad & Rahman, Mizan, 2021. "Consumer trust and perceived risk for voice-controlled artificial intelligence: The case of Siri," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 591-597.
    8. Joshua Ettinger & Peter Walton & James Painter & Thomas DiBlasi, 2021. "Climate of hope or doom and gloom? Testing the climate change hope vs. fear communications debate through online videos," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 164(1), pages 1-19, January.
    9. Song, Yan & Zhang, Lu & Zhang, Ming, 2022. "Research on the impact of public climate policy cognition on low-carbon travel based on SOR theory—Evidence from China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 261(PA).
    10. Charles A. Ogunbode & Rouven Doran & Gisela Böhm, 2020. "Exposure to the IPCC special report on 1.5 °C global warming is linked to perceived threat and increased concern about climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 158(3), pages 361-375, February.
    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. Changmin Yan & Kate Johnson & Valerie K. Jones, 2024. "The Impact of Interaction Time and Verbal Engagement with Personal Voice Assistants on Alleviating Loneliness among Older Adults: An Exploratory Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 21(1), pages 1-10, January.

    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. Bartels, Lara & Kesternich, Martin, 2022. "Motivate the crowd or crowd- them out? The impact of local government spending on the voluntary provision of a green public good," ZEW Discussion Papers 22-040, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    2. Grolleau, Gilles & Ibanez, Lisette & Mzoughi, Naoufel, 2020. "Moral judgment of environmental harm caused by a single versus multiple wrongdoers: A survey experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    3. Ming, Yaxin & Deng, Huixin & Wu, Xiaoyue, 2022. "The negative effect of air pollution on people's pro-environmental behavior," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 72-87.
    4. Maccarrone, Giovanni & Marini, Marco A. & Tarola, Ornella, 2023. "Shop Until You Drop: the Unexpected Effects of Anticonsumerism and Environmentalism," FEEM Working Papers 330384, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    5. Karoline Gamma & Robert Mai & Moritz Loock, 2020. "The Double-Edged Sword of Ethical Nudges: Does Inducing Hypocrisy Help or Hinder the Adoption of Pro-environmental Behaviors?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 161(2), pages 351-373, January.
    6. Falk, Armin & Boneva, Teodora & Chopra, Felix, 2021. "Fighting Climate Change: the Role of Norms, Preferences, and Moral Values," CEPR Discussion Papers 16343, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    7. Phu Nguyen-Van & Anne Stenger & Tuyen Tiet, 2021. "Social incentive factors in interventions promoting sustainable behaviors: A meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(12), pages 1-27, December.
    8. Carolin V. Zorell, 2020. "Nudges, Norms, or Just Contagion? A Theory on Influences on the Practice of (Non-)Sustainable Behavior," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-21, December.
    9. Castro-Santa, Juana & Drews, Stefan & Bergh, Jeroen van den, 2023. "Nudging low-carbon consumption through advertising and social norms," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    10. Jana Eßer & Manuel Frondel & Stephan Sommer, 2023. "Soziale Normen und der Emissionsausgleich bei Flügen: Evidenz für deutsche Haushalte [Social Norms and Flight Emission Offsets: Evidence for German Households]," AStA Wirtschafts- und Sozialstatistisches Archiv, Springer;Deutsche Statistische Gesellschaft - German Statistical Society, vol. 17(1), pages 71-99, March.
    11. Gkargkavouzi, Anastasia & Halkos, George & Matsiori, Steriani, 2019. "How do motives and knowledge relate to intention to perform environmental behavior? Assessing the mediating role of constraints," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 1-1.
    12. Alper Ozpinar, 2023. "A Hyper-Integrated Mobility as a Service (MaaS) to Gamification and Carbon Market Enterprise Architecture Framework for Sustainable Environment," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-22, March.
    13. Welsch, Heinz, 2021. "How climate-friendly behavior relates to moral identity and identity-protective cognition: Evidence from the European social surveys," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    14. Leonhard K. Lades & Kate Laffan & Till O. Weber, 2020. "Do economic preferences predict pro-environmental behaviour?," Working Papers 202003, Geary Institute, University College Dublin.
    15. Chen, Shihua & Chen, Yulin & Jebran, Khalil, 2021. "Trust and corporate social responsibility: From expected utility and social normative perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 518-530.
    16. Coisnon, Thomas & Rousselière, Damien & Rousselière, Samira, 2018. "Information on biodiversity and environmental behaviors: a European study of individual and institutional drivers to adopt sustainable gardening practices," Working Papers 272611, Institut National de la recherche Agronomique (INRA), Departement Sciences Sociales, Agriculture et Alimentation, Espace et Environnement (SAE2).
    17. Marco Vincenzi, 2023. "Mapping the empirical relationship between environmental performance and social preferences: Evidence from macro data," ECONOMICS AND POLICY OF ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2023(1), pages 85-102.
    18. Danuta Miłaszewicz, 2022. "Survey Results on Using Nudges for Choice of Green-Energy Supplier," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-19, April.
    19. Yongliang Yang & Yuting Zhu & Xiaopeng Wang & Yi Li, 2022. "The Perception of Environmental Information Disclosure on Rural Residents’ Pro-Environmental Behavior," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(13), pages 1-22, June.
    20. Ajzenman, Nicolas & López Bóo, Florencia, 2019. "Lessons from Behavioral Economics to Improve Treatment Adherence in Parenting Programs: An Application to SMS," IZA Discussion Papers 12808, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    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:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:4:p:3772-:d:1075021. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.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.