IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i12p5119-d375357.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How does an Intelligence Chatbot Affect Customers Compared with Self-Service Technology for Sustainable Services?

Author

Listed:
  • Taehyee Um

    (Department of Hotel Management, College of Hotel and Tourism Management, Kyung Hee University, Seoul 02447, Korea)

  • Taekyung Kim

    (Business School, Kwangwoon University, Seoul 01897, Korea)

  • Namho Chung

    (Smart Tourism Research Platform, Kyung Hee University, Seoul 02447, Korea)

Abstract

To gain competitive advantages and sustainable service innovation, hotels are considering artificial intelligence technologies (AI), including robots, kiosks for service automation and chatbots. However, due to the change of the service process and unfamiliar communication interface, hotel customers may have difficulties in adopting the new change. In this paper, we tried to find out if the failure of AI-based services would affect customers’ perception. For this, we designed the experiment by separating AI (i.e., chatbot) services and self-service technology (SST, i.e., pad) services and service failures and successful cases, respectively. As a result, SST showed more positive perceptions and revisit intention in the successful service situation. The service failure situation showed no differences between chatbot and SST. In addition, novelty and the need for interaction characteristics of customers showed significant differences between groups in terms of service success and failure, respectively. Additionally, we explored negative word-of-mouth (WOM) to learn further effects by service failures and successes.

Suggested Citation

  • Taehyee Um & Taekyung Kim & Namho Chung, 2020. "How does an Intelligence Chatbot Affect Customers Compared with Self-Service Technology for Sustainable Services?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-21, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:12:p:5119-:d:375357
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/12/5119/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/12/5119/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Joireman, Jeff & Grégoire, Yany & Devezer, Berna & Tripp, Thomas M., 2013. "When do customers offer firms a “second chance” following a double deviation? The impact of inferred firm motives on customer revenge and reconciliation," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 89(3), pages 315-337.
    2. Oh, Haemoon & Jeong, Miyoung & Baloglu, Seyhmus, 2013. "Tourists' adoption of self-service technologies at resort hotels," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(6), pages 692-699.
    3. Bolton, Ruth & Saxena-Iyer, Shruti, 2009. "Interactive Services: A Framework, Synthesis and Research Directions," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 91-104.
    4. Samuelson, William & Zeckhauser, Richard, 1988. "Status Quo Bias in Decision Making," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 7-59, March.
    5. John D Brewer, 2011. "The impact of impact," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(3), pages 255-256, September.
    6. Campbell, Colin & Sands, Sean & Ferraro, Carla & Tsao, Hsiu-Yuan (Jody) & Mavrommatis, Alexis, 2020. "From data to action: How marketers can leverage AI," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 227-243.
    7. Lu, Jin-Long & Chou, Hung-Yen & Ling, Pei-Chuan, 2009. "Investigating passengers' intentions to use technology-based self check-in services," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 345-356, March.
    8. Ivanov Stanislav, 2019. "Ultimate transformation: How will automation technologies disrupt the travel, tourism and hospitality industries?," Zeitschrift für Tourismuswissenschaft, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 25-43, April.
    9. Zied Mani & Inès Chouk, 2018. "Consumer Resistance to Innovation in Services," Post-Print hal-03700875, HAL.
    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. Jin-Kyu Kim & Jae-Jang Yang & Yong-Ki Lee, 2023. "How Do Self-Service Kiosks Improve COVID-19 Pandemic Resilience in the Restaurant Industry?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-21, June.
    2. Laura Studen & Victor Tiberius, 2020. "Social Media, Quo Vadis? Prospective Development and Implications," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-22, August.
    3. Yi Sun & Shihui Li & Lingling Yu, 2022. "The dark sides of AI personal assistant: effects of service failure on user continuance intention," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(1), pages 17-39, March.
    4. Sewoong Hwang & Jonghyuk Kim, 2021. "Toward a Chatbot for Financial Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-18, March.
    5. Huiyue Ye & Sunny Sun & Rob Law, 2022. "A Review of Robotic Applications in Hospitality and Tourism Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-15, August.
    6. Nick Drydakis, 2022. "Artificial Intelligence and Reduced SMEs’ Business Risks. A Dynamic Capabilities Analysis During the COVID-19 Pandemic," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 1223-1247, August.

    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. Hajiheydari, Nastaran & Delgosha, Mohammad Soltani & Olya, Hossein, 2021. "Scepticism and resistance to IoMT in healthcare: Application of behavioural reasoning theory with configurational perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    2. Rosenbaum, Mark S. & Wong, IpKin Anthony, 2015. "If you install it, will they use it? Understanding why hospitality customers take “technological pauses” from self-service technology," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(9), pages 1862-1868.
    3. 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).
    4. 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.
    5. 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).
    6. Jose Apesteguia & Miguel Ballester, 2009. "A theory of reference-dependent behavior," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 40(3), pages 427-455, September.
    7. Bryce, Cormac & Dowling, Michael & Lucey, Brian, 2020. "The journal quality perception gap," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(5).
    8. Obeidat, Zaid Mohammad & Xiao, Sarah Hong & Qasem, Zainah al & dweeri, Rami al & Obeidat, Ahmad, 2018. "Social media revenge: A typology of online consumer revenge," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 239-255.
    9. Haase, Janina & Wiedmann, Klaus-Peter & Labenz, Franziska, 2022. "Brand hate, rage, anger & co.: Exploring the relevance and characteristics of negative consumer emotions toward brands," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 1-16.
    10. Boyce, Christopher & Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Hanley, Nick, 2019. "Personality and economic choices," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 82-100.
    11. Ishii, Joy & Xuan, Yuhai, 2014. "Acquirer-target social ties and merger outcomes," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 112(3), pages 344-363.
    12. Daniel W. Elfenbein & Anne Marie Knott & Rachel Croson, 2017. "Equity stakes and exit: An experimental approach to decomposing exit delay," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(2), pages 278-299, February.
    13. Lovric, M. & Kaymak, U. & Spronk, J., 2008. "A Conceptual Model of Investor Behavior," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2008-030-F&A, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    14. Boon, L.N. & Brière, M. & Rigot, S., 2018. "Regulation and pension fund risk-taking," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 23-41.
    15. Andrea Baranzini & Stefano Carattini & Linda Tesauro, 2021. "Designing Effective and Acceptable Road Pricing Schemes: Evidence from the Geneva Congestion Charge," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 79(3), pages 417-482, July.
    16. 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.
    17. Louis Lévy-Garboua & Claude Montmarquette, 1996. "Cognition In Seemingly Riskless Choices And Judgments," Rationality and Society, , vol. 8(2), pages 167-185, May.
    18. Joey F George & Rui Chen & Lingyao Yuan, 2021. "Intent to purchase IoT home security devices: Fear vs privacy," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(9), pages 1-14, September.
    19. H. Henry Cao & Bing Han & David Hirshleifer & Harold H. Zhang, 2011. "Fear of the Unknown: Familiarity and Economic Decisions," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 15(1), pages 173-206.
    20. Silvia Jordan & Corinna Treisch, 2010. "The perception of tax concessions in retirement savings decisions," Qualitative Research in Financial Markets, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 2(3), pages 157-184, October.

    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:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:12:p:5119-:d:375357. 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.