Whether consumers prefer human or robot financial advisors: the moderating effect of self-control and agency–communion orientation

Although robo-advisors have seen rapid adoption in recent years, the personality traits influencing consumers’ preference for such services remain insufficiently understood. This research investigates how self-control and agency – communion orientation moderate the impact of advisor type (human vs. robo-advisor) on decision confidence and usage intentions. Across four experiments (N = 1,044), we manipulated self-control (high vs. low) and relational orientation (agency vs. communion) in decision-making scenarios featuring either human or robotic advisors. Participants then evaluated their decision confidence, perceived advisor competence, and intention to use advisory services. Employing PROCESS macro (Model 7) with 5,000 bootstrap resamples, we tested moderated mediation effects. Results indicate that consumers with low self-control exhibit a preference for human advisors, whereas those with high self-control favour robo-advisors; decision confidence mediated this interaction. Additionally, agency-oriented individuals perceived robo-advisors as more competent and demonstrated greater usage intentions, while communion-oriented individuals favoured human advisors, with perceived competence again serving as a mediator. These findings held after controlling for age, gender, and investment experience. Our results demonstrate that self-control and agency – communion orientation jointly shape consumer trust and adoption of financial advisory services, highlighting the value of tailoring advisor recommendations to individual personality traits to enhance confidence and service uptake.