The Influence of AI-Based Chatbots and Their Design on Users' Trust and Information Sharing in Online Loan Applications

Based on recent advances in Artificial Intelligence (AI), chatbots are now increasingly offered as an alternative source of customer service. For their uptake user trust in critical. However, little is known about how these interfaces fundamentally influence trust perceptions. In particular, it’s unclear what exactly causes perceptual differences - the change towards a conversational interface or the usage of anthropomorphic design elements. In this study, an online experiment with 160 participants was conducted to examine the differential effects of conversational interaction and anthropomorphism on trust in the interface or the provider within the context of online loan applications. The results show that both treatment conditions affect trust in the interface and the provider by increasing perceptions of social presence. Meanwhile, trust in the interface significantly effects the intention to share information, while trust in the provider has no effect on behavioral intention.

[1]  C. Fornell,et al.  Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. , 1981 .

[2]  J. H. Davis,et al.  An Integrative Model Of Organizational Trust , 1995 .

[3]  C. Nass,et al.  Machines and Mindlessness , 2000 .

[4]  Justine Cassell,et al.  Relational agents: a model and implementation of building user trust , 2001, CHI.

[5]  Charles J. Kacmar,et al.  The impact of initial consumer trust on intentions to transact with a web site: a trust building model , 2002, J. Strateg. Inf. Syst..

[6]  David Gefen,et al.  Managing User Trust in B2C e-Services , 2003 .

[7]  Cheryl Burke Jarvis,et al.  A Critical Review of Construct Indicators and Measurement Model Misspecification in Marketing and Consumer Research , 2003 .

[8]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  Trust and TAM in Online Shopping: An Integrated Model , 2003, MIS Q..

[9]  D. Paulhus,et al.  The over-claiming technique: measuring self-enhancement independent of ability. , 2003, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[10]  Scott B. MacKenzie,et al.  Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. , 2003, The Journal of applied psychology.

[11]  John D. Lee,et al.  Trust in Automation: Designing for Appropriate Reliance , 2004, Hum. Factors.

[12]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  Trust In and Adoption of Online Recommendation Agents , 2005, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[13]  Timothy W. Bickmore,et al.  'It's just like you talk to a friend' relational agents for older adults , 2005, Interact. Comput..

[14]  Timothy W. Bickmore,et al.  Modalities for building relationships with handheld computer agents , 2006, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[15]  T. M. Holtgraves,et al.  Perceiving artificial social agents , 2007, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[16]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  Evaluating Anthropomorphic Product Recommendation Agents: A Social Relationship Perspective to Designing Information Systems , 2009, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[17]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  Embodied Conversational Agent-Based Kiosk for Automated Interviewing , 2011, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[18]  D. Straub,et al.  Editor's comments: a critical look at the use of PLS-SEM in MIS quarterly , 2012 .

[19]  Edson Emílio Scalabrin,et al.  Using a personal assistant for exploiting service interfaces , 2014, Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE 18th International Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work in Design (CSCWD).

[20]  David Coniam.  The linguistic accuracy of chatbots: usability from an ESL perspective , 2014 .

[21]  Justin Scott Giboney,et al.  Facilitating Natural Conversational Agent Interactions: Lessons from a Deception Experiment , 2014, ICIS.

[22]  Herman Aguinis,et al.  Best Practice Recommendations for Designing and Implementing Experimental Vignette Methodology Studies , 2014 .

[23]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  Effects of rational and social appeals of online recommendation agents on cognition- and affect-based trust , 2016, Decis. Support Syst..

[24]  Jan Marco Leimeister,et al.  Why different trust relationships matter for information systems users , 2016, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[25]  Mary Czerwinski,et al.  An Exploratory Study Toward the Preferred Conversational Style for Compatible Virtual Agents , 2016, IVA.

[26]  J. Leimeister,et al.  Understanding the Development of Trust: Comparing Trust in the IT Artifact and Trust in the Provid , 2016 .

[27]  Robert Dale,et al.  The return of the chatbots , 2016, Natural Language Engineering.

[28]  RaiArun.  Editor's comments: avoiding type III errors: formulating IS research problems that matter , 2017 .

[29]  Matthew Schroeder,et al.  Trusting in Machines: How Mode of Interaction Affects Willingness to Share Personal Information with Machines , 2018, HICSS.

[30]  Theo Araujo,et al.  Living up to the chatbot hype: The influence of anthropomorphic design cues and communicative agency framing on conversational agent and company perceptions , 2018, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[31]  Asbjørn Følstad,et al.  Different Chatbots for Different Purposes: Towards a Typology of Chatbots to Understand Interaction Design , 2018, INSCI Workshops.

[32]  Matthias Söllner,et al.  AI-Based Digital Assistants , 2019, Business & Information Systems Engineering.

[33]  Alexander Benlian,et al.  Anthropomorphic Information Systems , 2019, Business & Information Systems Engineering.

[34]  Asbjørn Følstad,et al.  An Initial Model of Trust in Chatbots for Customer Service - Findings from a Questionnaire Study , 2019, Interact. Comput..

[35]  Graeme McLean,et al.  Hey Alexa ... examine the variables influencing the use of artificial intelligent in-home voice assistants , 2019, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[36]  Qian Yu,et al.  "I Almost Fell in Love with a Machine": Speaking with Computers Affects Self-disclosure , 2019, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[37]  Alexander Maedche,et al.  A Taxonomy of Social Cues for Conversational Agents , 2019, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[38]  Jonathan Grudin,et al.  Chatbots, Humbots, and the Quest for Artificial General Intelligence , 2019, CHI.

[39]  J. Kandampully,et al.  Frontline Service Technology infusion: conceptual archetypes and future research directions , 2019, Journal of Service Management.

[40]  Joonhwan Lee,et al.  Comparing Data from Chatbot and Web Surveys: Effects of Platform and Conversational Style on Survey Response Quality , 2019, CHI.

[41]  Alexander Benlian,et al.  Mr. and Mrs. Conversational Agent - Gender Stereotyping in Judge-Advisor Systems and the Role of Egocentric Bias , 2019, ICIS.

[42]  Thiemo Wambsganss,et al.  Unleashing the Potential of Conversational Agents for Course Evaluations: Empirical Insights from a Comparison with Web Surveys , 2020, ECIS.

[43]  A. Følstad,et al.  Users' experiences with chatbots: findings from a questionnaire study , 2020, Quality and User Experience.

[44]  Roland T. Rust,et al.  Engaged to a Robot? The Role of AI in Service , 2020, Journal of Service Research.

[45]  J. Leimeister,et al.  The Anatomy of User Experience with Conversational Agents: A Taxonomy and Propositions of Service Clues , 2020, ICIS.

[46]  Naim Zierau,et al.  Towards Developing Trust-Supporting Design Features for AI-Based Chatbots in Customer Service , 2020, ICIS.

[47]  E. De Bellis,et al.  Autonomous Shopping Systems: Identifying and Overcoming Barriers to Consumer Adoption , 2020, Journal of Retailing.

[48]  Matthias Söllner,et al.  Trust in Smart Personal Assistants: A Systematic Literature Review and Development of a Research Agenda , 2020, Wirtschaftsinformatik.

[49]  Alexander Benlian,et al.  AI-based chatbots in customer service and their effects on user compliance , 2020, Electronic Markets.

[50]  Andreas Janson,et al.  Value Co-Creation in Smart Services: A Functional Affordances Perspective on Smart Personal Assistants , 2020, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..