CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 252AI in Service InteractionsCustomer Service Quality and LoyaltySocial Robot Interaction and HRI

Creepiness: Its antecedents and impact on loyalty when interacting with a chatbot

Rajaobelina, Lova, Prom Tep, Sandrine, Arcand, Manon, Ricard, Line·2021·Psychology & Marketing
DOI 10.1002/mar.21548
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Consumers sometimes describe their experience of interacting with artificial intelligence‐based human‐like chatbots as creepy. This study investigates the antecedents of creepiness (i.e., the chatbot's usability, privacy concerns, and user variables such as technology anxiety and the need for human interaction) and its impact on consumer loyalty. Grounded in the technology paradox, it deepens the understanding of creepiness in light of the theoretical underpinnings of the privacy paradox and privacy cynicism. Presented with the task of obtaining a car insurance quote, 430 consumers participated in a simulation involving interaction with a chatbot, followed by a questionnaire. The findings show that creepiness decreases loyalty and indirectly impacts it through trust and negative emotions. While usability reduces perceptions of creepiness, privacy concerns raised by the interaction with the chatbot increase creepiness, which is positively associated with consumer traits (i.e., technology anxiety and need for human interaction). The main contribution of the research lies in its focus on creepiness, a concept under‐researched in the marketing literature, and which can be seen from the perspective of a coping mechanism for consumers’ privacy concerns. This paper provides practical implications to orient managers in the design and implementation of chatbots, as a promising touch point to build customer loyalty.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/mar.21548

Cites

123 of 123 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Replacing human-human interactions with human-AI interactions, along with ethical concerns and heightened perceptions of creepiness, absence of personalization and empathy, could potentially result in adverse effects on brand experience and customer loyalty.

    “Hence, replacing humanhuman interactions with human-AI interactions, along with ethical concerns and heightened perceptions of creepiness, the absence of personalization and empathy, could potentially result in adverse effects on the brand experience and customer loyalty (Luo et al., 2019;Rajaobelina et al., 2021;Niu & Mvondo, 2024).”

    From Navigating the perils of artificial intelligence: a focused review on ChatGPT and responsible research and innovation (2024) · cites this paper as Rajaobelina et al., 2021

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 125 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Rajaobelina, L., Prom Tep, S., Arcand, M., & Ricard, L.
Affiliations
  • Université du Québec à Montréal (CA)
  • Department of Marketing, ESG Business School (École des Sciences de la Gestion) Université du Québec à Montréal Montreal Quebec Canada
Corresponding author
Rajaobelina, Lova
ORCID
Venue
Psychology & Marketing
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2021-07-20
Volume
38
Issue
12
Pages
2339-2356
ISSN
  • 0742-6046 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-6793
DOI
10.1002/mar.21548
OpenAlex
W3184313572
Cited by
252
References
125
Citations by year
2026: 52 · 2025: 67 · 2024: 57 · 2023: 57 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 2
FWCI
11.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)
Locations
Psychology and Marketing (publishedVersion)
Funders
Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (CAD$ 48,096)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in Service Interactions
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Customer Service Quality and Loyalty
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
Keywords
creepiness, chatbots, customer loyalty, privacy concerns, technology anxiety, chatbot usability, trust, negative emotions, privacy paradox, privacy cynicism, technology paradox, automobile insurance

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review