The DOI matches its Crossref record; 86 of the 86 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Paradoxes of artificial intelligence in consumer markets: Ethical challenges and opportunities
Abstract
Abstract Products and services empowered by artificial intelligence (AI) are becoming widespread in today’s marketplace. However, consumers have mixed feelings about AI technologies due to the numerous ethical challenges associated the development and deployment of AI. Drawing upon prior research on the moral significance of technology and the emerging literature on AI, we delineate three key dimensions of AI-enabled products (i.e., multi-functionality, interactivity, and AI intelligence stage) that have relevance for ethical implications and adopt a socio-technical approach to provide a multi-layered ethical analysis of AI products at the product-, consumer-, and society-levels. Some key ethical issues identified in the paper include AI biases, ethical design, consumer privacy, cybersecurity, individual autonomy and wellbeing, and unemployment. Companies need to engage in corporate social responsibility (CSR) to shape the future of ethical AI; drawing upon stakeholder theory and institutional theory, we develop a conceptual framework on AI-related CSR, highlighting the product-, company-, and institutional environment-specific factors that influence firms’ socially responsible actions in the domain of AI and discussing the subsequent outcomes for firm, consumers, and the society. We include a section on future research agenda for AI ethics and firm CSR in this important domain.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037//0003-066x.55.1.68 · Cited by 54,599
(2010) · Cited by 24,023
Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches
Suchman, M. C. (1995) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258788 · Cited by 19,903
Organizational culture and leadership
(1993) · Long Range Planning · doi:10.1016/0024-6301(93)90120-5 · Cited by 16,462
Evolving to a New Dominant Logic for Marketing
Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2004) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1509/jmkg.68.1.1.24036 · Cited by 14,779
Upper Echelons: The Organization as a Reflection of Its Top Managers
Hambrick, D. C., & Mason, P. A. (1984) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1984.4277628 · Cited by 10,220
Service-dominant logic: continuing the evolution
Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2008) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1007/s11747-007-0069-6 · Cited by 7,824
The Stakeholder Theory of the Corporation: Concepts, Evidence, and Implications
Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258887 · Cited by 5,846
Flourish: A Visionary New Understanding of Happiness and Well-Being
(2011) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.48-7217 · Cited by 5,543
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
(2015) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.187763 · Cited by 5,309
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Russell, S., & Norvig, P. (2016). Artificial intelligence: A modern approach (Global Edition). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Pearson Higher Ed.
Cited by
Ethical framework for Artificial Intelligence and Digital technologies
Ashok, M., Madan, R., Joha, A., & Sivarajah, U. (2022) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102433 · Cited by 469
Technology readiness and the organizational journey towards AI adoption: An empirical study
Uren, V., & Edwards, J. S. (2023) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2022.102588 · Cited by 335
Camilleri, M. A. (2024) · Expert Systems · doi:10.1111/exsy.13406 · Cited by 331
Corporate digital responsibility in service firms and their ecosystems
Wirtz, J., Kunz, W. H., Hartley, N., & Tarbit, J. (2023) · Journal of Service Research · doi:10.1177/10946705221130467 · Cited by 291
Fu, Y., & Weng, Z. (2024) · Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100306 · Cited by 195
Metadata
- Authors
- Du, S., & Xie, C.
- Venue
- Journal of Business Research
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2021-05
- Volume
- 129
- Pages
- 961-974
- ISSN
- 0148-2963 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3082636531
- Cited by
- 554
- References
- 86
- FWCI
- 31.70
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
- www.elsevier.com/legal/tdmrep-license (tdm)
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Paradoxes of artificial intelligence in consumer markets: Ethical challenges and opportunities. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.08.024
- The paper
- Du, S., & Xie, C. (2021). Paradoxes of artificial intelligence in consumer markets: Ethical challenges and opportunities. Journal of Business Research. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.08.024
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.