Artificial Intelligence and the New Forms of Interaction: Who Has the Control When Interacting with a Chatbot?

A significant body of literature examines anthropomorphism, modality, warmth/competence cues, and initiation patterns, frequently demonstrating impacts on satisfaction, social presence, or reactance in controlled environments.

“A significant body of literature examines anthropomorphism, modality, warmth/competence cues, and initiation patterns, frequently demonstrating impacts on satisfaction, social presence, or reactance in controlled environments [8,24].”

Experiments confirm autonomy to powerlessness/reactance mechanisms and interface-driven reactance shifts, whereas surveys focus on usefulness/satisfaction/trust chains.

“This disparity is evident in both experimental and survey methodologies: experiments confirm autonomy → powerlessness/reactance mechanisms [23,40] and interface-driven reactance shifts [24], whereas surveys focus on usefulness/satisfaction/trust chains [42,44,69].”

Non-anthropomorphic, computer-initiated assistants are more prone to reactance in consumers yet enhance levels of satisfaction due to improved performance certainty.

“Pizzi et al. [24] found in another study that non-anthropomorphic, computer-initiated assistants are more prone to reactance in consumers yet enhance levels of satisfaction due to improved performance certainty.”

As systems move toward truly agentic, transaction-executing commerce, the main limitation is measurement: a significant portion of the evidence deduces delegation from adoption or continuation intentions, rather than from direct observation of explicit delegation choices or verified execution.

“As systems move toward truly agentic, transaction-executing commerce [24,40,44,45,50,52,67], the main limitation is measurement: a significant portion of the evidence deduces delegation from adoption or continuation intentions, rather than from direct observation of explicit delegation choices or verified execution.”

Design and channel factors (voice vs. text; initiation mode; anthropomorphic cues) influence perceived control and social presence, occasionally altering the direction of effects through reactance or satisfaction mechanisms.

“Fourth, design and channel factors (voice vs. text; initiation mode; anthropomorphic cues) influence perceived control and social presence, occasionally altering the direction of effects through reactance or satisfaction mechanisms [7,24,31,32,52].”

Co-assistant designs can maintain satisfaction and choice certainty when users recognize performance advantages without a reduction in governance, and modality/interaction selections can influence whether autonomy is perceived as supportive or intrusive.

“Conversely, co-assistant designs can maintain satisfaction and choice certainty when users recognize performance advantages without a reduction in governance [24], and modality/interaction selections can additionally influence whether autonomy is perceived as supportive or intrusive [8].”

Negative reactions arise when autonomy cues suggest a loss of control (reactance/threat-to-freedom) or displacement (powerlessness); conversely, positive outcomes are observed when systems facilitate friction reduction while maintaining perceived authorship and recourse.

“Negative reactions arise when autonomy cues suggest a loss of control (reactance/threat-to-freedom) or displacement (powerlessness); conversely, positive outcomes are observed when systems facilitate friction reduction while maintaining perceived authorship and recourse [23,24,40].”

Modality and interface cues determine whether autonomy is perceived as supportive or intrusive.

“In a similar vein, modality and interface cues determine whether autonomy is perceived as supportive or intrusive (e.g., the effects of voice versus text on cognition and satisfaction; assistant initiation patterns affecting reactance) [8,24,52].”

Design elements that suggest system-initiated control, particularly in the absence of explicit user veto or approval, exacerbate this phenomenon, even when downstream satisfaction may remain favorable due to certainty and performance improvements.

“Design elements that suggest system-initiated control, particularly in the absence of explicit user veto or approval, exacerbate this phenomenon, even when downstream satisfaction may remain favorable due to certainty and performance improvements [24].”

Feelings of powerlessness and psychological reactance occur when cues of autonomy or personalization are perceived as threats to freedom or displacement, leading to decreased acceptance and heightened avoidance.

“First, feelings of powerlessness and psychological reactance occur when cues of autonomy or personalization are perceived as threats to freedom or displacement, leading to decreased acceptance and heightened avoidance [23,24,40].”

Interface design is not superficial appearance; cues can shift agency perceptions and reactance, but the market importance of these cue pathways is still not well understood.

“This bridging logic follows the review's broader conclusion that interface design is not superficial appearance; cues can shift agency perceptions and reactance-but the market importance of these cue pathways is still not well understood [23,24].”

Lab experiments often manipulate assistant design or autonomy but measure intentions or simulated choice instead of actual checkout/payment.

“For instance, lab experiments often manipulate the design of the assistant or give them more freedom, but they measure the results as intentions or simulated choice instead of actual checkout/payment [7,8,24,38,43,52,54,63].”

Acceptance models usually assume that delegation is the action-level construct, and autonomy is the boundary condition that makes governance costs important.

“Acceptance models usually assume that delegation is the action-level construct, and autonomy is the boundary condition that makes governance costs important [23,24,40].”

Design decisions and interface modalities function through psychological pathways that ultimately determine a user's willingness to rely on the agent.

“Additionally, it is consistent with research demonstrating that design decisions and interface modalities function through psychological pathways that ultimately determine a user's willingness to rely on the agent [8,24].”

The effects of manipulating autonomy frequently shift through governance mechanisms, such as perceived control and powerlessness/reactance.

“Second, the effects of manipulating autonomy frequently shift through governance mechanisms, such as perceived control and powerlessness/reactance, indicating that future research should treat governance and delegation as causal constructs rather than downstream correlates [23,24,46].”

Numerous studies exhibit robust internal validity while functioning within simulated purchasing contexts.

“Numerous studies exhibit robust internal validity while functioning within simulated purchasing contexts [7,8,24,63].”

Satisfaction declines when designs trigger reactance or cognitive/affective overload, which depress downstream evaluations.

“It declines when designs trigger reactance or cognitive/affective overload, which depress downstream evaluations.”

Satisfaction rises via problem-solving, confirmation, usefulness, and interaction/service quality.

“Satisfaction rises via problem-solving, confirmation, usefulness, and interaction/service quality.”

Governance-related constructs (perceived control/agency, powerlessness/reactance, risk/privacy) consistently influence whether delegation is perceived as empowerment or displacement.

“In RQ2-RQ3, governance-related constructs (perceived control/agency, powerlessness/reactance, risk/privacy) consistently influence whether delegation is perceived as empowerment or displacement [23,24].”

Satisfaction/CX/perceived service quality is mostly positive, but design can introduce negative affect (reactance, overload).

“Mostly positive, but design can introduce negative affect (reactance, overload)”