Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 412

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 105 of the 105 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Chatbots in retailers’ customer communication: How to measure their acceptance?

Rese, Alexandra, Ganster, Lena, Baier, Daniel·2020·Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services
DOI 10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102176
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Abstract Currently, online retailers evaluate whether chatbots—software programs that interact with users using natural languages—could improve their customers' satisfaction. In a retail context, chatbots allow humans to pose shopping-related questions and receive answers in natural language without waiting for a salesperson or using other automated communication forms. However, until now, it has been unclear which customers accept this new communication form and which factors determine their acceptance. In this paper, we contrast the well-known technology acceptance model (TAM) with the lesser known uses and gratifications (U&G) theory, applying both approaches to measure the acceptance of the text-based “Emma” chatbot by its target segment. “Emma” was developed for the prepurchase phase of online fashion retailing and integrated into Facebook Messenger by the major German online retailer Zalando. Data were collected from 205 German Millennial respondents in a usability study. The results show that both utilitarian factors such as “authenticity of conversation” and “perceived usefulness,” as well as hedonic factors such as “perceived enjoyment”, positively influence the acceptance of “Emma”. However, privacy concerns and the immaturity of the technology had a negative effect on usage intention and frequency. The predictive power of both models was similar, showing little deviation, but U&G gives alternative insights into the customers’ motivation to use “Emma” compared to the TAM.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102176

Cites

105 of 105 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 105 references

Cited by

See all 412

Metadata

Authors
Rese, A., Ganster, L., & Baier, D.
Venue
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-09
Volume
56
Pages
102176
ISSN
0969-6989 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102176
OpenAlex
W3036081459
Cited by
412
References
105
FWCI
17.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Chatbots in retailers’ customer communication: How to measure their acceptance? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102176
The paper
Rese, A., Ganster, L., & Baier, D. (2020). Chatbots in retailers’ customer communication: How to measure their acceptance? Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102176

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.