Cited by 50AI in Service InteractionsTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourCustomer Service Quality and Loyalty

Examining chatbot usage intention in a service encounter: Role of task complexity, communication style, and brand personality

Open access
Murtaza, Zara, Sharma, Isha, Carbonell, Pilar·2024·Technological Forecasting and Social Change

Abstract

This study investigates the role of chatbot communication style (task vs. social oriented), task complexity (high vs. low), brand personality (sophisticated vs. sincere), and anthropomorphism on consumer trust and chatbot usage intention. Data is collected through three experiments conducted among US respondents ( N = 328, 200, and 336). The results offer mixed insights as only one experiment supports that task complexity moderates the effect of communication style on trust, such that, task-oriented communication style of the chatbot leads to higher trust under high task complexity conditions. No significant differences in the moderating effect of task complexity on the relationship between communication style and trust is observed between sincere and sophisticated brands. Consistent across the three studies, it is observed that perceived anthropomorphism mediates the effect of communication style on trust which, in turn, affects intention to use the chatbot. The study contributes to literature on AI-enabled conversational agents, human computer interaction , anthropomorphism, and trust. Practically, the study offers insights for managers and service providers who wish to integrate chatbots and other AI enabled technology to enhance service delivery by providing efficient, cost-effective, and consistent support.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.techfore.2024.123806

Cites

110 of 110 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Murtaza, Z., Sharma, I., & Carbonell, P.
Affiliations
  • Lahore School of Economics (PK)
  • York University (CA)
Corresponding author
Sharma, Isha
Venue
Technological Forecasting and Social Change
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2024-12
Volume
209
Pages
123806
ISSN
0040-1625 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4403502338
Cited by
46
References
110
Citations by year
2026: 35 · 2025: 11
FWCI
6.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Technological Forecasting and Social Change (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in Service Interactions
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Customer Service Quality and Loyalty
Keywords
chatbots, consumer trust, task complexity, communication styles, brand personality, anthropomorphism, service encounters, moderated mediation

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