Cited by 44AI in Service InteractionsSocial Robot Interaction and HRIArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education

AI with a Heart: How perceived authenticity and warmth shape trust in healthcare chatbots

Phan, The Anh, Bui, Van Dat·2025·Journal of Marketing Communications

Abstract

As artificial intelligence (AI) continues to transform healthcare, AI-driven chatbots are increasingly utilized for patient communication, symptom assessment, and mental health support. However, the success of these chatbots depends on more than just accuracy; their perceived authenticity, warmth, and empathy significantly shape patient trust and engagement. This study examines the interplay between perceived authenticity, perceived warmth, and perceived empathy in influencing patient trust and visit intention. Through an empirical study, we find that perceived authenticity enhances both warmth and empathy, which in turn foster trust and increase visit intention. Additionally, we investigate the moderating role of chatbot type, revealing that while human-like design can enhance warmth perception, it does not necessarily amplify the effects of authenticity. These findings highlight the critical role of emotional intelligence in AI-driven healthcare interactions and suggest that chatbots should prioritize sincerity and socially attuned communication over mere anthropomorphic features. This study contributes to the growing discourse on AI-human trust dynamics and offers actionable insights for healthcare providers, AI developers, and policymakers seeking to integrate patient-centered AI solutions into clinical practice.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/13527266.2025.2508887

Cites

41 of 41 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?

  • Trust and skepticism toward AI are domain-specific, shaping adoption differently across hospitality, financial services, healthcare, and food and meal recommendations.

    “Consistent with this, a growing body of recent work documents that trust and skepticism toward AI are domain-specific, shaping adoption differently across hospitality (Nguyen & Phan, 2026), financial services (Phan et al., 2025), healthcare (Phan & Bui, 2025), and food and meal recommendations (Phan et al., 2025).”

    From Marketing to the Machine: Rethinking Global Marketing for the AI Era (2026) · cites this paper as Phan & Bui, 2025

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Phan, T. A., & Bui, V. D.
Affiliations
Eastern International University (VN)
Corresponding author
Phan, The Anh
Venue
Journal of Marketing Communications
Published
2025-05-21
Pages
1-21
ISSN
  • 1352-7266 (ISSN-L)
  • 1466-4445
OpenAlex
W4410566485
Cited by
40
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 36 · 2025: 4
FWCI
16.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Marketing Communications (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in Service Interactions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Keywords
healthcare chatbots, perceived authenticity, perceived warmth, perceived empathy, patient trust, visit intention, chatbot design, emotional intelligence, patient engagement

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