The relevance of task technology fit and affective responses in predicting chatbot user’s sustained use: Moderating role of cognitive innovativeness
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7903/ijecs.2342Keywords:
chatbot, Task-technology fit, perceived anthropomorphism, perceived playfulness, SEM-ANNAbstract
Business enterprises increasingly leverage artificial intelligence tools, particularly chatbots, to improve client relations and drive sustainable growth. While empirical research on post-adoption chatbot user behavior is in its nascent stage, the current study focuses on how Task-Technology Fit (TTF), Affective Response Model (ARM), and cognitive innovativeness drive post-adoption behavior, specifically continuance intention, extending beyond the confines of Expectation-Confirmation Model (ECM). Notably, previous studies had not collectively tested these predictors, marking the uniqueness of this study. Data from 401 travel chatbot users were empirically validated through structural equation modeling (SEM) and artificial neural network (ANN) analyses. Task-technology fit emerged as the potent predictor of satisfaction and sustained use. Contrary to expectations, anthropomorphism exhibited a detrimental effect on continuance intention. Additionally, this research offers intriguing perspectives into the catalytic role of users’ cognitive innovativeness, identifying two significant and non-significant moderations. The study offers implications for academia, travel management, and chatbot developers.
References
Agogo D and Hess TJ (2018) “How does tech make you feel?” a review and examination of negative affective responses to technology use. European Journal of Information Systems 27(5): 570–599.
Agrawal AJG and AG (2017) ‘What to expect from artificial intelligence.’. MIT Sloan Management Review.
Ahmed I and Singh S (2015) AIML Based Voice Enabled Artificial Intelligent Chatterbot. International Journal of u- and e-Service, Science and Technology 8(2): 375–384.
Aimone JB (2019) Neural algorithms and computing beyond Moore’s law. Communications of the ACM 62(4): 110–110.
Airenti G (2018) The Development of Anthropomorphism in Interaction: Intersubjectivity, Imagination, and Theory of Mind. Frontiers in Psychology 9.
Alabed A, Javornik A and Gregory-Smith D (2022) AI anthropomorphism and its effect on users’ self-congruence and self–AI integration: A theoretical framework and research agenda. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 182: 121786.
Anthes G (2017) Artificial intelligence poised to ride a new wave. Communications of the ACM 60(7): 19–21.
Aryadoust V and Baghaei P (2016) Does EFL Readers’ Lexical and Grammatical Knowledge Predict Their Reading Ability? Insights From a Perceptron Artificial Neural Network Study. Educational Assessment 21(2): 135–156.
Ashfaq M, Yun J, Yu S, et al. (2020) I, Chatbot: Modeling the determinants of users’ satisfaction and continuance intention of AI-powered service agents. Telematics and Informatics 54: 101473.
Balakrishnan J and Dwivedi YK (2021) Conversational commerce: entering the next stage of AI-powered digital assistants. Annals of Operations Research. Epub ahead of print 12 April 2021. DOI: 10.1007/s10479-021-04049-5.
Balakrishnan J, Abed SS and Jones P (2022) The role of meta-UTAUT factors, perceived anthropomorphism, perceived intelligence, and social self-efficacy in chatbot-based services? Technological Forecasting and Social Change 180: 121692.
Belsley DA (2014) Conditioning diagnostics. Wiley StatsRef: Statistics Reference Online. Epub ahead of print April 2014.
Bentler PM (1992) On the fit of models to covariances and methodology to the Bulletin. Psychological Bulletin 112(3): 400–404.
Bentler PM (1995) EQS Structural Equations Program Manual. Encino, CA: Multivariate software.
Bentler PM and Bonett DG (1980) Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin 88(3): 588–606.
Bhattacherjee A (2001) Understanding Information Systems Continuance: An Expectation-Confirmation Model. MIS Quarterly 25(3): 351.
Blut M, Wang C, Wünderlich N V., et al. (2021) Understanding anthropomorphism in service provision: a meta-analysis of physical robots, chatbots, and other AI. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 49(4): 632–658.
Brandtzaeg PB and Følstad A (2017) Why People Use Chatbots. In: Kompatsiaris I, Cave J, Satsiou A, et al. (eds) Internet Science. Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 377–392. Available at: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-3-319-70284-1_30.
Cassell J et al. (2000) ‘Human Conversation as a System Framework: Designing Embodied Conversational Agents.’
Castillo D, Canhoto AI and Said E (2021) The dark side of AI-powered service interactions: exploring the process of co-destruction from the customer perspective. The Service Industries Journal 41(13–14): 900–925.
Cheng Y and Jiang H (2020) How Do AI-driven Chatbots Impact User Experience? Examining Gratifications, Perceived Privacy Risk, Satisfaction, Loyalty, and Continued Use. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 64(4): 592–614.
Cheng Y-M (2019) How does task-technology fit influence cloud-based e-learning continuance and impact? Education + Training 61(4): 480–499.
Chung M, Ko E, Joung H, et al. (2020) Chatbot e-service and customer satisfaction regarding luxury brands. Journal of Business Research 117: 587–595.
Davies F, Moutinho L and Curry B (1996) ATM user attitudes: a neural network analysis. Marketing Intelligence & Planning 14(2): 26–32.
Dishaw MT and Strong DM (1999) Extending the technology acceptance model with task–technology fit constructs. Information & Management 36(1): 9–21.
Erskine MA, Khojah M and McDaniel AE (2019) Location selection using heat maps: Relative advantage, task-technology fit, and decision-making performance. Computers in Human Behavior 101: 151–162.
Fernandes T and Oliveira E (2021) Understanding consumers’ acceptance of automated technologies in service encounters: Drivers of digital voice assistants adoption. Journal of Business Research 122: 180–191.
Fornell C and Larcker DF (1981) Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error: Algebra and Statistics. Journal of Marketing Research 18(3): 382–388.
Gaskin. J (2021) Common method bias.
Gaskin J (2021) Data prep. Available at: http://statwiki.gaskination.com/ (accessed 3 March 2023).
Goodhue DL and Thompson RL (1995) Task-Technology Fit and Individual Performance. MIS Quarterly 19(2): 213.
Grandview Research (2022) Chatbot Market Size, Share & Trends Analysis Report By End User, By Application (Bots For Service, Bots For Marketing), By Type (Standalone, Web-based), By Product Landscape, By Vertical, And Segment Forecasts, 2021 - 2028. April. Available at: https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/chatbot-market/methodology.
Haenlein M and Kaplan A (2019) A Brief History of Artificial Intelligence: On the Past, Present, and Future of Artificial Intelligence. California Management Review 61(4): 5–14.
Hair Joseph F. et. al. (2009) Multivariate Data Analysis. A Global Perspective. 7th ed. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.
Han MC (2021) The Impact of Anthropomorphism on Consumers’ Purchase Decision in Chatbot Commerce. Journal of Internet Commerce 20(1): 46–65.
Harasis AA, Qureshi MI and Rasli A (2018) Development of research continuous usage intention of e-commerce. A systematic review of literature from 2009 to 2015. International Journal of Engineering and Technology(UAE) 7(2). Science Publishing Corporation Inc: 73–78.
Hsiao K-L and Chen C-C (2022) What drives continuance intention to use a food-ordering chatbot? An examination of trust and satisfaction. Library Hi Tech 40(4): 929–946.
Hsu C-L, Chang K-C and Chen M-C (2012) The impact of website quality on customer satisfaction and purchase intention: perceived playfulness and perceived flow as mediators. Information Systems and e-Business Management 10(4): 549–570.
Hu L.-T. & BPM (1995) Evaluating model fit. In: Structural Equation Modeling: Concepts, Issues, and Applications. R. H. Hoyle. Sage Publications, Inc., pp. 76–99.
Huang SYB and Lee C-J (2022) Predicting continuance intention to fintech chatbot. Computers in Human Behavior 129: 107027.
Huang T-L and Liao S (2015) A model of acceptance of augmented-reality interactive technology: the moderating role of cognitive innovativeness. Electronic Commerce Research 15(2): 269–295.
Isaac O, Abdullah Z, Ramayah T, et al. (2017) Internet usage, user satisfaction, task-technology fit, and performance impact among public sector employees in Yemen. The International Journal of Information and Learning Technology 34(3): 210–241.
Jiang Q, Chen J, Wu Y, et al. (2022) A Study of Factors Influencing the Continuance Intention to the Usage of Augmented Reality in Museums. Systems 10(3): 73.
Juniper Research (2022) CHATBOT INTERACTIONS IN RETAIL TO REACH 22 BILLION BY 2023, AS AI OFFERS COMPELLING NEW ENGAGEMENT S.
Kim H-Y (2013) Statistical notes for clinical researchers: assessing normal distribution (2) using skewness and kurtosis. Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics 38(1): 52.
Kim TT, Suh YK, Lee G, et al. (2010) Modelling roles of task-technology fit and self-efficacy in hotel employees’ usage behaviours of hotel information systems. International Journal of Tourism Research 12(6): 709–725.
Kimiagari S and Asadi Malafe NS (2021) The role of cognitive and affective responses in the relationship between internal and external stimuli on online impulse buying behavior. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 61: 102567.
Klein K and Martinez LF (2022) The impact of anthropomorphism on customer satisfaction in chatbot commerce: an experimental study in the food sector. Electronic Commerce Research. Epub ahead of print 16 May 2022. DOI: 10.1007/s10660-022-09562-8.
Kuo N-T, Chang K-C, Cheng Y-S, et al. (2016) Effects of Tour Guide Interpretation and Tourist Satisfaction on Destination Loyalty in Taiwan’s Kinmen Battlefield Tourism: Perceived Playfulness and Perceived Flow as Moderators. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing 33(sup1): 103–122.
Larsen TJ, Sørebø AM and Sørebø Ø (2009) The role of task-technology fit as users’ motivation to continue information system use. Computers in Human Behavior 25(3): 778–784.
Leong L-Y, Hew T-S, Ooi K-B, et al. (2020) Predicting mobile wallet resistance: A two-staged structural equation modeling-artificial neural network approach. International Journal of Information Management 51: 102047.
Li X and Sung Y (2021) Anthropomorphism brings us closer: The mediating role of psychological distance in User–AI assistant interactions. Computers in Human Behavior 118: 106680.
Liaw S-S and Huang H-M (2013) Perceived satisfaction, perceived usefulness and interactive learning environments as predictors to self-regulation in e-learning environments. Computers & Education 60(1): 14–24.
Limayem M and Cheung CMK (2008) Understanding information systems continuance: The case of Internet-based learning technologies. Information & Management 45(4): 227–232.
Lin CS, Wu S and Tsai RJ (2005) Integrating perceived playfulness into expectation-confirmation model for web portal context. Information & Management 42(5): 683–693.
Lin K-M, Chen N-S and Fang K (2011) Understanding e-learning continuance intention: a negative critical incidents perspective. Behaviour & Information Technology 30(1): 77–89.
Lin K-Y and Lu H-P (2011) Why people use social networking sites: An empirical study integrating network externalities and motivation theory. Computers in Human Behavior 27(3): 1152–1161.
Lin RR, Zheng Y and Lee JC (2023) Artificial intelligence-based pre-implementation interventions in users’ continuance intention to use mobile banking. International Journal of Mobile Communications 21(4): 518–540.
Lin W-S (2012) Perceived fit and satisfaction on web learning performance: IS continuance intention and task-technology fit perspectives. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 70(7): 498–507.
Lindgaard G and Dudek C (2003) What is this evasive beast we call user satisfaction? Interacting with Computers 15(3): 429–452.
Liu H, Shao M, Liu X, et al. (2021) Exploring the Influential Factors on Readers’ Continuance Intentions of E-Book APPs: Personalization, Usefulness, Playfulness, and Satisfaction. Frontiers in Psychology 12.
McTear MFZC and DG (2016) The Conversational Interface. 94th ed. Cham: Springer.
Mumtaz Ali Memon, Hiram Ting, T. Ramayah, et al. (2017) A REVIEW OF THE METHODOLOGICAL MISCONCEPTIONS AND GUIDELINES RELATED TO THE APPLICATION OF STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING: A MALAYSIAN SCENARIO. Journal of Applied Structural Equation Modeling 1(1): 1–13.
Nguyen DM, Chiu Y-TH and Le HD (2021) Determinants of continuance intention towards banks’ chatbot services in vietnam: A necessity for sustainable development. Sustainability (Switzerland) 13(14). MDPI AG.
Oghuma AP, Libaque-Saenz CF, Wong SF, et al. (2016) An expectation-confirmation model of continuance intention to use mobile instant messaging. Telematics and Informatics 33(1): 34–47.
Oliver RL (1980) A Cognitive Model of the Antecedents and Consequences of Satisfaction Decisions. Journal of Marketing Research 17(4): 460–469.
Paul Harrison and Robin Shaw (2004) Consumer satisfaction and post-purchase intentions: An exploratory study of museum visitors. International journal of Arts Management: 23–32.
Pearson PH (1970) Relationships between global and specified measures of novelty seeking. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 34(2): 199–204.
Pérez JQ, Daradoumis T and Puig JMM (2020) Rediscovering the use of chatbots in education: A systematic literature review. Computer Applications in Engineering Education 28(6): 1549–1565.
Pillai R and Sivathanu B (2020) Adoption of AI-based chatbots for hospitality and tourism. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 32(10): 3199–3226.
Radziwill NM, and MCBenton (2017) ‘Evaluating quality of chatbots and intelligent conversational agents.’ . Epub ahead of print 2017.
Roca JC, Chiu C-M and Martínez FJ (2006) Understanding e-learning continuance intention: An extension of the Technology Acceptance Model. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 64(8): 683–696.
Shang D and Wu W (2017) Understanding mobile shopping consumers’ continuance intention. Industrial Management & Data Systems 117(1): 213–227.
Sternad Zabukovšek S, Kalinic Z, Bobek S, et al. (2019) SEM–ANN based research of factors’ impact on extended use of ERP systems. Central European Journal of Operations Research 27(3): 703–735.
Stone RW and Baker-Eveleth L (2013) Students’ expectation, confirmation, and continuance intention to use electronic textbooks. Computers in Human Behavior 29(3): 984–990.
Straits Research (2022) Chatbot Market.
Stratton SJ (2021) Population Research: Convenience Sampling Strategies. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine 36(4): 373–374.
Sun Y and Gao F (2020) An investigation of the influence of intrinsic motivation on students’ intention to use mobile devices in language learning. Educational Technology Research and Development 68(3): 1181–1198.
Svenningsson N and Faraon M (2019) Artificial Intelligence in Conversational Agents. In: Proceedings of the 2019 2nd Artificial Intelligence and Cloud Computing Conference, New York, NY, USA, 21 December 2019, pp. 151–161. ACM.
Times Property (2023) Decoding Indian Cities Classifications In Tier I, II, III, IV. Times Property, 26 June.
Ukpabi DC, Aslam B and Karjaluoto H (2019) Chatbot Adoption in Tourism Services: A Conceptual Exploration. In: Robots, Artificial Intelligence, and Service Automation in Travel, Tourism and Hospitality. Emerald Publishing Limited, pp. 105–121. Available at:https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/978-1-78756-687-320191006/full/html.
Usoro A. SS& KM (2010) Task-technology fit and technology acceptance models applicability to e-tourism. Journal of Economic Development 2(1): 1 –32.
Venkatraman MP and Price LL (1990) Differentiating between cognitive and sensory innovativeness. Journal of Business Research 20(4): 293–315.
Verkijika SF (2020) An affective response model for understanding the acceptance of mobile payment systems. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 39: 100905.
Wang T, Lin CL and Su YS (2021) Continuance intention of university students and online learning during the covid-19 pandemic: A modified expectation confirmation model perspective. Sustainability (Switzerland) 13(8). MDPI.
Weizenbaum J (1966) ‘ELIZA—a computer program for the study of natural language communication between man and machine.’ Communications of the ACM 9.1: 36–45.
Wu B and Chen X (2017) Continuance intention to use MOOCs: Integrating the technology acceptance model (TAM) and task technology fit (TTF) model. Computers in Human Behavior 67: 221–232.
Yam KC, Bigman YE, Tang PM, et al. (2021) Robots at work: People prefer—and forgive—service robots with perceived feelings. Journal of Applied Psychology 106(10): 1557–1572.
Yang J, Chen Y-L, Por LY, et al. (2023) A Systematic Literature Review of Information Security in Chatbots. Applied Sciences 13(11): 6355.
You JJ, Jong D and Wiangin U (2020) Consumers’ Purchase Intention of Organic Food via Social Media: The Perspectives of Task-Technology Fit and Post-acceptance Model. Frontiers in Psychology 11. Frontiers Media S.A.
Yuan S, Liu Y, Yao R, et al. (2016) An investigation of users’ continuance intention towards mobile banking in China. Information Development 32(1): 20–34.
Zhang P (2013) The Affective Response Model: A Theoretical Framework of Affective Concepts and Their Relationships in the ICT Context. MIS Quarterly 37(1): 247–274.
Zhang T, Kaber DB, Zhu B, et al. (2010) Service robot feature design effects on user perceptions and emotional responses. Intelligent Service Robotics 3(2): 73–88.
Zhao Y and Bacao F (2020) What factors determining customer continuingly using food delivery apps during 2019 novel coronavirus pandemic period? International Journal of Hospitality Management 91: 102683.
Zhou J (2017) Exploring the factors affecting learners’ continuance intention of MOOCs for online collaborative learning: An extended ECM perspective. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology. Epub ahead of print 9 April 2017. DOI: 10.14742/ajet.2914.
Zhou T, Lu Y and Wang B (2010) Integrating TTF and UTAUT to explain mobile banking user adoption. Computers in Human Behavior 26(4): 760–767.
