4.7 Article

A Mind in Intelligent Personal Assistants: An Empirical Study of Mind-Based Anthropomorphism, Fulfilled Motivations, and Exploratory Usage of Intelligent Personal Assistants

期刊

FRONTIERS IN PSYCHOLOGY
卷 13, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.856283

关键词

IPAs; anthropomorphism; IPA self-efficacy; social connection; intention to explore IPAs

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [71701212]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study explores the impact of mind-based anthropomorphism on users' exploratory usage of IPAs, revealing that cognitive and affective anthropomorphism have different effects on IPA self-efficacy and social connection.
Intelligent personal assistants (IPAs) own anthropomorphic features which enable users' perception of anthropomorphism. Adopting the perspective of mind-based anthropomorphism, the purpose of this paper is to investigate how mind-based anthropomorphism influences users' exploratory usage of IPAs. Based on the notion that anthropomorphism can satisfy people's sociality and effectance motivation, we hypothesize that mind-based anthropomorphism can enhance people's social connection with IPAs and IPA self-efficacy, which can in turn influence their exploratory usage of IPAs. Questionnaires were developed and distributed to users who had experience in smart speaker-based IPAs on Wenjuanxing and 551 valid questionnaires were collected to test the research model. The results revealed that cognitive and affective anthropomorphism exerted common and differential impacts on IPA self-efficacy and social connection. Cognitive anthropomorphism versus affective anthropomorphism had stronger influences on IPA self-efficacy, while affective anthropomorphism had stronger impacts on social connection. Both IPA self-efficacy and social connection enhanced users' intentions to explore IPAs. This study enriches previous studies on IPA adoption or post-adoption by investigating exploratory usage which captures how users are deeply engaged with IPAs.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据