Bad News? Send an AI. Good News? Send a Human

The present research demonstrates how consumer responses to negative and positive offers are influenced by whether the administering marketing agent is an artificial intelligence (AI) or a human. In the case of a product or service offer that is worse than expected, consumers respond better when dealing with an AI agent in the form of increased purchase likelihood and satisfaction. In contrast, for an offer that is better than expected, consumers respond more positively to a human agent. The authors demonstrate that AI agents, compared with human agents, are perceived to have weaker intentions when administering offers, which accounts for this effect. That is, consumers infer that AI agents lack selfish intentions in the case of an offer that favors the agent and lack benevolent intentions in the case of an offer that favors the customer, thereby dampening the extremity of consumer responses. Moreover, the authors demonstrate a moderating effect, such that marketers may anthropomorphize AI agents to strengthen perceived intentions, providing an avenue to receive due credit from consumers when the agent provides a better offer and mitigate blame when it provides a worse offer. Potential ethical concerns with the use of AI to bypass consumer resistance to negative offers are discussed.

Automated summary

This research explores the influence of artificial intelligence (AI) and human marketing agents on consumer responses to negative and positive offers. When faced with offers that are worse than expected, consumers are more willing to accept AI agents, whereas for offers that are better than expected, consumers prefer human agents. The study also found that marketers can anthropomorphize AI agents to strengthen consumer perception of their intentions and receive recognition for better offers while mitigating blame for worse offers.