Abstract
Chatbots are widely used by business in everyday life to interact with consumers in e-commerce, social networking, education, and government settings. Anthropomorphism is a fundamental aspect of chatbot design and implementation, and increases the interaction of chatbots with humans. As part of the recent expansion of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies, chatbots incorporated AI to engage more personally with consumers. The anthropomorphic characteristics of chatbots, including both visual appearance and language, influence the interaction of chatbots with humans in diverse ways that may have both positive and negative consequences. The purpose of this review is to increase physician awareness of the use of chatbots which use AI to enhance anthropomorphism. Consumers routinely anthropomorphize products including chatbots. Physicians need to be aware of the wide-ranging and routine use of chatbots, and the importance of anthropomorphism in chatbot design and implementation. Physicians also need to recognize potential negative consequences of anthropomorphism of chatbots on mental health.
Keywords: Chatbots, Anthropomorphism, Artificial intelligence, Mental health
Introduction
Consumers routinely anthropomorphize the products they interact with, attributing human characteristics to them including names, knowledge, intentions, beliefs, and capabilities [1, 2]. Commerce has long recognized this behavior, and routinely encourage anthropomorphism of brands and products by consumers when marketing goods and services, including in healthcare [3]. For example, many animated spokes-characters have been included in direct-to-consumer marketing of pharmaceuticals in the US [4, 5]. Anthropomorphism is viewed as a fundamental aspect of developing consumer brand loyalty [6]. For consumers, anthropomorphism of marketing messages increases both the feeling of connection, and comprehension of the products being sold [3]. The widespread use of chatbots that use artificial intelligence (AI) and directly interact with consumers have greatly increased the opportunities to market healthcare products by encouraging consumer anthropomorphism. The purpose of this paper is to review the potential consequences of the increasing anthropomorphic messaging that is received by consumers in the era of AI, with an emphasis on how chatbots in daily life outside of healthcare may affect mental health.
Recent technology advancements
During the last decade, the use of AI technologies in everyday life has greatly expanded. Diverse techniques such as machine learning for predictive analysis, natural language processing, rule-based expert systems, generative AI including large language models that produce original content, and the creation of AI agents or chatbots have all been employed to engage with customers [7, 8]. The use of AI technology creates new opportunities and challenges different from those found with traditional technologies [7]. The global chatbot industry is expected to expand at an annual growth rate of 23.3% from 2024 to 2030 [9]. The varied businesses using chatbots include online e-commerce, social networking, education, banking, music streaming and the travel industry, with the chatbots often providing customer support [10, 11]. Chatbots have also been widely adopted by governments to address the information and service requests from citizens [12]. Consumers anthropomorphize chatbots in large part because companies design chatbots to encourage anthropomorphism.
Background on chatbots
Chatbots are a type of computer program that communicate with a user in friendly verbal or text conversations, giving the impression of human intelligence [13–15]. The goal for the chatbot is to make the person feel as if they are conversing with another human [15]. One of the earliest chatbots was Eliza in the 1960s, launched as a questioning therapist and often anthropomorphized by users [14–16]. The use of chatbots has expanded greatly in recent years with the inclusion of AI technology in mobile apps, messaging platforms and social media [13, 17, 18]. The advancements in AI techniques have expanded the capabilities of chatbots to communicate and understand [19]. Chatbots also employ sentiment analysis, which uses natural language processing and machine learning to interpret human text and speech as positive, negative or neutral [20].
A key aspect of chatbots is their anthropomorphic appearance which increases the visual attention paid to a chatbot [21]. The combination of both anthropomorphic language and appearance increases the perceived competence of a chatbot [22]. Encouraging the anthropomorphizing of chatbots increases customer trust, intent to purchase, satisfaction with the shopping experience, and may make products seem more personalized [23, 24]. Maximizing the perceived humanness of virtual agents or chatbots is positively associated with customer satisfaction [25]. Anthropomorphism of agents increases resilience to a trust breakdown [26]. The loss of trust after a negative interaction, such as a failure to understand customer input, is lower when the chatbot is human-like rather than machine-like [27]. People may be more willing to disclose personal information to a customer service chatbot that has been humanized [28]. However, anthropomorphism may have a psychological cost for some people, undermining well-being, challenging human uniqueness, creating fear that they can be replaced by machines with a competitive mind, and posing a threat to their human identity [29].
Effects of chatbots on consumers
People will often anthropomorphize and bond with chatbots as if they were a new friend [30]. Chatbots with greater conversational skills, including tailored responses, are perceived as more humanlike and more engaging [31]. User loneliness, along with chatbot personification, may contribute to developing a long-term relationship with a chatbot [32]. Consumers with a high need for human interaction may prefer anthropomorphic service chatbots [33]. Consumers who are lonely and interact with anthropomorphic chatbots may be willing to pay higher prices for products [24]. There is less switching to a human agent after a customer service failure when chatbots have an anthropomorphic appearance and communication style [34]. Human attributes of warmth and competence increase trust in the chatbot, and contribute to customer perception of a brand as humane [35, 36]. The context in which people interact with a chatbot contributes to the perceived humanness, and this may change during the conversation [37]. Humor generated by chatbots that is benevolent, socially appropriate and entertaining may increase satisfaction with customer service [38, 39]. Anthropomorphism also increases customer compliance with chatbot requests for service feedback [40].
Chatbots and mental health
Interaction with empathetic chatbots may improve mood after experiencing social exclusion [41]. In a health screening context, some people are more willing to disclose personal information to a computer than a human [42]. Chatbots may be an effective means to provide asynchronous, individualized support to those experiencing social isolation, as found during the pandemic [30]. In a mental health counseling situation, an anthropomorphic chatbot design increased patient satisfaction and intent to reuse, mediated by a social rapport between chatbot counselors and users [43].
Anthropomorphizing aspects of chatbots
Specific steps may be taken to make chatbots appear more human. The use of a human name and informal language style increases the anthropomorphism of a chatbot [44]. Chatbots with both visual and verbal cues that are anthropomorphic can promote disclosure [45]. Responses from chatbots may be slowed down to appear as if they were typed by a thinking human [46]. The intentional design of trembling voices may increase empathic feelings towards a conversational agent [47]. Disclosure of shortcomings and limitations by a chatbot may increase user trust and engagement [48]. The use of humor and informal language by chatbots may help increase satisfaction after a service failure [49]. As with human conversation, the content of chatbot responses depends upon a prior message in the conversation to appear interconnected [50]. Based on response language, chatbot text can be manipulated to assume a personality that is similar to the consumer, which has a positive impact on engagement [51]. Other techniques used to increase the humanness of a chatbot include self-introduction, addressing the respondent by name, and repeating the respondent’s answer [52]. However, typos in the chatbot responses may decrease the perceived humanness [53].
Unexpected impacts of chatbots
There may also be unexpected and negative impacts when people use technology that encourages anthropomorphism. There may be differences in the style of conversation with chatbots versus other humans. Conversations with chatbots may contain more messages with fewer words per message, and include more profanity, than conversations with humans [54]. Chatbots may also use language that is obscene or offensive [55, 56]. In some cases, complex capabilities given to chatbots do not help to humanize interpersonal interactions. For example, when expressed by a chatbot, some human attributes, such as empathy or sympathy related to healthcare may feel inauthentic [57]. Some people feel uncomfortable interacting with a chatbot, experiencing negative or creepy emotions [30, 58]. For services that require empathy and understanding, such as counseling, some people put less effort into self-disclosure with a chatbot, even when embarrassed [59]. In some cases, humanistic chatbots asking sensitive questions will elicit socially desirable but less honest answers [60]. When people are angry, chatbot anthropomorphic behavior may have a negative impact [61]. Angry customers may evaluate a company that uses an anthropomorphized chatbot more severely [62]. In a 2023 survey, almost 2/3 of customers wished that companies did not use AI for customer service [63]. Additionally, chatbots may be exploitive, providing empathy and support for extreme and harmful ideologies [64].
Potential negative consequences of chatbots
Chatbots can also be used to intentionally spread misinformation. Highly anthropomorphized dialog can lead to misplaced trust when misinformation is output [65]. Chatbots may avoid admitting they do not know the answer to a question, and attempt to conceal knowledge limits [66]. Technology failures with anthropomorphized products, such as password errors, may lead to feelings of rejection, and more negative emotions than when technology is not anthropomorphized [67]. Interaction with a chatbot may increase unethical consumer behavior when it is perceived that the victim is not human [68]. Anthropomorphism of chatbots may contribute to inappropriate hype of AI capabilities [69].
There may be serious negative consequences related to chatbots for people with mental health conditions. Chatbots may create a false illusion of human help. Conversational chatbot agents may postpone human referrals for patients displaying increasing depression and suicidality, and lack access to human resources such as a suicide hotline for high risk and crises situations [70]. People with mental illness may not understand the therapeutic limitations of a chatbot in comparison to a human, such as the inability to provide care during a crisis [71]. Additionally, chatbots can provide dangerous advice, encouraging self-harm and suicide [72].
In some cases, anthropomorphic characteristics of counseling chatbots will decrease self-disclosure and help-seeking behavior, such as for people do not want to appear incompetent [73, 74]. Users who have long-term relationships with chatbots can experience psychological dependence and withdrawal [32]. Some lonely users become addicted to the relationship with chatbot companions [75]. A chatbot approximation of human behavior can be demanding, requesting emotional and social support, requiring attention, driving privacy concerns, and causing stress if the user cannot meet the chatbot’s demands [72]. Chatbots may reflect stereotypic biases regarding people with disabilities [76].
Security and privacy risks of chatbots
There are many data security and privacy risks associated with chatbots, which may be exacerbated for transactions involving medical data [77, 78]. Some security threats and vulnerabilities relate to malicious inputs, fake session terminations, access control attacks, user profiling, data breaches, and context exploitation [79, 80]. Anthropomorphism of chatbots in a customer service context increases privacy concerns along with perceived competence [81]. In commercial situations, people must trust the products and manufacturers as these interactions could potentially be used to manipulate users [82]. Despite not knowing the risks, vulnerabilities, or secret corporate instructions, many people will develop a default trust in AI [83].
Limitations
There are many limitations to this discussion. There are wide ranging ethical considerations associated with chatbots including issues related to privacy, data storage and security, data access, algorithm bias and fairness, which are especially concerning when related to mental health [84–86]. Some organizations will use chatbots deceptively, such as providing erroneous information and letting customers assume they are interacting with a human [87, 88]. International cultural differences that impact the acceptance and relation with chatbots, such as in expectations for customer service, were not discussed [89]. The use of validated and regulated chatbots in medicine was not discussed [90]. The challenges to prevent misuse of chatbots were not discussed [91, 92]. The role of chatbots in medicine, including digital mental health, was out of scope. The computer processing power needed for chatbots to provide immediate responses was not discussed.
Conclusion
Physicians need to be aware of the wide-ranging use of chatbots, and the importance of anthropomorphism in chatbot design and implementation. The interaction between humans and chatbots has become routine in multiple aspects in everyday life. The extensive use of anthropomorphism in the design and implementation of chatbots increases and influences the interactions with humans, including on mental health, and may have negative as well as beneficial effects.
Author contributions
SM and TG wrote the initial draft. All authors reviewed and approved the final manuscript.
Funding
No funding was received.
Declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
Ethical approval and consent to participate
This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.
References
- 1.Aggarwal P, McGill AL (2007) Is that car smiling at me? Schema congruity as a basis for evaluating anthropomorphized products. J Consum Res 34:468–479. https://academic.oup.com/jcr/article-abstract/34/4/468/1820244 [Google Scholar]
- 2.Epley N (2018) A Mind like mine: the exceptionally ordinary underpinnings of anthropomorphism. J Assoc Consum Res 3(4):591–598. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/699516 [Google Scholar]
- 3.Yang LW, Aggarwal P, McGill AL (2020) The 3 c’s of anthropomorphism: connection, comprehension, and competition. Consum Psychol Rev 3(1):3–19. https://myscp.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/arcp.1054 [Google Scholar]
- 4.Bhutada NS, Rollins BL, Perri IIIM (2017) Impact of animated spokes-characters in print direct-to-consumer prescription drug advertising: an elaboration likelihood model approach. Health Commun 32(4):391–400. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10410236.2016.1138382 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Muzumdar JM, Schommer JC, Hadsall RS, Huh J (2013) Effects of anthropomorphic images and narration styles in promotional messages for generic prescription drugs. Res Social Adm Pharm 9(1):60–79. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S155174111200040X [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Rauschnabel PA, Ahuvia AC (2014) You’re so lovable: anthropomorphism and brand love. J Brand Manag 21:372–395. 10.1057/bm.2014.14 [Google Scholar]
- 7.Benbya H, Pachidi S, Jarvenpaa S (2021) Special issue editorial: artificial intelligence in organizations: implications for information systems research. J Assoc Inf Syst 22(2):10. https://aisel.aisnet.org/jais/vol22/iss2/10/ [Google Scholar]
- 8.Monteith S, Glenn T, Geddes JR, Whybrow PC, Achtyes E, Bauer M (2024) Artificial intelligence and increasing misinformation. Br J Psychiatry 224(2):33–35. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/the-british-journal-of-psychiatry/article/artificial-intelligence-and-increasing-misinformation/DCCE0EB214E3D375A3006AA69FFB210D [DOI] [PubMed]
- 9.Grand View Research (2023) Global Chatbot Market Size & Outlook, 2023–2030. https://www.grandviewresearch.com/horizon/outlook/chatbot-market-size/global
- 10.Huseynov F (2023) Chatbots in digital marketing: enhanced customer experience and reduced customer service costs. Contemporary approaches of digital marketing and the role of machine intelligence, pp. 46–72. IGI Global. https://www.igi-global.com/chapter/chatbots-in-digital-marketing/327550
- 11.Viliavin R (2023) Customer support: using AI chatbots for efficiency and empathy. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesbusinessdevelopmentcouncil/2023/07/18/customer-support-using-ai-chatbots-for-efficiency-and-empathy/
- 12.Chen T, Gascó-Hernandez M, Esteve M (2024) The adoption and implementation of artificial intelligence chatbots in public organizations: evidence from US state governments. Am Rev Public Adm 54(3):255–270. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/02750740231200522 [Google Scholar]
- 13.Adamopoulou E, Moussiades L (2020) Chatbots: history, technology, and applications. Mach Learn Appl 2:100006. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666827020300062 [Google Scholar]
- 14.Neff G (2016) Talking to bots: symbiotic agency and the case of Tay. Int J Commun. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/6277
- 15.Zemčík M (2019) A brief history of chatbots. Trans Comput Sci Eng 10. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Tomas-Zemcik/publication/336734161_A_Brief_History_of_Chatbots/links/5dc1bc51a6fdcc21280872a3/A-Brief-History-of-Chatbots.pdf
- 16.Weizenbaum J (1966) ELIZA—a computer program for the study of natural Language communication between man and machine. Commun ACM 9(1):36–45. https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/365153.365168 [Google Scholar]
- 17.Skrebeca J, Kalniete P, Goldbergs J, Pitkevica L, Tihomirova D, Romanovs A (2021) Modern development trends of chatbots using artificial intelligence (ai). In 2021 62nd international scientific conference on information technology and management science of riga technical university (ITMS). IEEE, pp 1–6 https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/9615258
- 18.Sun Y, Chen J, Sundar SS (2024) Chatbot Ads with a human touch: A test of anthropomorphism, interactivity, and narrativity. J Bus Res 172:114403. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0148296323007622 [Google Scholar]
- 19.Aslam F (2023) The impact of artificial intelligence on chatbot technology: A study on the current advancements and leading innovations. Eur J Technol 7(3):62–72. https://ajpojournals.org/journals/index.php/EJT/article/view/1561 [Google Scholar]
- 20.IBM (2024) What is sentiment analysis? https://www.ibm.com/topics/sentiment-analysis
- 21.Chen J, Guo F, Ren Z, Li M, Ham J (2023) Effects of anthropomorphic design cues of chatbots on users’ perception and visual behaviors. Int J Hum Comput Interact 1–19. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10447318.2023.2193514
- 22.Nguyen M, Casper Ferm LE, Quach S, Pontes N, Thaichon P (2023) Chatbots in frontline services and customer experience: an anthropomorphism perspective. Psychol Mark 40(11):2201–2225. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/mar.21882 [Google Scholar]
- 23.Konya-Baumbach E, Biller M, von Janda S (2023) Someone out there? A study on the social presence of anthropomorphized chatbots. Comput Hum Behav 139, 107513. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0747563222003338
- 24.Sidlauskiene J, Joye Y, Auruskeviciene V (2023) AI-based chatbots in conversational commerce and their effects on product and price perceptions. Electron Mark 33(1):24. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12525-023-00633-8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Söderlund M, Oikarinen EL (2021) Service encounters with virtual agents: an examination of perceived humanness as a source of customer satisfaction. Eur J Mark 55(13):94–121. https://www.emerald.com/ejm/article-pdf/55/13/94/131243/ejm-09-2019-0748.pdf [Google Scholar]
- 26.De Visser EJ, Monfort SS, McKendrick R, Smith MA, McKnight PE, Krueger F, Parasuraman R (2016) Almost human: anthropomorphism increases trust resilience in cognitive agents. J Exp Psychol Appl 22(3):331. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2016-37452-001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Seeger AM, Heinzl A (2021) Chatbots often fail! Can anthropomorphic design mitigate trust loss in conversational agents for customer service? InECIS https://web.archive.org/web/20220801211900id_/https://aisel.aisnet.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1011&context=ecis2021_rp
- 28.Schanke S, Burtch G, Ray G (2021) Estimating the impact of humanizing customer service chatbots. Inf Syst Res 32(3):736–751. https://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/isre.2021.1015 [Google Scholar]
- 29.Uysal E, Alavi S, Bezençon V (2022) Trojan horse or useful helper? A relationship perspective on artificial intelligence assistants with humanlike features. J Acad Mark Sci 50(6):1153–1175. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11747-022-00856-9 [Google Scholar]
- 30.Dosovitsky G, Bunge EL (2021) Bonding with bot: user feedback on a chatbot for social isolation. Front Digit Health 3:735053. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/digital-health/articles/10.3389/fdgth.2021.735053/full [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Schuetzler RM, Grimes GM, Scott Giboney J (2020) The impact of chatbot conversational skill on engagement and perceived humanness. J Manag Inf Syst 37(3):875–900. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/07421222.2020.1790204 [Google Scholar]
- 32.Xie T, Pentina I, Hancock T (2023) Friend, mentor, lover: does chatbot engagement lead to psychological dependence? J Service Manage 34(4) 806 – 28. https://www.emerald.com/josm/article-abstract/34/4/806/237446/Friend-mentor-lover-does-chatbot-engagement-lead?redirectedFrom=fulltext
- 33.Sheehan B, Jin HS, Gottlieb U (2020) Customer service chatbots: anthropomorphism and adoption. J Bus Res 115:14–24. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0148296320302484?via%3Dihub [Google Scholar]
- 34.Lu Z, Min Q, Jiang L, Chen Q (2024) The effect of the anthropomorphic design of chatbots on customer switching intention when the chatbot service fails: an expectation perspective. Int J Inf Manage 76:102767. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S026840122400015X [Google Scholar]
- 35.Roy R, Naidoo V (2021) Enhancing chatbot effectiveness: the role of anthropomorphic conversational styles and time orientation. J Bus Res 126:23–34. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0148296320308808 [Google Scholar]
- 36.Cheng X, Zhang X, Cohen J, Mou J (2022) Human vs. AI: Understanding the impact of anthropomorphism on consumer response to chatbots from the perspective of trust and relationship norms. Inf Process Manag 59(3):102940. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0306457322000620 [Google Scholar]
- 37.Rapp A, Boldi A, Curti L, Perrucci A, Simeoni R (2023) How do people ascribe humanness to chatbots? An analysis of real-world human-agent interactions and a theoretical model of humanness. Int J Hum Comput Interact 1–24. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10447318.2023.2247596
- 38.Shin H, Bunosso I, Levine LR (2023) The influence of chatbot humour on consumer evaluations of services. Int J Consum Stud 47(2):545–562. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ijcs.12849 [Google Scholar]
- 39.Xie Y, Liang C, Zhou P, Jiang L (2024) Exploring the influence mechanism of chatbot-expressed humor on service satisfaction in online customer service. J Retailing Consumer Serv 76:103599. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0969698923003508 [Google Scholar]
- 40.Adam M, Wessel M, Benlian A (2021) AI-based chatbots in customer service and their effects on user compliance. Electron Mark 31(2):427–445. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12525-020-00414-7 [Google Scholar]
- 41.De Gennaro M, Krumhuber EG, Lucas G (2020) Effectiveness of an empathic chatbot in combating adverse effects of social exclusion on mood. Front Psychol 10:3061. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03061/full [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42.Lucas GM, Gratch J, King A, Morency LP (2014) It’s only a computer: virtual humans increase willingness to disclose. Comput Hum Behav 37:94–100. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0747563214002647 [Google Scholar]
- 43.Park G, Lee S, Chung J (2023) Do anthropomorphic chatbots increase counseling satisfaction and reuse intention? The moderated mediation of social rapport and social anxiety. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw 26(5):357–365. https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/abs/10.1089/cyber.2022.0157 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44.Araujo T (2018) Living up to the chatbot hype: the influence of anthropomorphic design cues and communicative agency framing on conversational agent and company perceptions. Comput Hum Behav 85:183–189. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0747563218301560 [Google Scholar]
- 45.Chen J, Li M, Ham J (2024) Different dimensions of anthropomorphic design cues: how visual appearance and conversational style influence users’ information disclosure tendency towards chatbots. Int J Hum Comput Stud 103320. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1071581924001046
- 46.Plaisance PL (2024) The danger of dishonest anthropomorphism in chatbot design. Psychol Today Jan 8, 2024. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/virtue-in-the-media-world/202401/the-danger-of-dishonest-anthropomorphism-in-chatbot-design
- 47.Efthymiou F, Hildebrand C (2023) Empathy by design: the influence of trembling AI voices on prosocial behavior. IEEE Trans Affect Comput. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/10316625
- 48.Rheu M, Shin JY, Peng W, Huh-Yoo J (2021) Systematic review: Trust-building factors and implications for conversational agent design. Int J Hum Comput Interact 37(1):81–96. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10447318.2020.1807710 [Google Scholar]
- 49.Shams G, Kim KK, Kim K (2024) Enhancing service recovery satisfaction with chatbots: the role of humor and informal Language. Int J Hosp Manag 120:103782. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S027843192400094X [Google Scholar]
- 50.Go E, Sundar SS (2019) Humanizing chatbots: the effects of visual, identity and conversational cues on humanness perceptions. Comput Hum Behav 97:304–316. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0747563219300329 [Google Scholar]
- 51.Shumanov M, Johnson L (2021) Making conversations with chatbots more personalized. Comput Hum Behav 117:106627. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0747563220303745 [Google Scholar]
- 52.Rhim J, Kwak M, Gong Y, Gweon G (2022) Application of humanization to survey chatbots: change in chatbot perception, interaction experience, and survey data quality. Comput Hum Behav 126:107034. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0747563221003575 [Google Scholar]
- 53.Westerman D, Cross AC, Lindmark PG (2019) I believe in a thing called bot: perceptions of the humanness of chatbots. Commun Stud 70(3):295–312. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10510974.2018.1557233 [Google Scholar]
- 54.Hill J, Ford WR, Farreras IG (2015) Real conversations with artificial intelligence: A comparison between human–human online conversations and human–chatbot conversations. Comput Hum Behav 49:245–250. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0747563215001247 [Google Scholar]
- 55.Park N, Jang K, Cho S, Choi J (2021) Use of offensive Language in human-artificial intelligence chatbot interaction: the effects of ethical ideology, social competence, and perceived humanlikeness. Comput Hum Behav 121:106795. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0747563221001187 [Google Scholar]
- 56.Song H, Hong J, Jung C, Chin H, Shin M, Choi Y, Choi J, Cha M (2024) Detecting Offensive Language in an Open Chatbot Platform. In Proceedings of the 2024 Joint International Conference on Computational Linguistics, Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC-COLING 2024) 4760–4771. https://aclanthology.org/2024.lrec-main.426/
- 57.Seitz L (2024) Artificial empathy in healthcare chatbots: does it feel authentic? Computers Hum Behavior: Artif Hum 2(1):100067. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949882124000276 [Google Scholar]
- 58.Rajaobelina L, Prom Tep S, Arcand M, Ricard L (2021) Creepiness: its antecedents and impact on loyalty when interacting with a chatbot. Psychol Mark 38(12):2339–2356. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/mar.21548 [Google Scholar]
- 59.Tsai WH, Lun D, Carcioppolo N, Chuan CH (2021) Human versus chatbot: Understanding the role of emotion in health marketing communication for vaccines. Psychol Mark 38(12):2377–2392. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/mar.21556 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 60.Schuetzler RM, Giboney JS, Grimes GM, Nunamaker JF Jr (2018) The influence of conversational agent embodiment and conversational relevance on socially desirable responding. Decis Support Syst 114:94–102. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167923618301404 [Google Scholar]
- 61.Crolic C, Thomaz F, Hadi R, Stephen AT (2022) Blame the bot: anthropomorphism and anger in customer–chatbot interactions. J Mark 86(1):132–148. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/00222429211045687 [Google Scholar]
- 62.Hadi R (2019) When humanizing customer service chatbots might backfire. NIM Mark Intell Rev 11(2):30–35. https://intapi.sciendo.com/pdf/10.2478/nimmir-2019-0013 [Google Scholar]
- 63.Gartner (2024) Gartner survey finds 64% of customers would prefer that companies didn’t use AI for customer service. https://www.gartner.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/2024-07-09-gartner-survey-finds-64-percent-of-customers-would-prefer-that-companies-didnt-use-ai-for-customer-service
- 64.Cuadra A, Wang M, Stein LA, Jung MF, Dell N, Estrin D, Landay JA (2024) The illusion of empathy? Notes on displays of emotion in human-computer interaction. Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1–18). https://dl.acm.org/doi/full/10.1145/3613904.3642336
- 65.Abercrombie G, Curry AC, Dinkar T, Rieser V, Talat Z (2023) Mirages: on anthropomorphism in dialogue systems. ArXiv Preprint arXiv :230509800 https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.09800
- 66.Söderlund M (2024) I do not know’: an examination of reactions to virtual agents that fail to answer the user’s questions. Int Rev Retail Distribution Consumer Res 34(2):228–250. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09593969.2023.2253003 [Google Scholar]
- 67.Lteif L, Valenzuela A (2022) The effect of anthropomorphized technology failure on the desire to connect with others. Psychol Mark 39(9):1762–1774. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/mar.21700 [Google Scholar]
- 68.Kim T, Lee H, Kim MY, Kim S, Duhachek A (2023) AI increases unethical consumer behavior due to reduced anticipatory guilt. J Acad Mark Sci 51(4):785–801. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11747-021-00832-9 [Google Scholar]
- 69.Barrow N (2024) Anthropomorphism and AI hype. AI Ethics Feb 5:1–8. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s43681-024-00454-1
- 70.Heston TF (2023) Safety of large Language models in addressing depression. Cureus 15(12). https://www.cureus.com/articles/213293-safety-of-large-language-models-in-addressing-depression#!/ [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
- 71.Khawaja Z, Bélisle-Pipon JC (2023) Your robot therapist is not your therapist: Understanding the role of AI-powered mental health chatbots. Front Digit Health 5:1278186. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/digital-health/articles/10.3389/fdgth.2023.1278186/full [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 72.Laestadius L, Bishop A, Gonzalez M, Illenčík D, Campos-Castillo C (2022) Too human and not human enough: A grounded theory analysis of mental health harms from emotional dependence on the social chatbot Replika. New Media Soc 14614448221142007. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/14614448221142007
- 73.Kang E, Kang YA (2024) Counseling chatbot design: the effect of anthropomorphic chatbot characteristics on user self-disclosure and companionship. Int J Hum Comput Interact 40(11):2781–2795. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10447318.2022.2163775 [Google Scholar]
- 74.Kim S, Zhang K, Park D (2018) Don’t want to look dumb? The role of theories of intelligence and humanlike features in online help seeking. Psychol Sci 29(2):171–180. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0956797617730595 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 75.Marriott HR, Pitardi V (2024). One is the loneliest number. Two can be as bad as one. The influence of AI Friendship apps on users’ well-being and addiction. Psychol Mar 41(1):86–101. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/mar.21899
- 76.Gadiraju V, Kane S, Dev S, Taylor A, Wang D, Denton E, Brewer R (2023) I wouldn’t say offensive but.: disability-centered perspectives on large Language models. In Proceedings of the 2023 ACM conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency. 205–216 10.1145/3593013.3593989
- 77.Li J (2023) Security implications of AI chatbots in health care. J Med Internet Res 25:e47551. https://www.jmir.org/2023/1/e47551/ [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 78.Hasal M, Nowaková J, Ahmed Saghair K, Abdulla H, Snášel V, Ogiela L (2021) Chatbots: security, privacy, data protection, and social aspects. Concurr Comput 33(19):e6426. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/cpe.6426 [Google Scholar]
- 79.Yang J, Chen YL, Por LY, Ku CS (2023) A systematic literature review of information security in chatbots. Appl Sci 3(11):6355. https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/13/11/6355 [Google Scholar]
- 80.Ye W, Li Q (2020) Chatbot security and privacy in the age of personal assistants. IEEE/ACM Symp Edge Comput (SEC) 388–393. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/9355740. Nov 12
- 81.Song M, Zhu Y, Xing X, Du J (2023) The double-edged sword effect of chatbot anthropomorphism on customer acceptance intention: the mediating roles of perceived competence and privacy concerns. Behav Inf Technol 1–23. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0144929X.2023.2285943
- 82.Seymour W, Van Kleek M (2021) Exploring interactions between trust, anthropomorphism, and relationship development in voice assistants. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction. 5(CSCW2), 1–16. https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3479515
- 83.Schneier B (2023) AI and trust. Belfer center for science and international affairs, Harvard Kennedy School, November 27, 2023. https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/ai-and-trust
- 84.Luxton DD (2020) Ethical implications of conversational agents in global public health. Bull World Health Organ 98(4):285. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7133471/ [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 85.Coghlan S, Leins K, Sheldrick S, Cheong M, Gooding P, D’Alfonso S (2023) To chat or bot to chat: Ethical issues with using chatbots in mental health. Digital health. 2023; 9, 20552076231183542. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/20552076231183542 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
- 86.Xue J, Wang YC, Wei C, Liu X, Woo J, Kuo CC (2023) Bias and fairness in chatbots: An overview. arXiv preprint. https://arxiv.org/abs/2309.08836
- 87.McGuire J, De Cremer D, Hesselbarth Y, De Schutter L, Mai KM, Van Hiel A (2023) The reputational and ethical consequences of deceptive chatbot use. Sci Rep 13(1):6246. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-41692-3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 88.Zhan X, Xu Y, Sarkadi S (2023) Deceptive AI ecosystems: The case of ChatGPT. In: Proceedings of the 5th international conference on conversational user interfaces. Jul 19 (pp. 1–6). https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3571884.3603754
- 89.Ekechi CC, Chukwurah EG, Oyeniyi LD, Okeke CD (2024) AI-infused chatbots for customer support: a cross-country evaluation of user satisfaction in the USA and the UK. Int J Manage Entrepreneurship Res 6(4):1259–1272. https://fepbl.com/index.php/ijmer/article/view/1057 [Google Scholar]
- 90.Lee J, Lee D (2023) User perception and self-disclosure towards an AI psychotherapy chatbot according to the anthropomorphism of its profile picture. Telemat Inform 2023;5:102052. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0736585323001168
- 91.Hacker P, Engel A, Mauer M (2023) Regulating ChatGPT and other large generative AI models. In: Proceedings of the 2023 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (pp. 1112–1123). https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3593013.3594067 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
- 92.Migliorini S (2024) More than words: a legal approach to the risks of commercial chatbots powered by generative artificial intelligence. Eur J Risk Regul 1–18. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/european-journal-of-risk-regulation/article/more-than-words-a-legal-approach-to-the-risks-of-commercial-chatbots-powered-by-generative-artificial-intelligence/4EB4DD9997211B81283EF7B34299E254
