Skip to main content
. 2026 May 29;17:1827571. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1827571

Table 3.

Behavior measurement scale.

Variable Item Content References
Interaction quality IQ1 I feel a smooth interaction with the virtual companion. Recommended scale sources: Borsci et al. (2022), BUS-15/Chatbot Usability Scale—conversational efficiency, functionality and time response for chatbot interaction quality; Chen et al. (2022), AICSQ—AI chatbot service quality, especially responsiveness/understanding/personalization; Pelau et al. (2021)—interaction quality and empathy in AI acceptance. IQ5 may also draw on Schmidmaier et al. (2024), PETS—emotional responsiveness/understanding.
IQ2 The virtual companion responds quickly.
IQ3 I feel that the content of conversations with the virtual companion is natural.
IQ4 The virtual companion can understand my needs accurately.
IQ5 The virtual companion’s emotional responses make me feel understood.
Visual appeal VA1 The virtual companion’s appearance design is highly appealing to me. Recommended scale sources: Moshagen and Thielsch (2010), VisAWI—visual aesthetics dimensions of simplicity, diversity, colorfulness and craftsmanship; Lavie and Tractinsky (2004)—perceived visual aesthetics of websites, classical and expressive aesthetics. Suitable for avatar appearance, style, interface aesthetics, color and visual delight.
VA2 I like the virtual companion’s image and style.
VA3 The virtual companion’s interface design is aesthetically pleasing and easy to understand.
VA4 The virtual companion’s visual effects bring me a sense of delight.
VA5 I’m satisfied with the color and overall appearance design of the virtual companion.
Perceived personalization PP1 The virtual companion can accurately recognize the emotions I express. Recommended scale sources: Schmidmaier et al. (2024), Perceived Empathy of Technology Scale (PETS)—emotional responsiveness and understanding/trust items such as understanding needs/goals and responding to mental/emotional states; Fan and Poole (2006)—personalization in information systems: what/to whom/who personalizes; Chen et al. (2022), AICSQ—personalized/relevant AI chatbot service. This construct is best named perceived empathic personalization.
PP2 The virtual companion can make appropriate responses based on my emotional state.
PP3 I perceive an emotional resonance from the virtual companion.
PP4 The virtual companion’s responses make me feel understood.
PP5 I feel an emotional comfort through interactions with the virtual companion.
Intelligent adaptability IA1 The virtual companion can adjust its functions based on my past behaviors. Recommended scale sources: Fan and Poole (2006)—personalization implementation choices: content, interface, functionality and channel; Chen et al. (2022), AICSQ—AI chatbot service quality attributes and personalized/relevant service; Chen et al. (2023)—AI chatbot service quality attributes affecting perceived value, trust, satisfaction and loyalty. Adapt for behavior history, emotional state, personality/preferences and tailored suggestions.
IA2 The virtual companion can tailor its interaction style according to my emotional state and needs.
IA3 The virtual companion has adapted to my personality and preferences.
IA4 I feel that the virtual companion can adjust its response approach at appropriate moments.
IA5 The virtual companion can provide content and suggestions aligning with my specific needs.
Sensory experience SE1 The virtual companion’s visual effects bring me a sense of pleasure. Recommended scale sources: Brakus et al. (2009)—sensory dimension of brand experience; Schmitt (1999a, 1999b)—SENSE experiential module; Hone and Graham (2000), SASSI—subjective assessment of speech system interfaces for voice/speech interaction, likeability and response qualities. Suitable for visual effects and auditory/voice experience.
SE2 The virtual companion’s voice sounds natural.
SE3 I enjoy the visual effects during my interactions with the virtual companion.
SE4 The virtual companion’s voice offers me a great auditory experience.
SE5 The virtual companion’s design fully meets my expectations in both visual and auditory aspects.
Emotional experience EX1 I feel happy in the interaction with the virtual companion. Recommended scale sources: Brakus et al. (2009)—affective dimension of brand experience; Schmitt (1999a, 1999b)—FEEL experiential module; Schmidmaier et al. (2024), PETS—emotional responsiveness of technology. For loneliness relief, De Freitas et al. (2024/2025) on AI companions reducing loneliness can be used as contextual support.
EX2 The virtual companion makes me feel cared for.
EX3 I’m satisfied with the virtual companion’s emotional responses.
EX4 The virtual companion’s interactions provide me with emotional comfort.
EX5 My interactions with the virtual companion effectively alleviate my feelings of loneliness.
Thinking experience TE1 I feel excited and curious about the interaction with the virtual companion. Recommended scale sources: Brakus et al. (2009)—intellectual dimension of brand experience; Schmitt (1999a, 1999b)—THINK experiential module, curiosity, creative cognition and problem-solving; Laugwitz et al. (2008), UEQ—stimulation/novelty items may supplement curiosity and cognitive novelty.
TE2 The content provided by the virtual companion sparks more thought and contemplation in me.
TE3 I often receive creative suggestions when interacting with the virtual companion.
TE4 The interactions with the virtual companion bring me new cognitive experiences.
TE5 I’m truly amazed by the virtual companion’s intelligence level and thinking ability.
Action experience AE1 I feel that the virtual companion’s way of interaction makes me more actively engaged in the process. Recommended scale sources: Brakus et al. (2009)—behavioral dimension of brand experience; Schmitt (1999a, 1999b)—ACT experiential module, physical behaviors, lifestyles and interactions. Suitable for active engagement, proactivity, daily tasks and activity participation.
AE2 The interaction with the virtual companion motivates me to participate in more activities.
AE3 The virtual companion’s feedback enhances my intention to engage in physical activities or tasks.
AE4 I think the interactions with the virtual companion make me more proactive.
AE5 The functions offered by the virtual companion prompt me to be more involved in daily tasks.
Relational experience RE1 I feel a sense of belonging when interacting with the virtual companion. Recommended scale sources: Schmitt (1999a, 1999b)—RELATE experiential module; Nysveen et al. (2013)—relational/social experience in service brand experience; Lee and Robbins (1995)—Social Connectedness Scale for belonging/connectedness; McMillan and Chavis (1986)—sense of community theory for belonging, membership and shared emotional connection.
RE2 The virtual companion makes me feel that I’m a part of a certain community.
RE3 I think the virtual companion enables me to resonate more with others.
RE4 My interactions with the virtual companion evoke a feeling of cultural recognition in me.
RE5 The virtual companion’s social function makes me feel more connected when I’m alone.
Behavioral intention BI1 I have the intention to continue using the virtual companion. Recommended scale sources: Venkatesh et al. (2003), UTAUT—behavioral intention to use technology; Bhattacherjee (2001), IS continuance intention—continued use; Zeithaml et al. (1996)—behavioral consequences of service quality, including recommendation, positive word of mouth and purchase/repurchase intention.
BI2 I plan to purchase relevant services associated with the virtual companion in the future.
BI3 I’d like to recommend the virtual companion to my family or friends.
BI4 I would consider buying or trying new virtual companion products if any.
BI5 I’d like to use the virtual companion in my daily life.