Knowledge Management Research (지식경영연구)

The Knowledge Management Society of Korea (한국지식경영학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The Impact of Customer Regulatory Focus and Familiarity with Generative AI-based Chatbot on Self-Disclosure Intentions: Focusing on Privacy Calculus Theory

고객의 조절초점 성향과 생성형 AI 기반 챗봇에 대한 친숙도가 개인정보 제공의도에 미치는 영향: 프라이버시 계산이론을 중심으로

  • Received : 2024.04.23
  • Accepted : 2024.06.18
  • Published : 2024.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Increasing concerns regarding personal data privacy have complicated the acquisition of customer data through online marketing. This study investigates factors influencing customers' willingness to disclose information via a generative AI-based chatbot. Drawing on privacy calculus theory and regulatory focus theory, we explore how customer regulatory focus and familiarity with the generative AI-based chatbot shape disclosure intentions. Our study, involving 473 participants, reveals that low familiarity with the chatbot leads individuals with a prevention focus to perceive higher privacy risks and lower perceived usefulness compared to those with a promotion focus. However, with high familiarity, these differences diminish. Moreover, individuals with a promotion focus show a greater inclination to disclose information when familiarity with the generative AI-based chatbot is low, whereas this regulatory focus does not significantly impact disclosure intentions when familiarity is high. Perceived privacy risks mediate these relationships, underscoring the importance of understanding familiarity with the generative AI-based chatbot in facilitating personal information disclosure.

최근 개인정보 공유에 대한 사람들의 우려가 높아지면서 온라인 마케팅을 통해 고객 데이터를 수집하는 것이 점점 어려워지고 있다. 본 연구에서는 생성형 AI 기반 챗봇을 이용하여 고객의 정보 제공의도를 향상시키기 위한 효과적인 요인을 탐색하고자 한다. 보다 구체적으로, 프라이버시 계산이론과 조절초점 이론을 바탕으로 고객의 성향과 생성형 AI 챗봇에 대한 친숙도가 고객의 개인정보 제공의도에 어떻게 영향을 미치는지 살펴보았다. 473명의 참가자를 이용한 실험 결과에 따르면 생성형 AI 기반 챗봇에 대한 친숙도가 낮은 경우, 예방초점 성향의 참가자가 향상초점 성향의 참가자보다 프라이버시 위험을 높게 인식하고 유용성을 더 낮게 지각한 반면, 챗봇에 대한 친숙도가 높은 경우, 예방초점과 향상초점 참가자 간의 프라이버시 위험과 인지된 유용성에는 차이가 나타나지 않았다. 개인정보 제공의도 역시 생성형 AI 기반 챗봇에 대한 친숙도가 낮은 경우, 향상초점 성향의 참가자가 예방초점 성향의 참가자보다 개인정보 제공의도가 더 높게 나타난 반면 챗봇에 대한 친숙도가 높은 경우, 예방초점과 향상초점 참가자 간의 개인정보 제공의도에는 차이가 나타나지 않았다. 이는 개인정보 제공의도에 대한 프라이버시 위험에 의해 매개되었다. 본 연구는 고객의 개인정보 공개를 촉진하기 위해서는 고객의 내재적 성향과 함께 생성형 AI 기반 챗봇에 대한 친숙도를 함께 고려해야 한다는 시사점을 제공하며 더불어 생성형 AI 챗봇에 대한 관련 연구 분야에 기여한다.

Keywords

References

  1. 김기진, 변광인, 양정미 (2011). 스마트폰 외식관련 어플리케이션의 사용용이성이 이용의도에 미치는 영향에 관한 연구: 친숙도와 유용성의 매개효과를 중심으로: 친숙도와 유용성의 매개효과를 중심으로. 호텔경영학연구, 20(6), 61-81.
  2. 김영두, 하영원 (2011). 조절초점과 기대수익: 위험 정보 구성이 금융투자상품의 선택에 미치는 영향. 소비자학연구, 22(4), 103-134.
  3. 김은진, 박재진 (2016). 조절초점 이론과 TAM 모델의 결합을 통한 해외직구 소비자 행동 연구. 사회과학연구, 27(4), 47-66.
  4. 김준희, 하규수 (2012), 기업 모바일 소셜네트워크서비스 특성요인이 사용자 만족과 지속적 사용의도에 미치는 영향에 관한 연구. 디지털융복합연구, 10(8), 135-148. https://doi.org/10.14400/JDPM.2012.10.8.135
  5. 박경원, 김창수, 안현숙 (2017). 모바일 커머스 품질이 고객만족과 재구매의도에 미치는 영향. 한국정보기술학회논문지, 15(7), 149-162.
  6. 박은영 (2023). 챗봇의 의인화와 이용자의 성향이 개인정보 제공의도에 미치는 영향. 고객만족경영연구, 25(2), 1-21.
  7. 박지원, 이형룡 (2020). 패스트푸드점 고객의 키오스크 사용이 수용의도와 지속사용의도에 미치는 영향: UTAUT2 모형의 적용 및 친숙도의 조절효과를 중심으로. 관광학연구, 44(2), 207-228.
  8. 소현정, 곽기영 (2021). 모바일 헬스 앱 사용의 도 동기요인: 조절초점성향과 프라이버시계산이론을 중심으로. 지식경영연구, 22(2), 33-53. https://doi.org/10.15813/KMR.2021.22.2.003
  9. 양윤, 김신혜 (2011). 메시지 틀, 조절초점, 지각된 위험이 광고메시지 태도와 구매의도에 미치는 영향. 광고학연구, 22(1), 257-276.
  10. 유양호 (2022). 호텔의 언택트 서비스 특성, 수용의도, 관계지속의도 간의 영향관계 연구: 친숙도의 조절효과를 중심으로. 관광레저연구, 34(7), 169-186.
  11. 이문성 (2003). 인터넷 쇼핑몰 친숙도, 특성평가, 상품조회 및 구매의도의 상호관련성에 관한 연구. 산학경영연구, 16, 99-121.
  12. 이성호, 서문교 (2017). 사이버강의 수용에 영향을 미치는 요인에 대한 연구: 사회적 영향과 기술 친숙도를 중심으로. 경영교육연구, 32(6), 85-102.
  13. 이애리, 안효영 (2016). 핀테크 사용에 대한 정보프라이버시 염려와 이용자 저항에 대한 연구: 조절초점성향과의 상호작용 효과 고찰. 정보보호학회논문지, 26(1), 209-226. https://doi.org/10.13089/JKIISC.2016.26.1.209
  14. 정경수, 노미진 (2005). 모바일 비즈니스 유형과 비즈니스 특성이 모바일 인터넷 비즈니스 수용에 미치는 영향 분석. 한국경영정보학회 학술대회, 1096-1103.
  15. 한진영, 김형진, 손인수 (2021). 프라이버시에 대한 감정이 프라이버시 보호 행동에 미치는 영향: 카드사 개인정보 유출사건을 중심으로. 인터넷전자상거래연구, 21(3), 145-161.
  16. Aaker, D. A. (2009). Managing brand equity: Capitalizing on the value of a brand name. NY: Simon and Schuster.
  17. Adam, M., Wessel, M., & Benlian, A. (2021). AI-based chatbots in customer service and their effects on user compliance. Electronic Markets, 31(2), 427-445. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-020-00414-7
  18. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
  19. Alba Joseph, W., & Hutchinson Wesley, J. (1987). Dimensions of Consumer Expertise, Journal of Consumer Research, 13(4), 411-454. https://doi.org/10.1086/209080
  20. Anderson, C. L., & Agarwal, R. (2011). The digitization of healthcare: Boundary risks, emotion, and consumer willingness to disclose personal health information. Information Systems Research, 22(3), 469-490. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1100.0335
  21. Barak, A., & Gluck-Ofri, O. (2007). Degree and reciprocity of self-disclosure in online forums. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 10(3), 407-417. https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2006.9938
  22. Boerman, S. C., Kruikemeier, S., & Zuiderveen Borgesius, F. J. (2021). Exploring motivations for online privacy protection behavior: Insights from panel data. Communication Research, 48(7), 953-977. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650218800915
  23. Bowling, A. (2005). Mode of questionnaire administration can have serious effects on data quality. Journal of Public Health, 27(3), 281-291. https://doi.org/10.1093/pubmed/fdi031
  24. Choi, S., & Zhou, J. (2023). Inducing consumers' self-disclosure through the fit between Chatbot's interaction styles and regulatory focus. Journal of Business Research, 166, 114-127.
  25. Cordell, V. V. (1997). Consumer knowledge measures as predictors in product evaluation. Psychology & Marketing, 14(3), 241-260. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1520-6793(199705)14:3<241::AID-MAR3>3.0.CO;2-B
  26. Crowe, E., & Higgins, E. T. (1997). Regulatory focus and strategic inclinations: Promotion and prevention in decision-making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 69(2), 117-132. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1996.2675
  27. Culnan, M. J., & Bies, R. J. (2003). Consumer privacy: Balancing economic and justice considerations. Journal of Social Issues, 59(2), 323-342. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-4560.00067
  28. Dinev, T., & Hart, P. (2006). An extended privacy calculus model for e-commerce transactions. Information Systems Research, 17(1), 61-80. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1060.0080
  29. Flavian, C., Guinaliu, M., & Gurrea, R. (2006). The influence of familiarity and usability on loyalty to online journalistic services: The role of user experience. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 13(5), 363-375. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2005.11.003
  30. Gefen, D., & Straub, D. W. (2004). Consumer trust in B2C e-Commerce and the importance of social presence: Experiments in e-Products and e-Services. Omega, 32(6), 407-424. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2004.01.006
  31. Hassan, M., Mydock III, S., Pervan, S. J., & Kortt, M. (2016). Facebook, self-disclosure, and brand-mediated intimacy: Identifying value creating behaviors. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 15(6), 493-502. https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.1586
  32. Haws, K. L., Dholakia, U. M., & Bearden, W. O. (2010). An assessment of chronic regulatory focus measures. Journal of Marketing Research, 47(5), 967-982. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.47.5.967
  33. Hayes, A. F. (2018). Partial, conditional, and moderated moderated mediation: And Communication Quantification, inference, interpretation. Monographs, 85(1), 4-40. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2017.1352100
  34. Higgins, E. T. (1998). Promotion and prevention: Regulatory focus as a motivational principle. In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 30, pp. 1-46). Cambridge, Massachusetts: Academic Press.
  35. Jiang, Z., Heng, C. S., & Choi, B. C. (2013). Research note-privacy concerns and privacy-protective behavior in synchronous online social interactions. Information Systems Research, 24(3), 579-595. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1120.0441
  36. Kees, J., Burton, S., & Tangari, A. H. (2010). The impact of regulatory focus, temporal orientation, and fit on consumer responses to health-related advertising. Journal of Advertising, 39(1), 19-34. https://doi.org/10.2753/JOA0091-3367390102
  37. Krasnova, H., & Veltri, N. F. (2010, January). Privacy calculus on social networking sites: Explorative evidence from Germany and USA. In 2010 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 1-10). IEEE.
  38. Lee, A.Y., & Aaker, J. L. (2004). Bringing the frame into focus: The influence of regulatory fit on processing fluency and persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(2), 205-218. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.86.2.205
  39. Li, H., Sarathy, R., & Xu, H. (2010). Understanding situational online information disclosure as a privacy calculus. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 51(1), 62-71.
  40. Ling, E. C., Tussyadiah, I., Tuomi, A., Stienmetz, J., & Ioannou, A. (2021). Factors influencing users' adoption and use of conversational agents: A systematic review. Psychology & Marketing, 38(7), 1031-1051. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21491
  41. Mamat, M., Li, C. C., Ismail, N. N. H. N., Ismail, A., Razak, N. H. S. A., & Haron, M. S. (2013). Exploring the Role of Familiarity and Customer Involvement in Influencing Customer Service Experience.
  42. Mick, D. G., & Fournier, S. (1998). Paradoxes of technology: Consumer cognizance, emotions, and coping strategies. Journal of Consumer Research, 25(2), 123-143. https://doi.org/10.1086/209531
  43. Mourali, M., Bockenholt, U., & Laroche, M. (2007). Compromise and attraction effects under prevention and promotion motivations. Journal of Consumer Research, 34(2), 234-247. https://doi.org/10.1086/519151
  44. Park, C. W., & Lessig, V. P. (1981). Familiarity and its impact on consumer decision biases and heuristics. Journal of Consumer Research, 8(2), 223-230. https://doi.org/10.1086/208859
  45. Pentina, I., Zhang, L., Bata, H., & Chen, Y. (2016). Exploring privacy paradox in information-sensitive mobile app adoption: A cross-cultural comparison. Computers in Human Behavior, 65, 409-419. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.09.005
  46. Pizzi, G., Vannucci, V., Mazzoli, V., & Donvito, R. (2023). I, chatbot! the impact of anthropomorphism and gaze direction on willingness to disclose personal information and behavioral intentions. Psychology & Marketing, 40(7), 1372-1387. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21813
  47. Przegalinska, A., Ciechanowski, L., Stroz, A., Gloor, P., & Mazurek, G. (2019). In bot we trust: A new methodology of chatbot performance measures. Business Horizons, 62(6), 785-797. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2019.08.005
  48. Ruppel, E. K., Gross, C., Stoll, A., Peck, B. S., Allen, M., & Kim, S. Y. (2017). Reflecting on connecting: Meta-analysis of differences between computer-mediated and face-to-face self-disclosure. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 22(1), 18-34. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12179
  49. Ryu, G., Suk, K., Yoon, S. O., & Park, J. (2014). The underlying mechanism of self-regulatory focus impact on compromise choice. Journal of Business Research, 67(10), 2056-2063. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.04.013
  50. Jain, S. P., Lindsey, C., Agrawal, N., & Maheswaran, D. (2007). For better or for worse? Valenced comparative frames and regulatory focus. Journal of Consumer Research, 34(1), 57-65. https://doi.org/10.1086/513046
  51. Smith, H. J., Dinev, T., & Xu, H. (2011). Information privacy research: An interdisciplinary review. MIS Quarterly, 35(4), 989-1015. https://doi.org/10.2307/41409970
  52. Sprecher, S., & Hendrick, S. S. (2004). Self-disclosure in intimate relationships: Associations with individual and relationship characteristics over time. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 23(6), 857-877. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.23.6.857.54803
  53. Thomaz, F., Salge, C., Karahanna, E., & Hulland, J. (2020). Learning from the Dark Web: leveraging conversational agents in the era of hyper-privacy to enhance marketing. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 48, 43-63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-019-00704-3
  54. Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23(1), 3-43. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365096023001001
  55. Werth, L., & Foerster, J. (2007). How regulatory focus influences consumer behavior. European Journal of Social Psychology, 37(1), 33-51. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.343
  56. Xie, Y., & Keh, H. T. (2016). Taming the blame game: Using promotion programs to counter product-harm crises. Journal of Advertising, 45(2), 211-226. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2015.1134362
  57. Xu, H., Dinev, T., Smith, J., & Hart, P. (2011). Information privacy concerns: Linking individual perceptions with institutional privacy assurances. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 12(12), 1.
  58. Xu, H., Luo, X. R., Carroll, J. M., & Rosson, M. B. (2011). The personalization privacy paradox: An exploratory study of decision making process for location-aware marketing. Decision Support Systems, 51(1), 42-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2010.11.017
  59. Xu, H., Teo, H. H., Tan, B. C., & Agarwal, R. (2009). The role of push-pull technology in privacy calculus: The case of location-based services. Journal of Management Information Systems, 26(3), 135-174. https://doi.org/10.2753/MIS0742-1222260305
  60. Zajonc, R. B. (1968). Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9(2, Pt. 2), 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0025848
  61. Zhao, X., Lynch Jr, J. G., & Chen, Q. (2010). Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(2), 197-206. https://doi.org/10.1086/651257
  62. Zhou, R., & Pham, M. T. (2004). Promotion and prevention across mental accounts: When financial products dictate consumers& investment goals. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(1), 125-135. https://doi.org/10.1086/383429
  63. Zou, L. W., & Chan, R. Y. (2019). Why and when do consumers perform green behaviors? An examination of regulatory focus and ethical ideology. Journal of Business Research, 94, 113-127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.04.006
  64. Business Wire (2022). The worldwide chatbot industry is expected to reach $22.9 billion by 2030 -ResearchAndMarkets.com. https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20220916005448/en/The-Worldwide-Chatbot-Industry-is-Expected-to-Reach-22.9-Billion-by-2030---ResearchAndMarkets.com.