MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403484367 · doi:10.3390/jrfm17100470

Enhancing Financial Advisory Services with GenAI: Consumer Perceptions and Attitudes Through Service-Dominant Logic and Artificial Intelligence Device Use Acceptance Perspectives

2024· article· en· W4403484367 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Qin Yang, Young‐Chan Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicTechnology Adoption and User Behaviour
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerceptionFinancial servicesService (business)Advisory committeeService-dominant logicBusinessMarketingKnowledge managementFinancePsychologyComputer scienceEconomicsManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Financial institutions are currently undergoing a significant shift from traditional robo-advisors to more advanced generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) technologies. This transformation has motivated us to investigate the factors influencing consumer responses to GenAI-driven financial advice. Despite extensive research on the adoption of robo-advisors, there is a gap in our understanding of the specific contributors to, and differences in, consumer attitudes and reactions to GenAI-based financial guidance. This study aims to address this gap by analyzing the impact of personalized investment suggestions, human-like empathy, and the continuous improvement of GenAI-provided financial advice on its authenticity as perceived by consumers, their utilitarian attitude toward the use of GenAI for financial advice, and their reactions to GenAI-generated financial suggestions. A comprehensive research model was developed based on service-dominant logic (SDL) and Artificial Intelligence Device Use Acceptance (AIDUA) frameworks. The model was subsequently employed in a structural equation modeling (SEM) analysis of survey data from 822 mobile banking users. The findings indicate that personalized investment suggestions, human-like empathy, and the continuous improvement of GenAI’s recommendations positively influence consumers’ perception of its authenticity. Moreover, we discovered a positive correlation between utilitarian attitudes and perceived authenticity, which ultimately influences consumers’ responses to GenAI’s financial advisory solutions. This is manifested as either a willingness to engage or resistance to communication. This study contributes to the research on GenAI-powered financial services and underscores the significance of integrating GenAI financial guidance into the routine operations of financial institutions. Our work builds upon previous research on robo-advisors, offering practical insights for financial institutions seeking to leverage GenAI-driven technologies to enhance their services and customer experiences.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.747
Threshold uncertainty score0.653

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.063
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.284 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourFrench-language works237,207