Sociable robots or focused speakers? Transforming customer experience with communication style and embodiment type in smart home devices adoption
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The rising demand for AI-powered smart home solutions has produced a recent surge in the adoption of smart home devices (SHDs). SHDs are uniquely situated within private, personal environments, and understanding the impact of device design on users’ parasocial relationship, privacy perceptions, and overall adoption is crucial; however, the literature lacks a satisfactory exploration of this essential facet of integrating intelligent devices into everyday living. This study addresses this deficit by analysing the nuanced interplay between device design features and user adoption intentions. An online experiment was conducted using a 2 (communication style: task-oriented vs. social-oriented) × 3 (embodiment type: application voice vs. virtual animation vs. physical robot) between-subjects design (N = 297). The findings indicate that SHDs employing a social-oriented communication style, while promoting stronger parasocial interactions, are simultaneously correlated with increased perceptions of privacy risk when compared to those utilising a task-oriented communication style. The more embodied the SHDs, the stronger the perceived parasocial interaction. Furthermore, higher perceived privacy risks negatively affect purchase intention. The findings provide novel insights into the design of SHDs that not only address privacy concerns but also create positive user experiences in IoT-based smart homes, thereby fostering long-term adoption.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".