MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415265136 · doi:10.1108/jhtt-11-2024-0777

Crossing the innovation chasm: when and how to deploy service robots and facilitate customer adoption at restaurants

2025· article· en· W4415265136 on OpenAlex
Yaou Hu, Hyounae Min

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in Service Interactions
Canadian institutionsThompson Rivers University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Service (business)Sample (material)RobotVariance (accounting)PerceptionThematic analysisCustomer satisfaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose This research aims to investigate when and how restaurants can cross the innovation chasm in adopting service robots in both front-of-house and back-of-house operations. Specifically, it explores customer responses to varying levels of robot deployment, ranging from fully human-operated to fully automated services, across different restaurant types based on cuisine and thematic elements. Design/methodology/approach It employs two experiments to evaluate customer perceptions of authenticity, quality, fit and patronage intention under different service configurations. These configurations are examined within the context of local cuisine restaurants, fast-food establishments and futuristic-themed dining settings. The research sample consists of adults from the United States, ranging in age from 18 to 83. Multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was conducted to analyze the data. Findings The results reveal that local cuisine restaurants receive higher ratings in authenticity, quality, fit and patronage intention with fully human-operated services. In contrast, fast-food and futuristic-themed restaurants achieve comparable fit evaluations across human-operated, robot-involved and fully automated service configurations. Within futuristic-themed contexts, human-operated and robot-involved services receive comparable ratings for authenticity and patronage intention. However, when robots are responsible for cooking or when service is fully automated, human-operated services are perceived as higher in quality, with some advantage also observed in authenticity and patronage intention. Practical implications The findings guide restaurant operators in optimizing service robot integration strategies to align with customer expectations across diverse dining contexts. Social implications The research sheds light on the evolving interplay between technology and human interaction in dining, contributing to broader discussions on automation’s societal impact. Originality/value This research addresses the gap in understanding when and how to deploy service robots to facilitate customer adoption. It provides insights into optimal deployment levels to bridge the ‘innovation chasm’ in service robot adoption across different restaurant contexts.

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.

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)0.000
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 score0.624
Threshold uncertainty score0.340

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.250 · 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