5359 
4845机器人拟人化在提高消费者信任感和亲密度等方面发挥着重要的作用。因此，随着人工智能技术的逐步成熟，越来越多的企业引进了拟人化服务机器人。本文探讨了服务机器人外观拟人化与消费者使用意愿之间的关系，并剖析了外观拟人化程度对于不同社会阶层消费者的差异性影响。本文通过3个实验，首次提出了服务机器人外形拟人化程度对于消费者使用意愿的倒U形影响以及感知智能在其中的驱动作用，验证了消费者所处的社会阶层对其感知智能和使用意愿的影响。具体而言，低社会阶层的消费者对外观拟人化程度较低的服务机器人的感知智能水平较高，其使用意愿也较高；而高社会阶层的消费者对外观拟人化程度较高的服务机器人的感知智能水平较高，其使用意愿也较高。本研究为企业在提供智能服务的过程中如何更好地了解消费者的心理感知、减少服务机器人应用的负面效应和扩大服务机器人应用的正面效应提供了有效的指导。
服务机器人拟人化对消费者使用意愿的影响机理研究——社会阶层的调节作用
摘要
参考文献
1 曹忠鹏, 靳成雯, 马菁, 等. 自助服务技术中虚拟代理人呈现对顾客准备的影响研究[J]. 南开管理评论,2020, 23(4): 73-83. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1008-3448.2020.04.008
8 张雁冰, 吕巍, 张佳宇. AI营销研究的挑战和展望[J]. 管理科学,2019, 32(5): 75-86. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1007-368X.2019.05.024
10 Adler N E, Epel E S, Castellazzo G, et al. Relationship of subjective and objective social status with psychological and physiological functioning: Preliminary data in healthy, White women[J]. Health Psychology,2000, 19(6): 586-592. DOI:10.1037/0278-6133.19.6.586
11 Agarwal R, Karahanna E. Time flies when you're having fun: Cognitive absorption and beliefs about information technology usage[J]. MIS Quarterly,2000, 24(4): 665-694. DOI:10.2307/3250951
12 Aydin A L, Ullrich J, Siem B, et al. The effect of social class on agency and communion: Reconciling identity-based and rank-based perspectives[J]. Social Psychological and Personality Science,2019, 10(6): 735-745. DOI:10.1177/1948550618785162
13 Bartneck C, Kulić D, Croft E, et al. Measurement instruments for the anthropomorphism, animacy, likeability, perceived intelligence, and perceived safety of robots[J]. International Journal of Social Robotics,2009, 1(1): 71-81. DOI:10.1007/s12369-008-0001-3
14 Bartneck C, Reichenbach J, Carpenter J. Use of praise and punishment in human-robot collaborative teams[A]. ROMAN 2006-the 15th IEEE international symposium on robot and human interactive communication[C]. Hatfield: IEEE, 2006.
15 Bellezza S, Berger J. Trickle-round signals: When low status is mixed with high[J]. Journal of Consumer Research,2020, 47(1): 100-127. DOI:10.1093/jcr/ucz049
16 Belmi P, Laurin K. Who wants to get to the top? Class and lay theories about power[J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,2016, 111(4): 505-529. DOI:10.1037/pspi0000060
17 Čaić M, Odekerken-Schröder G, Mahr D. Service robots: Value co-creation and co-destruction in elderly care networks[J]. Journal of Service Management,2018, 29(2): 178-205. DOI:10.1108/JOSM-07-2017-0179
18 Chandler J, Schwarz N. Use does not wear ragged the fabric of friendship: Thinking of objects as alive makes people less willing to replace them[J]. Journal of Consumer Psychology,2010, 20(2): 138-145. DOI:10.1016/j.jcps.2009.12.008
19 Côté S, Gyurak A, Levenson R W. The ability to regulate emotion is associated with greater well-being, income, and socioeconomic status[J]. Emotion,2010, 10(6): 923-933. DOI:10.1037/a0021156
20 Damiano L, Dumouchel P. Anthropomorphism in human–robot co-evolution[J]. Frontiers in Psychology,2018, 9: 468. DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00468
21 Dennett D C. Kinds of minds: Toward an understanding of consciousness[M]. New York: Basic Books, 1996.
22 Eom K, Kim H S, Sherman D K. Social class, control, and action: Socioeconomic status differences in antecedents of support for pro-environmental action[J]. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,2018, 77: 60-75. DOI:10.1016/j.jesp.2018.03.009
23 Epley N. A mind like mine: The exceptionally ordinary underpinnings of anthropomorphism[J]. Journal of the Association for Consumer Research,2018, 3(4): 591-598. DOI:10.1086/699516
24 Epley N, Waytz A, Cacioppo J T. On seeing human: A three-factor theory of anthropomorphism[J]. Psychological Review,2007, 114(4): 864-886. DOI:10.1037/0033-295X.114.4.864
25 Fiske S T, Cuddy A J C, Glick P. Universal dimensions of social cognition: Warmth and competence[J]. Trends in Cognitive Sciences,2007, 11(2): 77-83. DOI:10.1016/j.tics.2006.11.005
26 Gray K, Wegner D M. Feeling robots and human zombies: Mind perception and the uncanny valley[J]. Cognition,2012, 125(1): 125-130. DOI:10.1016/j.cognition.2012.06.007
27 Hanson D, Olney A, Prilliman S, et al. Upending the uncanny valley[A]. Proceedings of the 20th national conference on artificial intelligence[C]. Pittsburgh: AAAI Press, 2005.
28 Haring K S, Silvera-Tawil D, Takahashi T, et al. How people perceive different robot types: A direct comparison of an android, humanoid, and non-biomimetic robot[A]. Proceedings of the 8th international conference on knowledge and smart technology (KST)[C]. Chiang Mai: IEEE, 2016.
29 Johnson S E, Richeson J A, Finkel E J. Middle class and marginal? Socioeconomic status, stigma, and self-regulation at an elite university[J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,2011, 100(5): 838-852. DOI:10.1037/a0021956
30 Kim H Y, McGill A L. Minions for the rich? Financial status changes how consumers see products with anthropomorphic features[J]. Journal of Consumer Research,2018, 45(2): 429-450. DOI:10.1093/jcr/ucy006
31 Kim S, Chen R P, Zhang K. Anthropomorphized helpers undermine autonomy and enjoyment in computer games[J]. Journal of Consumer Research,2016, 43(2): 282-302. DOI:10.1093/jcr/ucw016
32 Kim S Y, Schmitt B H, Thalmann N M. Eliza in the uncanny valley: Anthropomorphizing consumer robots increases their perceived warmth but decreases liking[J]. Marketing Letters,2019, 30(1): 1-12. DOI:10.1007/s11002-019-09485-9
33 Kraus M W, Keltner D. Signs of socioeconomic status: A thin-slicing approach[J]. Psychological Science,2009, 20(1): 99-106. DOI:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02251.x
34 Kraus M W, Piff P K, Keltner D. Social class as culture: The convergence of resources and rank in the social realm[J]. Current Directions in Psychological Science,2011, 20(4): 246-250. DOI:10.1177/0963721411414654
35 Kraus M W, Piff P K, Mendoza-Denton R, et al. Social class, solipsism, and contextualism: How the rich are different from the poor[J]. Psychological Review,2012, 119(3): 546-572. DOI:10.1037/a0028756
36 Leite I, Pereira A, Mascarenhas S, et al. The influence of empathy in human–robot relations[J]. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies,2013, 71(3): 250-260. DOI:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2012.09.005
37 MacDorman K F, Ishiguro H. The uncanny advantage of using androids in cognitive and social science research[J]. Interaction Studies,2006, 7(3): 297-337. DOI:10.1075/is.7.3.03mac
38 Marr J C, Thau S. Falling from great (and not-so-great) heights: How initial status position influences performance after status loss[J]. Academy of Management Journal,2014, 57(1): 223-248. DOI:10.5465/amj.2011.0909
39 Mathur M B, Reichling D B. Navigating a social world with robot partners: A quantitative cartography of the Uncanny Valley[J]. Cognition,2016, 146: 22-32. DOI:10.1016/j.cognition.2015.09.008
40 Mende M, Scott M L, van Doorn J, et al. Service robots rising: How humanoid robots influence service experiences and elicit compensatory consumer responses[J]. Journal of Marketing Research,2019, 56(4): 535-556. DOI:10.1177/0022243718822827
41 Mori M. The uncanny valley[J]. Energy,1970, 7(4): 33-35.
42 Ng W, Diener E. What matters to the rich and the poor? Subjective well-being, financial satisfaction, and postmaterialist needs across the world[J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,2014, 107(2): 326-338. DOI:10.1037/a0036856
43 Olson J G, McFerran B, Morales A C, et al. Wealth and welfare: Divergent moral reactions to ethical consumer choices[J]. Journal of Consumer Research,2016, 42(6): 879-896. DOI:10.1093/jcr/ucv096
44 Piff P K, Kraus M W, Côté S, et al. Having less, giving more: The influence of social class on prosocial behavior[J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,2010, 99(5): 771-784. DOI:10.1037/a0020092
45 Reczek R W, Haws K L, Summers C A. Lucky loyalty: The effect of consumer effort on predictions of randomly determined marketing outcomes[J]. Journal of Consumer Research,2014, 41(4): 1065-1077. DOI:10.1086/678052
46 Rehm M, Krogsager A. Negative affect in human robot interaction—Impoliteness in unexpected encounters with robots[A]. Proceedings of 2013 IEEE RO-MAN[C]. Gyeongju: IEEE, 2013.
47 Yan L, Keh H T, Chen J M. Assimilating and differentiating: The curvilinear effect of social class on green consumption[J]. Journal of Consumer Research,2021, 47(6): 914-936. DOI:10.1093/jcr/ucaa041
48 Yogeeswaran K, Złotowski J, Livingstone M, et al. The interactive effects of robot anthropomorphism and robot ability on perceived threat and support for robotics research[J]. Journal of Human-Robot Interaction,2016, 5(2): 29-47. DOI:10.5898/JHRI.5.2.Yogeeswaran
49 Zhou X Y, Kim S, Wang L L. Money helps when money feels: Money anthropomorphism increases charitable giving[J]. Journal of Consumer Research,2019, 45(5): 953-972. DOI:10.1093/jcr/ucy012
引用本文
张仪, 王永贵. 服务机器人拟人化对消费者使用意愿的影响机理研究——社会阶层的调节作用[J]. 外国经济与管理, 2022, 44(3): 3-18.
导出参考文献，格式为：
