Loading…

Who gets the blame for service failures? Attribution of responsibility toward robot versus human service providers and service firms

Service robots are on the rise. Technological advances in engineering, artificial intelligence, and machine learning enable robots to take over tasks traditionally carried out by humans. Despite the rapid increase in the employment of robots, there are still frequent failures in the performance of s...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Computers in human behavior 2020-12, Vol.113, p.106520, Article 106520
Main Authors: Leo, Xuying, Huh, Young Eun
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c325t-2fddff55bf82be07a98376e2a2818803102a184b87c7a5f90fb10e96f963687e3
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c325t-2fddff55bf82be07a98376e2a2818803102a184b87c7a5f90fb10e96f963687e3
container_end_page
container_issue
container_start_page 106520
container_title Computers in human behavior
container_volume 113
creator Leo, Xuying
Huh, Young Eun
description Service robots are on the rise. Technological advances in engineering, artificial intelligence, and machine learning enable robots to take over tasks traditionally carried out by humans. Despite the rapid increase in the employment of robots, there are still frequent failures in the performance of service robots. This research examines how and to what extent people attribute responsibility toward service robots in such cases of service failures compared to when humans provide the same service failures. Participants were randomly assigned to read vignettes describing a service failure either by a service robot or a human and were then asked who they thought was responsible for the service failure. The results of three experiments show that people attributed less responsibility toward a robot than a human for the service failure because people perceive robots to have less controllability over the task. However, people attributed more responsibility toward a service firm when a robot delivered a failed service than when a human delivered the same failed service. This research advances theory regarding the perceived responsibility of humans versus robots in the service sector, as well as the perceived responsibility of the firms involved. There are also important practical considerations raised by this research, such as how utilizing service robots may influence customer attitudes toward service firms. •When service fails, people attribute less responsibility toward a service provider if it is a robot rather than a human.•People perceive a robot service provider to have less control over a service outcome than a human service provider.•People attribute more blame toward a service firm when a robot delivers a failed service than when a human does.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.chb.2020.106520
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2449985732</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0747563220302727</els_id><sourcerecordid>2449985732</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c325t-2fddff55bf82be07a98376e2a2818803102a184b87c7a5f90fb10e96f963687e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9UMtKAzEUDaJgrX6Au4DrqUmmeQwupIgvENwoLkMyc2NT2klNMpXu_XBTKrpzdV_nnHs4CJ1TMqGEisvFpJ3bCSNsNwvOyAEaUSXrSoqGHaIRkVNZcVGzY3SS0oIQwjkRI_T1Ng_4HXLCeQ7YLs0KsAsRJ4gb35be-OUQIV3jWc7R2yH70OPgcNmtQ5-89UuftziHTxM7HIMNGW8gpiHh-bAy_a_SOoaN78oFm7770_dxlU7RkTPLBGc_dYxe725fbh6qp-f7x5vZU9XWjOeKua5zjnPrFLNApGlULQUwwxRVitSUMEPV1CrZSsNdQ5ylBBrhGlELJaEeo4u9bvHyMUDKehGG2JeXmk2nTaO4rFlB0T2qjSGlCE6vo1-ZuNWU6F3YeqFL2HoXtt6HXThXew4U-xsPUafWQ99C5yO0WXfB_8P-Bh2biXU</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2449985732</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Who gets the blame for service failures? Attribution of responsibility toward robot versus human service providers and service firms</title><source>ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Leo, Xuying ; Huh, Young Eun</creator><creatorcontrib>Leo, Xuying ; Huh, Young Eun</creatorcontrib><description>Service robots are on the rise. Technological advances in engineering, artificial intelligence, and machine learning enable robots to take over tasks traditionally carried out by humans. Despite the rapid increase in the employment of robots, there are still frequent failures in the performance of service robots. This research examines how and to what extent people attribute responsibility toward service robots in such cases of service failures compared to when humans provide the same service failures. Participants were randomly assigned to read vignettes describing a service failure either by a service robot or a human and were then asked who they thought was responsible for the service failure. The results of three experiments show that people attributed less responsibility toward a robot than a human for the service failure because people perceive robots to have less controllability over the task. However, people attributed more responsibility toward a service firm when a robot delivered a failed service than when a human delivered the same failed service. This research advances theory regarding the perceived responsibility of humans versus robots in the service sector, as well as the perceived responsibility of the firms involved. There are also important practical considerations raised by this research, such as how utilizing service robots may influence customer attitudes toward service firms. •When service fails, people attribute less responsibility toward a service provider if it is a robot rather than a human.•People perceive a robot service provider to have less control over a service outcome than a human service provider.•People attribute more blame toward a service firm when a robot delivers a failed service than when a human does.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0747-5632</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-7692</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2020.106520</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Elmsford: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Artificial intelligence ; Attribution theory ; Controllability ; Customer services ; Failure ; Human-robot interaction ; Machine learning ; Robots ; Service failure ; Service robot ; Service robots</subject><ispartof>Computers in human behavior, 2020-12, Vol.113, p.106520, Article 106520</ispartof><rights>2020 Elsevier Ltd</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier Science Ltd. Dec 2020</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c325t-2fddff55bf82be07a98376e2a2818803102a184b87c7a5f90fb10e96f963687e3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c325t-2fddff55bf82be07a98376e2a2818803102a184b87c7a5f90fb10e96f963687e3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Leo, Xuying</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Huh, Young Eun</creatorcontrib><title>Who gets the blame for service failures? Attribution of responsibility toward robot versus human service providers and service firms</title><title>Computers in human behavior</title><description>Service robots are on the rise. Technological advances in engineering, artificial intelligence, and machine learning enable robots to take over tasks traditionally carried out by humans. Despite the rapid increase in the employment of robots, there are still frequent failures in the performance of service robots. This research examines how and to what extent people attribute responsibility toward service robots in such cases of service failures compared to when humans provide the same service failures. Participants were randomly assigned to read vignettes describing a service failure either by a service robot or a human and were then asked who they thought was responsible for the service failure. The results of three experiments show that people attributed less responsibility toward a robot than a human for the service failure because people perceive robots to have less controllability over the task. However, people attributed more responsibility toward a service firm when a robot delivered a failed service than when a human delivered the same failed service. This research advances theory regarding the perceived responsibility of humans versus robots in the service sector, as well as the perceived responsibility of the firms involved. There are also important practical considerations raised by this research, such as how utilizing service robots may influence customer attitudes toward service firms. •When service fails, people attribute less responsibility toward a service provider if it is a robot rather than a human.•People perceive a robot service provider to have less control over a service outcome than a human service provider.•People attribute more blame toward a service firm when a robot delivers a failed service than when a human does.</description><subject>Artificial intelligence</subject><subject>Attribution theory</subject><subject>Controllability</subject><subject>Customer services</subject><subject>Failure</subject><subject>Human-robot interaction</subject><subject>Machine learning</subject><subject>Robots</subject><subject>Service failure</subject><subject>Service robot</subject><subject>Service robots</subject><issn>0747-5632</issn><issn>1873-7692</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9UMtKAzEUDaJgrX6Au4DrqUmmeQwupIgvENwoLkMyc2NT2klNMpXu_XBTKrpzdV_nnHs4CJ1TMqGEisvFpJ3bCSNsNwvOyAEaUSXrSoqGHaIRkVNZcVGzY3SS0oIQwjkRI_T1Ng_4HXLCeQ7YLs0KsAsRJ4gb35be-OUQIV3jWc7R2yH70OPgcNmtQ5-89UuftziHTxM7HIMNGW8gpiHh-bAy_a_SOoaN78oFm7770_dxlU7RkTPLBGc_dYxe725fbh6qp-f7x5vZU9XWjOeKua5zjnPrFLNApGlULQUwwxRVitSUMEPV1CrZSsNdQ5ylBBrhGlELJaEeo4u9bvHyMUDKehGG2JeXmk2nTaO4rFlB0T2qjSGlCE6vo1-ZuNWU6F3YeqFL2HoXtt6HXThXew4U-xsPUafWQ99C5yO0WXfB_8P-Bh2biXU</recordid><startdate>202012</startdate><enddate>202012</enddate><creator>Leo, Xuying</creator><creator>Huh, Young Eun</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>Elsevier Science Ltd</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7SC</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>L~C</scope><scope>L~D</scope></search><sort><creationdate>202012</creationdate><title>Who gets the blame for service failures? Attribution of responsibility toward robot versus human service providers and service firms</title><author>Leo, Xuying ; Huh, Young Eun</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c325t-2fddff55bf82be07a98376e2a2818803102a184b87c7a5f90fb10e96f963687e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Artificial intelligence</topic><topic>Attribution theory</topic><topic>Controllability</topic><topic>Customer services</topic><topic>Failure</topic><topic>Human-robot interaction</topic><topic>Machine learning</topic><topic>Robots</topic><topic>Service failure</topic><topic>Service robot</topic><topic>Service robots</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Leo, Xuying</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Huh, Young Eun</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts – Academic</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Professional</collection><jtitle>Computers in human behavior</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Leo, Xuying</au><au>Huh, Young Eun</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Who gets the blame for service failures? Attribution of responsibility toward robot versus human service providers and service firms</atitle><jtitle>Computers in human behavior</jtitle><date>2020-12</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>113</volume><spage>106520</spage><pages>106520-</pages><artnum>106520</artnum><issn>0747-5632</issn><eissn>1873-7692</eissn><abstract>Service robots are on the rise. Technological advances in engineering, artificial intelligence, and machine learning enable robots to take over tasks traditionally carried out by humans. Despite the rapid increase in the employment of robots, there are still frequent failures in the performance of service robots. This research examines how and to what extent people attribute responsibility toward service robots in such cases of service failures compared to when humans provide the same service failures. Participants were randomly assigned to read vignettes describing a service failure either by a service robot or a human and were then asked who they thought was responsible for the service failure. The results of three experiments show that people attributed less responsibility toward a robot than a human for the service failure because people perceive robots to have less controllability over the task. However, people attributed more responsibility toward a service firm when a robot delivered a failed service than when a human delivered the same failed service. This research advances theory regarding the perceived responsibility of humans versus robots in the service sector, as well as the perceived responsibility of the firms involved. There are also important practical considerations raised by this research, such as how utilizing service robots may influence customer attitudes toward service firms. •When service fails, people attribute less responsibility toward a service provider if it is a robot rather than a human.•People perceive a robot service provider to have less control over a service outcome than a human service provider.•People attribute more blame toward a service firm when a robot delivers a failed service than when a human does.</abstract><cop>Elmsford</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><doi>10.1016/j.chb.2020.106520</doi></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0747-5632
ispartof Computers in human behavior, 2020-12, Vol.113, p.106520, Article 106520
issn 0747-5632
1873-7692
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2449985732
source ScienceDirect Journals
subjects Artificial intelligence
Attribution theory
Controllability
Customer services
Failure
Human-robot interaction
Machine learning
Robots
Service failure
Service robot
Service robots
title Who gets the blame for service failures? Attribution of responsibility toward robot versus human service providers and service firms
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-24T19%3A40%3A52IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Who%20gets%20the%20blame%20for%20service%20failures?%20Attribution%20of%20responsibility%20toward%20robot%20versus%20human%20service%20providers%20and%20service%20firms&rft.jtitle=Computers%20in%20human%20behavior&rft.au=Leo,%20Xuying&rft.date=2020-12&rft.volume=113&rft.spage=106520&rft.pages=106520-&rft.artnum=106520&rft.issn=0747-5632&rft.eissn=1873-7692&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106520&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2449985732%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c325t-2fddff55bf82be07a98376e2a2818803102a184b87c7a5f90fb10e96f963687e3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2449985732&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true