Abstract
Robots have been widely used in social production, especially in the service industry. As their use continues to spread, their anthropomorphic design, which increases a robot’s efficiency and effectiveness in terms of human–robot interaction, becomes increasingly important. Based on grounded theory, this study encodes one-to-one in-depth interview data, and constructs a theoretical model of service robots’ anthropomorphism. The results show that service robots’ anthropomorphism comprises four dimensions: mission completion (core), user sensory experience (external manifestation), artificial intelligence (guarantee), and unique human characteristics (promotion). Meanwhile, a linkage between the dimensions and factors is proposed. This study thus systematically elucidates service robots’ anthropomorphism. The findings provide some implications for practitioners to design anthropomorphic robots and develop tools for evaluating anthropomorphism, corresponding factors and potential influences.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aggarwal, P., & McGill, A. L. (2007). Is that car smiling at me? Schema congruity as a basis for evaluating anthropomorphized products. Journal of Consumer Research, 34(4), 468–479. https://doi.org/10.1086/518544
Arunachalam, S., Bahadir, S. C., Bharadwaj, S. G., & Guesalaga, R. (2019). New product introductions for low-income consumers in emerging markets. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 48(5), 914–940. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-019-00648-8
Bartneck, C., & Kuli´c, D., Croft, E., & Zoghbi, S. (2009). Measurement instruments for the anthropomorphism, animacy, likeability, perceived intelligence, and perceived safety of robots. International Journal of Social Robotics, 1, 71–81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-008-0001-3
Blöcher, K., & Alt, R. (2021). AI and robotics in the european restaurant sector: Assessing potentials for process innovation in a high-contact service industry. Electronic Markets, 31(3), 529–551. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-020-00443-2
Blut, M., Wang, C., Wünderlich, N. V., & Brock, C. (2021). Understanding anthropomorphism in service provision: A meta-analysis of physical robots, chatbots, and other AI. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 49(4), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-020-00762-y
Čaić, M., Mahr, D., & Oderkerken-Schröder, G. (2019). Value of social robots in services: Social cognition perspective. Journal of Services Marketing, 33(4), 463–478. https://doi.org/10.1108/jsm-02-2018-0080
Castro-González, Á., Admoni, H., & Scassellati, B. (2016). Effects of form and motion on judgments of social robots׳ animacy, likability, trustworthiness and unpleasantness. Journal of Human Computer Studies, 90, 27–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2016.02.004
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2015). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (4th ed.). SAGE Publications Inc.
Cousineau, M. J. (2019). Limiting the discourse of computer and robot anthropomorphism in a research group. Ai & Society, 34(4), 877–888. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-018-0836-6
Doorn, J. V., Mende, M., Noble, S. M., Hulland, J., Ostrom, A. L., Grewal, D., & Andrew Petersen, J. (2017). Domo arigato MR. Roboto: Emergence of automated social presence in organizational frontlines and customers’ service experiences. Journal of service research, 20(1), 43–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670516679272
Epley, N., Waytz, A., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2007). On seeing human: A three-factor theory of anthropomorphism. Psychological Review, 114(4), 864–886. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.114.4.864
Eyssel, F., Kuchenbrandt, D., & Bobinger, S. (2011). Effects of anticipated human-robot interaction and predictability of robot behavior on perceptions of anthropomorphism. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Human Robot Interaction, Lausanne, Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1145/1957656.1957673
Fan, A., Wu, L., & Mattila, A. S. (2016). Does anthropomorphism influence customers’ switching intentions in the self-service technology failure context? Journal of Services Marketing, 30(7), 713–723. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSM-07-2015-0225
Fan, A., Wu, L., Miao, L., & Mattila, A. S. (2019). When does technology anthropomorphism help alleviate customer dissatisfaction after a service failure? – The moderating role of consumer technology self-efficacy and interdependent self-construal. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 29(3), 269–290. https://doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2019.1639095
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behaviour: An introduction to theory and research. Addison-Wesley Pub. Co.
Fussell, S. R., Kiesler, S., Setlock, L. D., & Yew, V. (2008). How people anthropomorphize robots. Proceedings of the 3rd ACM/IEEE international conference on Human robot interaction. https://doi.org/10.1145/1349822.1349842
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory : Strategies for qualitative research. Aldine Pub. Co.
Gursoy, D., Chi, O. H., Lu, L., & Nunkoo, R. (2019). Consumers acceptance of artificially intelligent device use in service delivery. International Journal of Information Management, 49, 157–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.03.008
Guthrie, S. E. (1993). Faces in the clouds : A new theory of religion. Oxford University Press.
Huang, M.-H., & Rust, R. T. (2018). Artificial intelligence in service. Journal of Service Research, 21(2), 155–172. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670517752459
Kiesler, S., & Goetz, J. (2002). Mental models of robotic assistants. Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. https://doi.org/10.1145/506486.506491
Knowledge Sourcing Intelligence (2018). Social robot market: forecasts from 2018 to 2023. URL: https://www.researchandmarkets.com. Accessed 23 May 2020.
Lin, H., Chi, O. H., & Gursoy, D. (2019). Antecedents of customers’ acceptance of artificially intelligent robotic device use in hospitality services. Journal of Hospitality Marketing and Management, 29(5), 530–549. https://doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2020.1685053
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage Publications.
Lua, L., Cai, R., & Gursoy, D. (2019). Developing and validating a service robot integration willingness scale. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 80, 36–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2019.01.005
MacInnis, D. J., & Folkes, V. S. (2017). Humanizing brands: When brands seem to be like me, part of me, and in a relationship with me. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 27(3), 355–374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2016.12.003
Malodia, S., Gupta, S., & Jaiswal, A. K. (2019). Reverse innovation: A conceptual framework. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 48, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-019-00703-4
Manthiou, A., Klaus, P., Kuppelwieser, V. G., & Reeves, W. (2021). Man vs machine: Examining the three themes of service robotics in tourism and hospitality. Electronic Markets, 31(3), 511–527. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-020-00434-3
Mende, M., Scott, M. L., Doorn, J., & v., Grewal, D., & Shanks, I. (2019). Service robots rising: How humanoid robots influence service experiences and elicit compensatory consumer responses. Journal of Marketing Research, 56(4), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022243718822827
Miles, M. B. (1994). Qualitative data analysis : An expanded sourcebook. Sage Publications.
Minato, T., Shimada, M., Ishiguro, H., & Itakura, S. (2004). Development of an android robot for studying human-robot interaction. Innovations in Applied Artificial Intelligence, 3029, 424–434. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-24677-0_44
Mirnig, N., Stollnberger, G., Miksch, M., Stadler, S., Giuliani, M., & Tscheligi, M. (2017). To err is robot: How humans assess and act toward an erroneous social robot. Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 4, 21. https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2017.00021
Mori, M. (1970). The uncanny valley. Energy, 7(2), 98–100. https://doi.org/10.1109/MRA.2012.2192811
Mourey, J. A., Olson, J. G., & Yoon, C. (2017). Products as pals: Engaging with anthropomorphic products mitigates the effects of social exclusion. Journal of Consumer Research, 44(2), 414–431. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucx038
Novak, T. P., & Hoffman, D. L. (2019). Relationship journeys in the internet of things: A new framework for understanding interactions between consumers and smart objects. Social Science Electronic Publishing, 47(2), 216–237. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-018-0608-3
Nunes, J. C., Ordanini, A., & Giambastiani, G. (2021). The concept of authenticity: What it means to consumers. Journal of Marketing, 85(4), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022242921997081
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). SAGE Publications Inc.
Pillai, R., & Sivathanu, B. (2020). Adoption of AI-based chatbots for hospitality and tourism. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 32(10), 3199–3226. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijchm-04-2020-0259
Pinxteren, M. M. E. V., Pluymaekers, M., & Lemmink, J. G. A. M. (2020). Human-like communication in conversational agents: A literature review and research agenda. Journal of Service Management, 31(2), 203–225. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOSM-06-2019-0175
Pinxteren, M. M. E., & v., Wetzels, R. W. H., Rüger, J., Pluymaekers, M., & Wetzels, M. (2019). Trust in humanoid robots: Implications for services marketing. Journal of Services Marketing, 33(4), 507–518. https://doi.org/10.1108/jsm-01-2018-0045
Powers, A., & Kiesler, S. (2006). The advisor robot: Tracing people’s mental model from a robot's physical attributes. Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGCHI/SIGART Conference on Human-Robot Interaction. https://doi.org/10.1145/1121241.1121280
Qiu, H., Li, M., Shu, B., & Bai, B. (2020). Enhancing hospitality experience with service robots: The mediating role of rapport building. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 29(3), 247–268. https://doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2019.1645073
Richards, D., & Bransky, K. (2014). Forgetmenot: What and how users expect intelligent virtual agents to recall and forget personal conversational content. International Journal of Human - Computer Studies, 72(5), 460–476. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2014.01.005
Ruijten, P. A. M., Bouten, D. H. L., Rouschop, D. C. J., Ham, J., & Midden, C. J. H. (2014). Introducing a rasch-type anthropomorphism scale. Proceedings of the 2014 ACM/IEEE international conference on Human-robot interaction. https://doi.org/10.1145/2559636.2559825
Rust, R. T., & Cooil, B. (1994). Reliability measures for qualitative data: Theory and implications. Journal of Marketing Research, 31(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224379403100101
Söderlund, M. (1998). Customer satisfaction and its consequences on customer behaviour revisited: The impact of different levels of satisfaction on word-of-mouth, feedback to the supplier and loyalty. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 9(2), 169–188. https://doi.org/10.1108/09564239810210532
Tan, H., Wang, D., & Sabanovic, S. (2018). Projecting life onto robots: The effects of cultural factors and design type on multi-level evaluations of robot anthropomorphism. Proceedings of the 27th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2018.8525584
Thomaz, F., Salge, C., Karahanna, E., & Hulland, J. (2020). Learning from the dark web: Leveraging conversational agents in the era of hyper-privacy to enhance marketing. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 48(1), 43–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-019-00704-3
Tian, L., Li, H., Wang, Q., Du, X., Tao, J., Chong, J., Thalmann, N. M. & Zheng, J. (2021). Towards complex and continuous manipulation: A gesture based anthropomorphic robotic hand design. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, 6(3), 5461–5468. https://doi.org/10.1109/lra.2021.3076960
Tuli, K., Kohli, A. K., & Bharadwaj, S. G. (2007). Rethinking customer solutions: From product bundles to relational processes. Journal of Marketing, 71(3), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.71.3.1
Waytz, A., Heafner, J., & Epley, N. (2014). The mind in the machine: Anthropomorphism increases trust in an autonomous vehicle. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 52(3), 113–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2014.01.005
Wirtz, J., Patterson, P. G., Kunz, W. H., Gruber, T., Lu, V. N., Paluch, S., & Martins, A. (2018). Brave new world: Service robots in the frontline. Journal of Service Management, 29(5), 907–931. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOSM-04-2018-0119
Wu, Q., Zhu, T., & Zhang, S. (2020). Campus canteen takeaway robot based on Raspberry Pi. Journal of Physics Conference, 1693(1), 6588–6596. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1693/1/012226
Xiao, L., & Kumar, V. (2021). Robotics for customer service: A useful complement or an ultimate substitute? Journal of Service Research, 24(1), 9–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670519878881
Yu, C.-E. (2020). Humanlike robots as employees in the hotel industry: Thematic content analysis of online reviews. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 29(1), 22–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2019.1592733
Złotowski, J., Strasser, E., & Bartneck, C. (2014). Dimensions of anthropomorphism: From humanness to humanlikeness. Proceedings of the 2014 ACM/IEEE international conference on Human-robot interaction. https://doi.org/10.1145/2559636.2559679
Funding
The work was substantially supported by Anhui Philosophy and Social Science Planning Project (AHSKY2017D24).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Responsible Editor: Doug Vogel.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendix 1
Appendix 1
Topic 1 related questions are as follows:
-
(1)
“The first question is, do you have any experience of dining in restaurants served by service robots?”
-
(2)
“Or have you seen intelligent robots provide services in other service scenarios, such as hotels, shopping malls, and airports?”
-
(3)
“Have you ever observed what an intelligent robot looks like?”
-
(4)
“What was your mood when you saw it (the intelligent robot)?”
-
(5)
“Have you interacted with it? For example, talking to it or operating its display.”
-
(6)
“Do you think that in this same situation, the presence or absence of this intelligent robot would have an impact on your perceived service quality?”
-
(7)
“In what ways do you think this intelligent robot is anthropomorphic?”
-
(8)
“Do you think the degree of anthropomorphism of this intelligent robot meets your expectations? That is, do you think its anthropomorphism is excessive, appropriate, or insufficient?”
-
(9)
“What do you think can be improved, in relation to the anthropomorphism of intelligent robots?”
Topic 2 related questions are as follows:
-
(10)
“Haidilao hot pot opened an experience store with intelligent robots to provide services in Beijing. Here are some related pictures. Figure
Fig. 2 
Meal delivery robot
2 is a meal delivery robot. After the customer orders the food, the back chef will put the corresponding dishes on this tray. The intelligent robot has wheels under it, and it will run to the customer’s table, but the customer needs to stand up and move the dishes on the tray to the table. Figure
Fig. 3 
Welcome robot
3 is a welcome robot. Because dining in Haidilao hot pot usually requires queuing by number, after you tell the welcome robot your number, it will lead you to the corresponding seat. By the way, if an obstacle or person is blocking its way during the journey, the robot will say ‘Excuse me, please let me through, I am working.’”
-
(11)
“If you were asked to be the designer of these intelligent robots, if there were customers who said they wanted these intelligent robots to be more anthropomorphic, regardless of whether the technology can be realized but only considering the needs of customers, what kind of design would you create?”
-
(12)
“Are there more design aspects to consider?”
Topic 3 related questions are as follows:
-
(13)
“Here are some words that we have summarized from related literature, websites, and previous interviews that may be able to describe the anthropomorphism of intelligent robots in service scenarios. Please select the six words that you think are the most important for the anthropomorphism of the intelligent robots according to your understanding, and rank them with the most important being No. 1.”
-
(14)
“Can you briefly explain your reasons for this ranking?”
-
(15)
“In the previous interview, someone had a different point of view than you. He/she thought… is the most important. What do you think?”
-
(16)
“…This item is rarely selected (as an important factor in the anthropomorphism of intelligent robots). What do you think is the uniqueness of your thinking?”
-
(17)
“The last question is, if you were asked to choose one of these words that you think is the least important to the anthropomorphism of intelligent robots, which one would you choose?”
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Zhang, S., Lin, X., Li, X. et al. Service robots’ anthropomorphism: dimensions, factors and internal relationships. Electron Markets 32, 277–295 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-022-00527-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-022-00527-1
Keywords
- Service robot
- Anthropomorphism
- In-depth interview
- Grounded theory
- Word frequency analysis
- Theoretical model