Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 78 (2024) 103779

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jretconser

Informational or emotional? Exploring the relative effects of chatbots’

self-recovery strategies on consumer satisfaction
Cheng Zhou a, Qian Chang b, *
a
Business and Tourism School, Sichuan Agricultural University, 288, Jianshe Road, Dujiangyan, 611,830, China
b
College of Management, Sichuan Agricultural University, 211, Huimin Road, Chengdu, 611,130, China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The rapid development of artificial intelligence technology has enabled chatbots to perform human-like service
Chatbots’ self-recovery strategies work. Chatbots commonly fail in service due to their limitations. However, previous research has simply focused
Informational self-Recovery on the difference between self-recovery and human recovery, and the details of self-recovery have largely been
Emotional self-recovery
overlooked. This study attempts to classify chatbots’ self-recovery strategies and elucidate their relative impact
Anthropomorphic level
Perceived competence and warmth
on consumer satisfaction. Drawing on social support theory, this study proposes two types of self-recovery
Consumer satisfaction strategies, informational self-recovery and emotional self-recovery. Meanwhile, this study further details con­
sumer satisfaction from quality and attitude. The results of three scenario-based experiments reveal that infor­
mational self-recovery has a more substantial effect on consumer quality satisfaction than emotional self-
recovery, while emotional self-recovery has a greater effect on consumer attitude satisfaction than informa­
tional self-recovery. Further, the anthropomorphic level of chatbots’ self-recovery also positively moderates the
relative relationship. The underlying mechanisms suggest that perceived competence partially mediates the
relationship between informational self-recovery and consumer quality satisfaction and that perceived warmth
partially mediates the relationship between emotional self-recovery and consumer attitude satisfaction. In
addition, this study implies that an informational self-recovery strategy is well-suited to the context of service
process failure, whereas an emotional self-recovery strategy is better adopted in the service outcome failure
context. This study provides new insights into chatbots’ self-recovery strategies in response to service failure and
offers implications to service providers of chatbots to leverage different self-recovery strategies to improve
consumer satisfaction.

1. Introduction users in making reservations. However, it failed to accurately under­

With the development of artificial intelligence (AI) technology, a
growing number of companies have employed AI-enabled chatbots to
perform their online service tasks (Wamba et al., 2021). Such chatbots
are computer programs that use AI algorithms to simulate human-like
conversations in a chat format (Wirtz et al., 2018). Through complex
algorithms, chatbots can analyze and understand patterns in consumer
interactions. This allows them to provide seamless, more accurate and
relevant responses, and personalized interactions to improve consumer
satisfaction (Wirtz et al., 2018).
However, no technology is perfect, and chatbot service failure is
equally common during the service process (Lei et al., 2021; Xing et al.,
2022). For example, Facebook released a chatbot called “M” as part of its
Messenger app. M was designed to provide recommendations and assist
stand and respond to user requests, leading to frustration among users
(Chaves and Gerosa, 2021). The service failure may result in potentially
serious consequences, such as customer dissatisfaction (Honora et al.,
2022), negative reputation (Crisafulli and Singh, 2017), and continuous
use of chatbots’ service (Kuang et al., 2022). Therefore, service recovery
has been considered a critical effort to turn service failure into positive
outcomes and improve consumer satisfaction (Kuo and Wu, 2012). In
the context of chatbots, self-recovery and human recovery are the two
main recovery strategies after service failure (Xing et al., 2022).
Self-recovery means that chatbots provide instructions to consumers
through predetermined algorithms after service failure (Ngai et al.,
2021). It highlights non-human intervention involved in the process of
service recovery. In contrast, human recovery requires human em­
ployees to use subjective thoughts to deal with service failure. Compared

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: mincheng1017@163.com (C. Zhou), changqian@sicau.edu.cn (Q. Chang).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2024.103779
Received 28 October 2023; Received in revised form 20 February 2024; Accepted 22 February 2024
Available online 7 March 2024
0969-6989/© 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
C. Zhou and Q. Chang
to human recovery, self-recovery is more time-efficient and less costly
(Luo et al., 2019); for this reason, self-recovery is widely used. However,
previous research has only explored the difference between
self-recovery and human recovery. Few studies have provided a new
perspective on what are self-recovery strategies and investigated their
relative impact on consumer satisfaction after service failure. Chatbots
may take different self-recovery strategies after service failure to alle­
viate negative outcomes as much as possible. For example, chatbots can
provide additional instructions to help consumers solve their problems,
or they can also provide comfort to mitigate consumers’ frustration after
service failure.
In addition, consumer satisfaction is the measure of how satisfied
consumers are with the products, services, and overall experience pro­
vided by a business (Shokouhyar et al., 2020). It is crucial for businesses
to prioritize consumer satisfaction as it directly impacts loyalty, repeat
business, and positive word-of-mouth (Popp and Woratschek, 2017).
Service recovery involves addressing and resolving consumer com­
plaints or issues in a timely and effective manner after service failure,
with the goal of restoring consumer satisfaction and maintaining a
positive consumer relationship. Therefore, consumer satisfaction is an
important evaluation for service recovery after service failure (Song
et al., 2022). By proactively addressing and resolving service failures,
chatbots can showcase their commitment to consumer satisfaction in the
long run, potentially gaining an edge over rivals (Jones et al., 2022). In
fact, consumer satisfaction can be obtained across various dimensions.
Previous studies on healthcare have indicated that the improvement of
medical-related information can easily increase patients’ service quality
satisfaction (Liu et al., 2022). Physicians’ emotional care, such as
comfort and empathy, can significantly improve patients’ service atti­
tude satisfaction (Liu et al., 2023a). Existing literature pays less atten­
tion to the details of consumer satisfaction in the context of service
recovery. Since service failure may drive consumer dissatisfaction,
chatbots need to take different self-recovery strategies to improve con­
sumer satisfaction. Consumers’ satisfaction varies when faced with
different self-recovery strategies; for example, they have a higher level
of quality satisfaction of the informational support provided by chat­
bots’ self-recovery, rather than with the attitude satisfaction. Accord­
ingly, further research is warranted on how consumers’ satisfaction
varies with different self-recovery strategies employed by chatbots after
service failure.
Finally, previous studies have shown that anthropomorphism of AI-
enabled agents is beneficial to consumer evaluation (Cheng et al.,
2022; Schanke et al., 2021). Anthropomorphism refers to the
human-like characteristics that AI-enabled agents exhibit during the
human-AI interaction (Cheng et al., 2022). Nowadays, chatbots are
believed to play a human role in various service scenarios, and they are
naturally expected to provide services as human-like as possible (Shee­
han et al., 2020). In other words, consumers want chatbots to show a
high level of anthropomorphism. Existing literature has demonstrated
the importance of anthropomorphic characteristics of AI artifacts in
influencing consumer evaluation (Castelo et al., 2019; Um et al., 2020).
In the current study, self-recovery is conducted by chatbots themselves
without human intervention. Thus, the effect of self-recovery strategies
may depend on consumers’ perception of anthropomorphic levels. As
prior research reported (Nordheim et al., 2019), high levels of anthro­
pomorphism required AI-enabled agents for consumers’ trust building.
However, there is little research on the role of anthropomorphism in the
context of service recovery.
Based on these arguments, this study aims to understand the
following research questions: (1) What are the strategies of chatbots’ self-
recovery after service failure? (2) How do different self-recovery strategies
influence consumer satisfaction? (3) Does the anthropomorphic level of
chatbots moderate the relative impact of self-recovery strategies on consumer
satisfaction?
2
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 78 (2024) 103779
2. Literature review
2.1. Chatbot service failure
AI-enabled service is a technology driven by complex algorithms that
can fulfill the requests of consumers (Xing et al., 2022). It mimics human
action and minimizes human involvement during the service process.
Currently, chatbot is a typical AI-enabled service designed to simulate
human conversation and conversationally interact with consumers
(Chaves and Gerosa, 2021). However, even human-enabled service is
not perfect, let alone AI-enabled services like chatbots. Accordingly,
chatbot service failure is common (Sharifi and Aghazadeh, 2016). For
example, ChatGPT, a generative service given a prompt or input from
users, represents a significant milestone in AI technology. However,
service failure can also occur with ChatGPT, such as providing incorrect
or nonsensical responses, and exhibiting biased behavior.
Unlike traditional service failure, chatbot service failure refers to a
situation where a chatbot fails to perform its intended function or
deliver the expected service (Liu et al., 2023b). It occurs when there is a
deviation from the desired outcome or when the service does not meet
the requirements or expectations of users, resulting in disruption, errors,
or inadequate performance. Chatbot service failure can be manifested in
various forms, such as incorrect or misleading information, system
crashes, slow response time, inability to understand user input, biased or
unfair decision-making, privacy breach, or security vulnerability
(Janssen et al., 2022). Nowadays, many types of service failure are
classified. In terms of service requirements (Sparks and Browning,
2010), core service failure means that the service fails to meet the basic
requests of consumers, while interactive service failure means that the
service attitude is deficient. In terms of service stages (Smith et al.,
1999), outcome failure means that the service fails to meet consumers’
expectations, while process failure refers to inadequate service delivery.
The impact of chatbot service failure can be significant, leading to
consumer dissatisfaction, negative WOM spread (Crisafulli and Singh,
2017), and reuse intention (Van Vaerenbergh et al., 2019). Therefore,
the self-recovery of chatbots is a key recovery strategy to alleviate the
negative outcome of service failure and change consumers’ evaluations.
2.2. Service self-recovery
Service recovery means that “service providers take some actions to
mitigate dissatisfaction and complaints of consumers after service fail­
ure” (Spreng et al., 1995). Such actions include apology, compensation,
and restoration. It can turn a negative outcome into a positive one, and
ultimately strengthen customers’ loyalty (Xing et al., 2022). Similarly,
chatbot self-recovery means that a chatbot autonomously provides
human-like responses to consumers without human intervention when
service failure occurs (Song et al., 2022). It involves the ability of
chatbots to learn from Internet data and improve responses based on
past interactions with users (Suta et al., 2020).
Currently, self-recovery and human recovery are the two main types
of service recovery. Scholars have explored the effects of them in
different contexts of service failure. For example, in the context of
chatbots, consumers prefer to speak more highly of self-recovery than
human recovery (Song et al., 2022). Xing et al. (2022) pointed out that
self-recovery positively affected consumers’ perception level of gover­
nance. According to previous research, service involvement in
self-recovery is a critical recovery strategy after service failure to
improve consumer satisfaction. However, the existing literature simply
compares the impact of self-recovery and human recovery on consumer
forgiveness of service failure. There is a lack of studies that attempt to
investigate different types of self-recovery and further examine their
relative impact on consumer satisfaction.
C. Zhou and Q. Chang
2.3. Consumer satisfaction
Consumer satisfaction refers to the level of customers’ contentment
or fulfillment after purchasing and using a product or service (Parker
and Mathews, 2001). It is an indicator of how well a service fulfills the
needs and desires of customers. Consumer satisfaction is affected by
various aspects, such as quality, price, customer service level, brand
reputation, and overall customer experience (Shokouhyar et al., 2020).
When consumers are satisfied, they are more likely to become loyal and
continue to support the product or service. To ensure consumer satis­
faction, providers of the product or service must understand consumers’
preferences, needs, and expectations. In addition, it is also crucial to
effectively manage customers’ possible complaints to maintain and
enhance consumer satisfaction.
Previous studies have suggested that attitude satisfaction and quality
satisfaction are two different aspects that contribute to consumer satis­
faction (Prentice et al., 2020; Uzir et al., 2021). Specifically, attitude
satisfaction refers to a consumer’s perception of the service provider’s
behavior, friendliness, and willingness to help (Xu et al., 2007). It en­
compasses the consumer’s emotional experience during the interaction,
such as feeling valued, respected, and understood. Attitude satisfaction
is often influenced by factors including the service provider’s commu­
nication skills, compassion for the consumer’s needs, and ability to
address any concerns or complaints. On the other hand, quality satis­
faction refers to a customer’s perception of quality, reliability, func­
tionality and durability of the product or service (Jun et al., 2004). It
involves meeting or exceeding the consumer’s expectations for perfor­
mance or features of the service. Quality satisfaction can be influenced
by factors such as the service’s ease of use and the extent to which it
fulfills its intended purpose.
Both attitude satisfaction and quality satisfaction are crucial in
ensuring consumer loyalty and repeat business. Smartly, service pro­
viders should strive to consistently provide customers with high levels of
attitude and quality satisfaction. This can be achieved through effective
training of service providers, cultivating a customer-centric culture, and
continuously improving service quality.
2.4. Social support theory
Previous research has indicated that social support theory highlights
the influence of informational and emotional messages on individual
well-being (Huang et al., 2010). This theory suggests that access to
supportive relationships and resources can have a positive impact on
various aspects of people’s life. To date, informational support and
emotional support are the two main dimensions of social support (Liang
et al., 2011; Zhou et al., 2021). Informational support is the provision of
information, guidance, and advice to help individuals solve problems or
make informed decisions (Chun and Lee, 2017). Emotional support is
the provision of love, empathy, and companionship to help individuals
feel cared for and understood (Lin et al., 2015). Both of these two sup­
ports have been mainly used in different contexts such as healthcare
(Chen et al., 2020) and online brand communities (Shazadi et al., 2021).
Furthermore, some studies have examined the relative impact of infor­
mational and emotional support (Liu et al., 2023a,b; Zhu et al., 2016).
However, there is a lack of research applying them to the context of
AI-enabled service self-recovery and discussing their relative role in
consumer evaluation.
In the current study, chatbot self-recovery can be seen as a kind of
social support after service failure to improve consumer satisfaction.
Different self-recovery strategies refer to different types of social sup­
port, and consumers may perform disparate evaluations of these stra­
tegies. However, few studies have focused on the details of chatbot self-
recovery. Following social support theory, this study aims to identify
two strategies of chatbot self-recovery, including informational self-
recovery and emotional self-recovery, and to explore their relative ef­
fects on consumer satisfaction.
3
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 78 (2024) 103779
2.5. Anthropomorphism and chatbots
Anthropomorphism is the attribution of human-like characteristics,
behaviors, or traits exhibited by non-human entities like animals, robots,
or even abstract concepts (Bartneck et al., 2009). It has appeared in a
variety of contexts like psychology, marketing, and AI artifacts (Schanke
et al., 2021). Thus, anthropomorphism is a common cognitive tendency
exhibited by humans, because people often find it easier to understand
and relate to things that resemble them or have human-like qualities
(Epley et al., 2007). In general, anthropomorphic characteristics can
include physical traits, such as facial expressions or body language,
emotional states like happiness or sadness, intellectual capacities like
reasoning or problem-solving abilities, and social behaviors like
communication or relationship formation (Nicolas and Agnieszka, 2021;
Pelau et al., 2021).
In the context of chatbots, anthropomorphism refers to the design
and development of a chatbot to mimic human conversation patterns
and personalities (Cheng et al., 2022). The anthropomorphism of chat­
bots can be programmed to have human-like qualities to create a more
engaging and relevant user experience (Roy and Naidoo, 2021). These
qualities can include a sense of humor, empathy, or even a unique
personality. By incorporating anthropomorphism into chatbot design,
developers aim to enhance human-AI interaction and create a more
conversational and natural process of communication.
Emoji-use in human-computer interaction is the practice of using
emojis, which are small digital images or icons, to express emotions,
convey messages, or enhance communication (Liu et al., 2018). Emojis
have become increasingly popular due to their ability to add nuance and
context to text-based conversations. People often use emojis to enhance
their written messages and make them more engaging and expressive
(Konrad et al., 2020; Manganari, 2021). With the development of
chatbot technology, by incorporating emojis into the chatbot’s re­
sponses, the chatbot can convey emotions and expressions more effec­
tively, which enhances its anthropomorphic characteristics (Jenneboer,
2022; Seeger et al., 2021). Emojis add a visual and contextual layer to
human-computer interaction, allowing the chatbot to express emotions
such as happiness, sadness, excitement, or confusion. For example, if a
user expresses a positive sentiment, the chatbot can respond with a
smiling emoji to convey its understanding and engagement. Similarly, if
a user is dissatisfied, the chatbot can respond with a sympathetic or
concerned emoji to show empathy. By using emojis appropriately, the
chatbot can create a more human-like interaction, improving the overall
perception of anthropomorphism, bridging the gap between human and
computer interaction (Liu et al., 2023b). Overall, emoji-use can indeed
improve the user’s perception of the chatbot’s anthropomorphic quali­
ties, and many studies have used it to label emojis the anthropomorphic
level of AI artifacts (Belanche et al., 2021; Schanke et al., 2021). How­
ever, the anthropomorphic level of chatbot self-recovery that contrib­
utes to consumer satisfaction is still under-explored in the context of
service failure. Therefore, this study investigates the moderating role of
anthropomorphism in the relationship between self-recovery strategies
and consumer satisfaction.
3. Research hypothesis development
3.1. The relative effects of self-recovery strategies
In general, consumer quality satisfaction is influenced by factors like
product or service performance, durability, reliability, functionality,
and meeting their specific needs and expectations (Grace et al., 2021).
Driven by AI algorithm, chatbots are design to automatically provide
information support to consumers (Wirtz et al., 2018). Accordingly,
under normal conditions, consumers expect a chatbot to perform as
promised and meet their needs effectively (Adam et al., 2021). If the
chatbots delivers on its promises and performs well, they are more likely
to be satisfied. However, the needs of consumers are diverse, chatbots
C. Zhou and Q. Chang
may struggle to provide a satisfactory response because of their limited
knowledge base (Shalaby et al., 2020). Such limitation may result in
chatbots experience service failure. Thus, the recovery process after
service failure can also rebuilding trust and demonstrate an effort to
consumer satisfaction (Bozic and Kuppelwieser, 2019). Resolution op­
tions, personalized approach, and cause of the service failure are mainly
recovery methods to improve consumer quality satisfaction (Jin et al.,
2020). These methods can be regarded as a form of information support.
Similarly, in this study, informational self-recovery aims to chatbots
provide additional information support to help consumers complete
their tasks after service failure or provide the cause of the service failure.
In fact, transparency is crucial in providing consumer satisfaction
(Honora et al., 2022). Chatbots’ informational self-recovery aims to
ensures that consumers have accurate and transparent information
about the service failure, keeping the consumer informed about the steps
being taken to address the failure. Tailoring the recovery process to
consumers’ needs shows attention to detail and a genuine desire to make
amends. Therefore, effectively informational self-recovery shows the
functionality and ability of chatbots, ultimately improving consumer
quality satisfaction. By contrast, emotion support aims to offer under­
standing, empathy, and comfort to someone who is going through
difficult times (Ngo et al., 2020). By utilizing AI algorithms, more and
more chatbots can exhibit emotions or simulate emotional responses
(Medeiros et al., 2021). Hence, emotional self-recovery plays a com­
forting role in providing empathy to consumers after service failure. It
aims to build connections with connect consumers on an emotional
level, fostering a sense of trust and empathy. Accordingly, informational
self-recovery focuses on the provision of helpful and practical informa­
tion to address consumers’ needs or situation after service failure, and
emotional self-recovery primarily addresses consumers’ psychological
and emotional well-being. On the other hand, consumer quality satis­
faction involves the perception of the service in terms of its performance
or functionality (Grace et al., 2021). Therefore, this study argues that
consumer quality satisfaction is mainly affected by informational
self-recovery after service failure compared with emotional
self-recovery and hypothesizes that.
H1. Informational self-recovery is more effective in affecting con­
sumer quality satisfaction than emotional self-recovery.
Differs to quality satisfaction, attitude satisfaction encompasses
consumers overall impression of the attitude they receive from the ser­
vice, including how they are treated, the level of care and attention
given to their concerns, and the sense of being valued (Lombart and
Louis, 2012). It is influenced by factors such as the friendliness,
encouragement, empathy, and understanding displayed by the service
providers (Xu et al., 2007). After service failure, having emotional
support means that consumers feel understood, valued, and cared for by
the chatbot service (Roongruangsee et al., 2022). The development of
chatbots’ emotional support has been driven by the desire to make ro­
bots more relatable and enhance their ability to interact with humans
effectively (Wang et al., 2023). Following this, emotional self-recovery
goes beyond meeting the consumers’ informational needs and extends
to meeting their emotional needs as well. When consumers receive
emotional support, it creates a sense of interpersonal care, ultimately
affecting their attitude satisfaction levels. Offermann et al. (2004) have
indicated that individuals’ attitudinal differences can be explained more
by emotional ability. After service failure, the chatbot’s emotional
self-recovery strategy focuses on the provision of empathy, under­
standing, and comfort to consumers and resonate with them on an
emotional level, and attitude satisfaction focuses on the interpersonal
emotion of the consumer experience (Xu et al., 2007). The relationship
between them is interconnected and closed. When consumers receive
emotional support from the chatbot’s emotional self-recovery, it helps
them feel understood, valued, and cared for. This, in turn, contributes to
a more positive attitude towards the self-recovery strategy. If consumers
feel that their emotional needs are not being met after service failure, or
4
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 78 (2024) 103779
if they encounter unsympathetic or unresponsive recovery service of the
chatbot (Harrison-Walker, 2019), it may lead to lower levels of attitude
satisfaction. Thus, this study argues that consumer attitude satisfaction
is mainly influenced by emotional self-recovery after service failure
compared with informational self-recovery and hypothesizes that.
H2. Emotional self-recovery is more effective in affecting consumer
attitude satisfaction than informational self-recovery.
3.2. The moderating role of anthropomorphic level
In general, chatbots have often been stereotyped as robotic (Salah
et al., 2023). People have associated them with generic and rigid re­
sponses, lacking empathy and understanding. However, these stereo­
types are changing as chatbot technology continues to advance (Zogaj
et al., 2023). Chatbot designers often utilize anthropomorphic elements
to make the interaction feel more familiar and relatable to users
(Schanke et al., 2021). By giving humanoid names or response with
emojis, anthropomorphic features aim to make users feel more
comfortable and willing to interact with the chatbots (Jenneboer, 2022).
Accordingly, chatbots’ anthropomorphic level is closely related to user
experience and consumer satisfaction (Haugeland et al., 2022; Ruan and
Mezei, 2022). Prior studies have indicated that anthropomorphism en­
hances chatbots’ effectiveness in service recovery (Agnihotri and Bhat­
tacharya, 2023; Song et al., 2023). By imbuing the chatbots with
human-like characteristics and traits, consumers may develop a stronger
emotional connection and feel more understood and supported during
the service recovery process (Blut et al., 2021). In general, consumers
expect the chatbots to be human-like in providing the desired recovery
service. For example, a chatbot’s response with emojis helps maintain a
conversational flow like human and shows the chatbot’s attempt to
recover from service failure (Liu et al., 2023b). Incorporating anthro­
pomorphism into chatbots can strengthen their effectiveness in service
recovery by fostering emotional connections, improving
problem-solving capabilities, and enhancing consumer satisfaction
(Fatima et al., 2024). In this study, different anthropomorphic levels of a
chatbot provide consumers with different perceptions of its self-recovery
strategies after service failure. Chatbots’ self-recovery strategies with a
high anthropomorphic level can not only serve humans but also
collaborate with human recovery (Waytz et al., 2010). As the anthro­
pomorphic level of chatbots improves, their ability to provide infor­
mational and emotional self-recovery increases. As a result, consumer
satisfaction is improved. Drawing these arguments, anthropomorphism
plays a crucial role in how the chatbot handle self-recovery and we
hypothesize that.
H3a. Anthropomorphic level positively moderates the relative effect
of informational self-recovery and emotional self-recovery on consumer
quality satisfaction.
H3b. Anthropomorphic level positively moderates the relative effect
of informational self-recovery and emotional self-recovery on consumer
attitude satisfaction.
3.3. The mediating role of perceived competence and warmth
The stereotype content model (SCM), proposed by Fiske et al. (2007),
suggests that individuals are stimulated by stereotypes to aid their
decision-making due to the complexity of cognition and limited re­
sources. Drawing on this process, SCM defines two primary dimensions:
warmth and competence. Warmth relates to empathy, friendliness,
trustworthiness, and good-naturedness, whereas competence is associ­
ated with confidence, capability, and skillfulness (Fiske et al., 2007).
These two dimensions originate from person perception (Cuddy et al.,
2008), social-value orientations (Fiske, 2018), and the construal of
others’ behaviors (Fiske, 2018). For example, when interacting with
unknown or unfamiliar people, an individual needs to consider whether
C. Zhou and Q. Chang
they are amicable or hostile (warmth dimension) and whether they pose
a threat or are helpful (competence dimension).
As mentioned above, informational self-recovery means that chat­
bots can offer assistance by providing prompt and effective information
support to address consumers’ concerns or complaints after a service
failure. They can offer explanations, troubleshoot problems, and provide
potential solutions to help consumers overcome difficulties and regain
their sense of competence. Chatbots can also assist consumers in un­
derstanding the reasons behind the service failure and provide reas­
surance that steps are being taken to rectify the situation (Baker and
Meyer, 2014). This responsiveness can restore trust and confidence in
the consumers and, consequently, increase their perceived competence
of chatbots (Zheng et al., 2023). Gieselmann and Sassenberg (2023)
found that information support triggers individuals’ competence per­
ceptions of artificial intelligence. Therefore, this study posits that by
using informational self-recovery, chatbots lead consumers to make
competent cognitive inferences. When chatbots provide helpful infor­
mation after service failure, consumers perceive the advancement of
artificial intelligence technology and increase their perceived compe­
tence toward the chatbots. After service failure, the informational
self-recovery reshapes consumer evaluations (e.g., perceived compe­
tence) toward the chatbots and enhances their quality satisfaction with
the recovery strategy. Thus, the following indirect hypothesis is
proposed.
H4a. Perceived competence mediates the relationship between infor­
mational self-recovery and consumers’ self-recovery quality satisfaction.
Similarly, while chatbots are not capable of experiencing emotions
themselves, they can still offer a form of emotional support (Meng and
Fig. 1. Research model.
5
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 78 (2024) 103779
Dai, 2021). Emotional self-recovery is designed to be empathetic and
understanding, to provide comforting and reassuring responses to con­
sumers, and to offer support in the form of validation or encouragement.
Perceived warmth refers to the recognition that someone is approach­
able, caring, and kindhearted (Aiello et al., 2020). Although
self-recovery is pre-programed and lacks genuine emotional under­
standing, it can still help consumers feel valued and acknowledged.
Through the use of a friendly and conversational self-recovery strategy,
chatbots create warmer and human-like interactions, which can enhance
consumers’ perceptions of warmth. Kim and Hur (2023) also suggested
that chatbots that use an emotional message increase the perceived
warmth of users. Drawing on these discussions, the following hypothesis
is proposed.
H4b. Perceived warmth mediates the relationship between informa­
tional self-recovery and consumers’ self-recovery attitude satisfaction.
Based on the above hypothesis, this study draws the research model
as Fig. 1.
4. Research methodology
4.1. Experiment overview
In this study, we attempted to understand how chatbots’ self-
recovery strategies affect consumer satisfaction. First, regarding
source of sample, we recruited participants through an online profes­
sional survey platform (www.wjx.cn) from July 1–30, 2023. The plat­
form is a leading crowdsourcing platform like MTurk, and the sample
size exceeds 10 million individuals, which ensures the randomness of the
C. Zhou and Q. Chang Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 78 (2024) 103779

sample. Second, we conducted three experiments (see Table 1) to test Table 2

our hypotheses. Extant literature has suggested that a multiple- The manipulation of chatbots’ self-recovery.
experiment design has advantages for explaining complex social phe­ High Low
nomena because multiple experiments applied within a research can
Informational self-recovery Diagnosis of service failure, Simple advice
complement each other in different stages, such as data collection and detailed advice
empirical analysis (Sarkar et al., 2020). In addition, using multiple ex­ Emotional self-recovery With blessing words Without blessing
periments can enhance the results and increase their validity, as opposed (empathy, comfort) words
to relying on a single method. Experiment 1 examined the main and Anthropomorphic level of self- With emojis ( Without emojis
recovery
mediating effect of chatbots’ self-recovery strategies on consumer ,
satisfaction. Experiment 2 tested the moderating effect of anthropo­
morphic level. In Experiments 1 and 2, service process failure was ,
simulated. In order to enhance robustness of findings, service outcome
failure was simulated in Experiment 3. ,

,
4.2. Experimental procedure
,
To test the above hypotheses, three experiments were performed.
Experiment 1 focused on the relative and mediating effects of two self- ,
recovery strategies on consumer satisfaction. Experiment 2 investi­
gated the moderating role of self-recovery anthropomorphism (high vs. )
low) in the relationship between self-recovery strategies and consumer
satisfaction. Experiment 3 assessed the hypotheses in the alternative
service failure (outcome failure) to ensure the reliability and generality it said that an unknown error occurred and apologized for it. Meanwhile,
of the results of Experiments 1 and 2 (process failure). Additionally, to it expressed empathy for the consumer and encouraged him to try again.
validate the results, all participants recruited in the three experiments Then, the consumer tried to provide more detailed booking information
were mutually independent. again. The chatbot searched the flights for a moment, and after 30 s, it
The experimental procedures as follows: Step 1, this study con­ said that the flight was successfully booked and hoped the consumer
structed the structure of chatbots’ self-recovery with different levels of enjoyed the trip.” Regarding the low level of emotional self-recovery
informational support, emotional support and anthropomorphism (see scenario (see Fig. 4 in Appendix), the chatbot only apologized for the
Table 2). Based on the structure, eight stimulus materials (see Appendix) error and did not provide empathy and encouragement. Meanwhile, the
designed for self-recovery strategies were text-based and screenshots. In chatbot did not provide blessing words after a successful booking.
Experiments 1 and 2, the high level of informational self-recovery sce­ Regarding the anthropomorphic level, emojis are usually used to label
nario (see Fig. 1 in Appendix) was identified as follows: “A consumer people’s humanness perceptions of AI-enabled agents (Go and Sundar,
asked an AI-based chatbot to book a flight from Beijing to New York. The 2019; Liu et al., 2023b). Thus, to manipulate the anthropomorphic level,
chatbot searched the flights for a moment, and after 30s, it said that an emojis were added to the chatbot’s responses (see Figs. 5–8 in Appen­
unknown error occurred and provided some possible reasons and in­ dix). The presence of emojis in the response indicated a high level of
structions for how to address it. The consumer then tried to provide anthropomorphism, whereas the absence of emojis indicated a low level
more detailed booking information again. The chatbot searched the of anthropomorphism. In Experiment 3, we changed service failure type
flights for a moment again, and after 30 s, it said that the flight was from process failure to outcome failure. The high level of informational
successfully booked and provided the details.” Regarding the low level self-recovery scenario (see Fig. 9 in Appendix) was identified as follows:
of informational self-recovery scenario (see Fig. 2 in Appendix), the “A consumer asked an AI-based chatbot to book a flight from Beijing to
chatbot did not provide reasons for the error and instructions for how to New York. The chatbot searched the flights for a moment, and after 30s,
address it. Meanwhile, the chatbot did not provide details of the flight it said that a connecting flight (Beijing to Tokyo and Tokyo to New York)
after successful booking. Similarly, the high level of emotional self- was available. The consumer said that the flight did not meet the re­
recovery scenario (see Fig. 3 in Appendix) was identified as follows: quirements. The chatbot provided some possible reasons for it and in­
“A consumer asked an AI-based chatbot to book a flight from Beijing to structions for how to address it. Then, the consumer tried to provide
New York. The chatbot searched the flights for a moment, and after 30 s, more detailed booking information again. The chatbot searched the
flights for a moment, and after 30 s, it said that the flight was success­
Table 1 fully booked and provided the details.” Regarding the low level of
Overview of three experiments. informational self-recovery scenario (see Fig. 10 in Appendix) was
Experiments Hypothesis/Effect Experimental design Sample
identified as follows: “A consumer asked an AI-based chatbot to book a
fight, the chatbot did not provide the reasons for the error and the in­
Experiment 1 Main and 2 (Informational self- N=
structions for how to address it. Meanwhile, the chatbot did not provide
(service mediating effect ( recovery: high vs. low) × 2 382
process H1, H2, H4a, and (emotional self-recovery: details of the flight after successful booking. Similarly, the high level of
failure) H4b) high vs. low) emotional self-recovery scenario (see Fig. 11 in Appendix) was identi­
Experiment 2 Moderating effect ( 2 (Informational self- N= fied as follows: “A consumer asked an AI-based chatbot to book a flight
(service H3a and, H3b) recovery: high vs. low) × 2 771
was identified as follows: “A consumer asked an AI-based chatbot to
process (emotional self-recovery:
failure) high vs. low) × 2
book a flight from Beijing to New York. The chatbot searched the flights
(anthropomorphic level: high for a moment, and after 30s, it said that a connecting flight (Beijing to
vs. low) Tokyo and Tokyo to New York) was available. The consumer said that
Experiment 3 Main, mediating 2 (Informational self- N= the flight did not meet the requirements. The chatbot apologized for it,
(service and moderating recovery: high vs. low) × 2 769
expressed empathy with the consumer, and encouraged the consumer to
outcome effects (all (emotional self-recovery:
failure) hypotheses) high vs. low) × 2 try again. Then, the consumer tried to provide more detailed booking
(anthropomorphic level: high information again. The chatbot searched the flights for a moment, and
vs. low) after 30s, it said that the flight was successfully booked and hoped that

6
C. Zhou and Q. Chang Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 78 (2024) 103779

the consumer could enjoy the trip.” Regarding the low level of emotional Table 3
self-recovery scenario (see Fig. 12 in Appendix) was identified as fol­ Questionnaire items.
lows: “A consumer asked an AI-based chatbot to book a flight, the Construct Items References
chatbot only apologized for the error and did not provide empathy and
Informational self- How do you think about the Newly
encouragement. Meanwhile, the chatbot did not provide blessing words recovery chatbot’s informational capability? developed
after a successful booking. Following the procedures of Experiments 1 Emotional self-recovery How do you think about the Newly
and 2, Figs. 13–16 in Appendix show the anthropomorphic level of chatbot’s emotional capability? developed
materials in different levels of self-recovery strategies. Anthropomorphic level How do you think about the Newly
chatbot’s anthropomorphism developed
capability?
Step 2, the participants were randomly assigned to experimental Perceived competence PC1: To what extend do you believe Gao and
groups. After the participants entered the experimental platform, we (PC) the chatbot is capable? Mattila (2014)
began by introducing an example to explain the meaning of chatbot PC2: To what extend do you believe
the chatbot is skillful?
service failure as follows: Facebook released a chatbot called “M” as
PC3: Does the chatbot show good
part of its Messenger app. M was designed to provide recommen­ performance?
dations and assist users in making reservations. However, it failed to Perceived warmth (PW) PW1: To what extend do you believe Gao and
accurately understand and respond to user requests, leading to the chatbot is friendly? Mattila (2014)
frustration among users (Chaves and Gerosa, 2021). We also intro­ PW2: To what extend does the
chatbot make you feel
duced the potential negative consequences (e.g., consumer dissatis­ encouragement?
faction, negative reputation, and continuous use of chatbots’ service) PW3: Does the chatbot show
of such service failure. Then, the concept of chatbot self-recovery empathy?
was introduced: self-recovery means that chatbots can provide Self-recovery quality SQS1: I think the self-recovery is Zhou et al.
satisfaction (SQS) useful. (2019)
additional instructions to help consumers solve their problems, or
SQS2: I think the self-recovery is
they can also provide comfort to mitigate consumers’ frustration reliable.
after service failure (Ngai et al., 2021). We also introduced the ad­ SQS3: I think the self-recovery can
vantages of self-recovery over human recovery (e.g., more meet my expectations.
time-efficient and less costly). Lastly, the participants were required Self-recovery attitude SAS1: I feel comforted from the self- Zhou et al.
satisfaction (SAS) recovery (2019)
to read our stimulation materials (see the Appendix). After 3 min,
SAS2: My frustration has been
each participant was required to indicate their perception of mitigated to a certain extent.
different levels of informational support, emotional support, and SAS3: I think the attitude of self-
anthropomorphism using a single item (“How do you think about the recovery is good.
chatbot’s informational, emotional, and anthropomorphism capabil­
ities?” (5-point Likert scale, with 5 = very high, and 1 = very low).
Step 3: After the participants listened to the experimental scenario, Table 4
they immediately completed the questionnaire (see Table 3, using a T-test of experimental manipulation.
5-point Likert scale) on chatbots’ self-recovery strategies to assess Group Number Mean t ρ
perceived competence (5 = very high, and 1 = very low), perceived
High information 20 4.534 3.342 0.000***
warmth (5 = very high, and 1 = very low), and self-recovery quality Low information 20 3.976
satisfaction and self-recovery attitude satisfaction (5 = strong satis­ High emotion 20 4.138 2.813 0.005**
faction, and 1 = strong dissatisfaction). We also requested their de­ Low emotion 20 3.247
mographic information, such as gender, age, educational High anthropomorphic 20 4.439 2.914 0.008**
Low anthropomorphic 20 3.580
background, and frequency of chatbot usage.
Note: ∗ ∗ ρ < 0.05; ∗ ∗ ∗ρ < 0.01.
4.3. Pretest

We pretested the stimulus materials on the chatbots’ self-recovery

strategies before conducting a formal experiment to ensure that the Table 5
Internal consistency test of variables.
manipulation was valid. A total of 40 participants (20 females and 20
males) were recruited from www.wjx.cn and randomly divided into four Variable Cronbach’s α CR AVE
groups. Based on the above experimental procedure, the responses of Informational self-recovery 1.000 1.000 1.000
participants were collected. The analysis of the data is described below. Emotional self-recovery 1.000 1.000 1.000
First, to examine the experimental manipulation, an independent Anthropomorphic level 1.000 1.000 1.000
Perceived competence 0.866 0.918 0.789
samples t-test was conducted to analyze whether the participants’ actual
Perceived warmth 0.874 0.923 0.751
perceptions of the chatbots’ self-recovery strategies were significantly Quality satisfaction 0.889 0.914 0.726
different. The t-test results for informational self-recovery, emotional Attitude satisfaction 0.771 0.867 0.686
self-recovery, and anthropomorphic levels are shown in Table 4. Clearly,
a high level of informational self-recovery was stronger than a low level
(t = 3.342, ρ = 0.000). The same was true for emotional self-recovery (t demonstrating that the questionnaire items had good discriminative
= 2.813, ρ = 0.005) and anthropomorphic level (t = 2914, ρ = 0.008), validity.
indicating successful manipulation of the experiment.
Second, the internal consistency of all constructs was tested. As 4.4. Experiment 1
shown in Table 5, Cronbach’s α for all constructs was above 0.7, indi­
cating that the questionnaire items had good reliability. The combined In this experiment, a 2 (informational self-recovery, high vs. low) × 2
reliability (CR) values were above 0.85, and the average extracted (emotional self-recovery, high vs. low) design was adopted. To enhance
variance (AVE) values were all above 0.6, indicating that the question­ the validity of the results, a one-way ANOVA, OLS regression, and
naire items had good aggregation validity. The correlation of each PROCESS were combined in this study.
construct with other constructs was below the square root of the AVE, Based on four scenarios, 400 participants with personal experience of

7
C. Zhou and Q. Chang Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 78 (2024) 103779

online chatbot service were recruited from wenjuanxing.com. Three Table 7

criterions were used to check the validation of responses: (1) the survey Sample distribution of Experiment 1.
completion time is less than 3 min; (2) incomplete questionnaire; (3) all Informational self-recovery Emotional self-recovery Number Proportion
responses on the scale were the same. Finally, 382 valid questionnaires
High High 95 24.87%
were collected. Tables 6 and 7 present the overview of demographic Low 98 25.65%
characteristics and the sample distribution of each group in Experiment Low High 97 25.39%
1. Moreover, the internal consistency of questionnaire items was also Low 92 24.09%
tested (see Table 8), indicating that the items had good aggregation and
discriminative validity.
The results of one-way ANOVA showed that both informational self- Table 8
recovery and emotional self-recovery had significant differences effects Internal consistency test of variables (Experiment 1).
on self-recovery quality satisfaction (informational: F = 4.80, ρ < 0.01; Variable Cronbach’s α CR AVE
emotional: F = 2.74, ρ < 0.05) and self-recovery attitude satisfaction
Informational self-recovery 1.000 1.000 1.000
(informational: F = 3.01, ρ < 0.01; emotional: F = 4.43, ρ < 0.01). To be Emotional self-recovery 1.000 1.000 1.000
more specific, quality satisfaction of high informational self-recovery Perceived competence 0.905 0.930 0.726
(M = 4.69, SD = 0.493) was higher than that of low informational Perceived warmth 0.915 0.947 0.855
self-recovery (M = 3.07, SD = 0.405). Meanwhile, attitude satisfaction Quality satisfaction 0.838 0.893 0.676
Attitude satisfaction 0.863 0.907 0.709
of high emotional self-recovery (M = 4.47, SD = 0.514) was higher than
that of low emotional self-recovery (M = 3.14, SD = 0.450). Fig. 2
intuitively illustrated the success of the manipulation test of self- mediation effect and supporting H4b.
recovery strategies. Then, the relative impact of chatbots’ self-
recovery strategies on consumer satisfaction was tested. The results
displayed (see Fig. 3) that compared with emotional self-recovery (M = 4.5. Experiment 2
3.09, SD = 0.398), consumers were more satisfied with the quality of
informational self-recovery (M = 4.61, SD = 0.557). H1 was supported. Based on Experiment 1, Experiment 2 used a 2 (informational self-
Compared with informational self-recovery (M = 3.57, SD = 0.412), recovery: high vs. low) x 2 (emotional self-recovery: high vs. low) x 2
consumers were more satisfied with the attitude of emotional self- (anthropomorphic level: high vs. low) within-subject design to test the
recovery (M = 4.84, SD = 0.521). H2 was supported. moderating role of chatbots’ self-recovery anthropomorphism in the
Then, we used OLS, a widely used method for examining causality relative impact of self-recovery strategies on consumer satisfaction. In
(Antonakis et al., 2014), to test the main effects. The regression results order to enhance the validity of results, two-way ANOVA and OLS
(see Table 9) shown that both informational self-recovery and emotional regression were combined in this study.
self-recovery enhanced consumer quality satisfaction, and the influence Following Experiment 1’s procedures, 800 participants were re-
of informational self-recovery was stronger than emotional self-recovery recruited and randomized into 8 groups. After checking the validation
(0.247 vs. 0.163); in contrast, the influence of informational self- of responses, 771 valid questionnaires were collected. Tables 11 and 12
recovery on consumer attitude satisfaction was weaker than that of present the overview of demographic characteristics and the sample
emotional self-recovery (0.171 vs. 0.274). Therefore, H1 and H2 were distribution of each group in Experiment 2. Meanwhile, Table 13 shown
further supported. that the questionnaire items had good aggregation and discriminative
Finally, Model 4 in PROCESS (bootstrap sample: 5000) was used to validity.
test the mediating effects. The results are presented in Table 10. The Two-way ANOVA shown that there were significant differences in
direct effect of informational self-recovery on consumer quality satis­ the perception of participants on the level of anthropomorphism in
faction was significant (effect = 0.462, 95% CI = [0.203, 0.721]); the chatbot self-recovery strategies (informational: F = 6.47, ρ < 0.001;
indirect effect of informational self-recovery through perceived emotional: F = 5.24, ρ < 0.01). Participants in the low anthropomorphic
competence (effect = 0.306, 95% CI = [0.143, 0.522]) was significant, level group were less satisfied with self-recovery strategies (quality
indicating a partial mediation effect and supporting H4a. Similarly, the satisfaction: M = 3.13, SD = 0.472; attitude satisfaction: M = 2.35, SD =
direct effect of emotional self-recovery on consumer attitude satisfaction 0.401), whereas participants in the high anthropomorphic level group
was significant (effect = 0.389, 95% CI = [0.103, 0.684]); the indirect were higher satisfied with self-recovery strategies (quality satisfaction:
effect of emotional self-recovery through perceived warmth (effect = M = 4.56, SD = 0.502; attitude satisfaction: M = 4.31, SD = 0.490).
0.265, 95% CI = [0.127, 0.612]) was significant, indicating a partial These results confirmed the validation of manipulating the anthropo­
morphic level of self-recovery strategies. Figs. 4 and 5 describe con­
sumer satisfaction of different self-recovery strategies for low and high
Table 6 anthropomorphic levels. As the anthropomorphic level increases, the
Demographic characteristics of participants in Experiment 1. relative impact of self-recovery strategies on consumer satisfaction is
Demographics variable Category Frequency significantly strengthened. Thus, H3a and H3b were supported.
Then, an OLS regression test was conducted (see Table 14). The re­
Gender Female 189
Male 193
sults indicated that the moderating role of anthropomorphic level on
Age <20 37 informational self-recovery and consumer quality satisfaction was
20–25 147 stronger than that of emotional self-recovery (0.378 vs. 0.214), sup­
26–30 123 porting H3a. The moderating role of anthropomorphic level on
31–40 53
emotional self-recovery and consumer attitude satisfaction was also
>40 22
Education High school and below 32 stronger than that of informational self-recovery (0.402 vs. 0.314),
Junior college 63 supporting H3b.
Undergraduate 261
Master’s degree and above 26
Frequency of use of chatbots <5 times 67 4.6. Experiment 3
5-10 times 202
11-15 times 81 Consistent with the procedures of Experiments 1 and 2, a 2 × 2 × 2
>15 times 32
between-subject design was also used in Experiment 3. To keep

8
C. Zhou and Q. Chang Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 78 (2024) 103779

Fig. 2. Results of manipulation test (Experiment 1).

Table 11
Demographic characteristics of participants in Experiment 2.
Demographics variable Category Frequency

Gender Female 385

Male 386
Age <20 64
20–25 306
26–30 253
31–40 105
>40 43
Education High school and below 89
Junior college 221
Undergraduate 403
Master’s degree and above 58
Frequency of use of chatbots <5 times 153
5–10 times 392
Fig. 3. Results of H1 and H2 (experiment 1). 11–15 times 138
>15 times 88

Table 9
Results of OLS regression (Experiment 1).
Table 12
Quality satisfaction Attitude satisfaction Sample distribution of Experiment 2.
Informational self-recovery 0.247*** 0.171* Informational Emotional Anthropomorphic Number Proportion
Emotional self-recovery 0.163** 0.274*** self-recovery self-recovery level
Gender − 0.225* − 0.211**
Age 0.184** 0.179* High High High 100 12.97%
Education 0.341*** 0.357** Low 96 12.45%
Frequency of use of chatbots 0.215* 0.206* Low High 98 12.71%
R2 0.351 0.370 Low 96 12.45%
Low High High 97 12.58%
Note: ∗ρ < 0.10, ∗ ∗ ρ < 0.05, ∗ ∗ ∗ρ < 0.01. Low 96 12.45%
Low Low High 95 12.32%
Low 93 12.07%

Table 10
Results of the mediation effect test (Experiment 1). Table 13
Paths Effect SE 95% 95% Internal consistency test of variables (Experiment 2).
LLCI ULCI Variable Cronbach’s α CR AVE
Informational self-recovery → quality 0.462 0.241 0.203 0.721 Informational self-recovery 1.000 1.000 1.000
satisfaction Emotional self-recovery 1.000 1.000 1.000
Informational self-recovery → perceived 0.306 0.145 0.143 0.522 Anthropomorphic level 1.000 1.000 1.000
competence → quality satisfaction Quality satisfaction 0.802 0.884 0.718
Emotional self-recovery →attitude 0.389 0.193 0.103 0.684 Attitude satisfaction 0.817 0.891 0.732
satisfaction
Emotional self-recovery → perceived 0.265 0.127 0.127 0.612
warmth → attitude satisfaction in Experiment 3. In addition, Table 17 shown that the questionnaire
items had good aggregation and discriminative validity.
participants’ independence, 800 participants were recruited to perform In Experiment 3, the ANOVA results in the context of outcome failure
experiments. After checking the validation of responses, 769 valid were consistent with Experiments 1 and 2 (see Figs. 6–8), providing
questionnaires were collected. Tables 15 and 16 present the overview of additional support for our hypotheses and revealing the robustness and
demographic characteristics and the sample distribution of each group generalizability of our findings.

9
C. Zhou and Q. Chang Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 78 (2024) 103779

Table 15
Demographic characteristics of participants in Experiment 3.
Demographics variable Category Frequency

Gender Female 375

Male 394
Age <20 62
20–25 361
26–30 275
31–40 45
>40 26
Education High school and below 42
Junior college 260
Undergraduate 409
Master’s degree and above 58
Frequency of use of chatbots <5 times 141
5-10 times 363
11-15 times 203
Fig. 4. Effect of informational self-recovery and anthropomorphic level on >15 times 62
consumer satisfaction (Experiment 2).

Table 16
Sample distribution of Experiment 3.
Informational Emotional Anthropomorphic Number Proportion
self-recovery self-recovery level

High High High 98 12.74%

Low 95 12.35%
Low High 100 13.01%
Low 94 12.22%
Low High High 100 13.01%
Low 96 12.48%
Low High 95 12.35%
Low 91 11.84%

Table 17
Internal consistency test of variables (Experiment 3).
Variable Cronbach’s α CR AVE
Fig. 5. Effect of emotional self-recovery and anthropomorphic level on con­
sumer satisfaction (Experiment 2). Informational self-recovery 1.000 1.000 1.000
Emotional self-recovery 1.000 1.000 1.000
Anthropomorphic level 1.000 1.000 1.000
Perceived competence 0.803 0.871 0.629
Table 14
Perceived warmth 0.777 0.870 0.692
Results of the moderating role test (Experiment 2). Quality satisfaction 0.763 0.863 0.678
Quality Attitude Attitude satisfaction 0.806 0.886 0.721
satisfaction satisfaction

Informational self-recovery 0.351*** 0.269**

Emotional self-recovery 0.293** 0.342***
Anthropomorphic level 0.311*** 0.278**
Informational self-recovery* 0.378*** 0.314**
Anthropomorphic level
Emotional self-recovery* 0.214** 0.402***
Anthropomorphic level
Gender − 0.205* − 0.208**
Age 0.192** 0.189***
Education 0.331** 0.322**
Frequency of use of chatbots 0.301** 0.289*
R2 0.311 0.335

Note: ∗ρ < 0.10, ∗ ∗ ρ < 0.05, ∗ ∗ ∗ρ < 0.01.

Next, an OLS regression test was conducted (see Table 18). The re­
sults indicated that the anthropomorphic level strengthened the relative
effects of informational self-recovery and emotional self-recovery on
Fig. 6. Relative effects of self-recovery strategies on consumer satisfaction
consumer satisfaction, further supporting H3a and H3b. (Experiment 3).
Finally, the results of PROCESS (Table 19) showed that perceived
competence and perceived warmth exerted a partial mediation effect
4.7. Post-hoc analysis
between the two self-recovery strategies and consumer satisfaction,
providing additional support to H4a and H4b.
In the above three experiments, this study examined the relative
effects of chatbots’ self-recovery strategies on consumer satisfaction.
However, we did not explore the suitability of each self-recovery

10
C. Zhou and Q. Chang Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 78 (2024) 103779

Table 19
Results of the mediation effect test (Experiment 3).
Paths Effect SE 95% 95%
LLCI ULCI

Informational self-recovery → quality 0.381 0.272 0.176 0.801

satisfaction
Informational self-recovery → perceived 0.335 0.219 0.200 0.605
competence →quality satisfaction
Emotional self-recovery → attitude 0.270 0.136 0.114 0.596
satisfaction
Emotional self-recovery →perceived 0.239 0.103 0.092 0.542
warmth →attitude satisfaction

Fig. 7. Effects of informational self-recovery and anthropomorphic level on

consumer satisfaction (Experiment 3).

Fig. 9. Effects of self-recovery strategies on consumer satisfaction in service

process failure context.

Fig. 8. Effects of emotional self-recovery and anthropomorphic level on con­

sumer satisfaction (Experiment 3).

Table 18
Results of the moderating role test (Experiment 3).
Quality Attitude
satisfaction satisfaction

Informational self-recovery 0.276*** 0.241**

Emotional self-recovery 0.210* 0.318**
Anthropomorphic level 0.332** 0.293**
Informational self-recovery* 0.309*** 0.221**
Anthropomorphic level
Emotional self-recovery* 0.253** 0.297***
Anthropomorphic level Fig. 10. Effects of self-recovery strategies on consumer satisfaction in service
Gender − 0.241** − 0.256**
outcome failure context.
Age 0.231*** 0.260**
Education 0.425*** 0.403**
Frequency of use of chatbots 0.285*** 0.272** emotional self-recovery in the service outcome context. We then con­
R2 0.292 0.304 ducted an OLS regression. The results (see Table 20) also indicated that
Note: ∗ρ < 0.10, ∗ ∗ ρ < 0.05, ∗ ∗ ∗ρ < 0.01. informational self-recovery was more applicable to the service process
failure (0.358, 0.302 vs. 0.275, 0.237), whereas emotional self-recovery
was more applicable to the service outcome failure (0.262, 0.314 vs.
0.342, 0.384).
strategy for a given context. To address this gap, this study considered
service failure types as a context setting and investigated which type
5. Discussion
would be more suitable for the evaluated self-recovery strategies.
Based on the sample used in Experiments 2 and 3, we randomly
5.1. Main findings
selected 50 participants from each group. Accordingly, there were 400
participants in both the service process failure group and the service
Different from previous literature on the difference between self-
outcome failure group. One-way ANOVA results (see Figs. 9 and 10)
recovery and human recovery, this study further focuses on chatbots’
showed that compared with emotional self-recovery, consumers were
self-recovery strategies and their impact on consumer satisfaction.
more satisfied with information self-recovery in the service process
Furthermore, the moderating role of chatbots’ self-recovery anthropo­
failure context, whereas the consumers were more satisfied with
morphism is also examined. Based on social support theory, self-

11
C. Zhou and Q. Chang Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 78 (2024) 103779

Table 20 enhances consumers’ perceptions of how capable the chatbot is in

Results of OLS regression in different service failure contexts. assisting them after a failure. After a service failure, if a chatbot
Service process failure Service outcome failure consistently provides helpful information, consumers are more likely to
perceive it as competent (Song et al., 2022), which, in turn, enhances
Quality Attitude Quality Attitude
satisfaction satisfaction satisfaction satisfaction their quality satisfaction regarding the chatbot’s self-recovery strategy.
Through its self-recovery, the chatbot provides emotional support
Informational self- 0.358*** 0.302*** 0.275** 0.237*
recovery
through encouragement, empathy, and understanding to consumers
Emotional self- 0.262** 0.314*** 0.342*** 0.384*** who may be experiencing emotional distress after a service failure. This
recovery support can involve incorporating phrases such as “I understand how
Anthropomorphic 0.346*** 0.332*** 0.368** 0.340*** you feel” or “I’m here for you” to let consumers know that their emotions
level
are acknowledged and validated and that their perceptions of warmth
Gender − 0.293*** − 0.304*** − 0.314** − 0.287***
Age 0.311** 0.298*** 0.274** 0.306*** are enhanced. When consumers perceive a chatbot as warm after a
Education 0.371** 0.353*** 0.323** 0.340** service failure, they are more likely to trust and connect with it (Choi
Frequency of use of 0.215*** 0.226** 0.270** 0.239*** et al., 2021), which also improves their attitude satisfaction in terms of
chatbots the chatbot’s self-recovery strategy.
R2 0.314 0.326 0.340 0.338
Fourth, this study suggests that informational self-recovery is well-
Note: ∗ρ < 0.10, ∗ ∗ ρ < 0.05, ∗ ∗ ∗ρ < 0.01. suited for handling service process failure, while emotional self-
recovery is more suitable for service outcome failure. When encoun­
tering a service process failure, consumers do not achieve the desired
recovery strategies are classified into informational self-recovery and results from chatbots; consequently, they want to receive a clear
emotional self-recovery. Meanwhile, self-recovery quality satisfaction explanation of what went wrong with the service process (Huang and
and self-recovery attitude satisfaction are considered two dimensions of Dootson, 2022; Xing et al., 2022). Informational self-recovery provides
consumer satisfaction. Through three experiments, several interesting possible explanations for how to rectify the failure and offers
findings were obtained: step-by-step guidance to help consumers resolve the failure. In some
First, informational self-recovery is stronger than emotional self- cases, consumers may prefer to address service process failures on their
recovery on consumer quality satisfaction. The purpose of informa­ own (Castillo et al., 2021). Informational self-recovery can include of­
tional self-recovery is to provide consumers with suggestions or in­ fering self-help resources and enhancing consumer satisfaction. Indeed,
structions after service failure and to help them understand what caused informational self-recovery is well-suited for handling service process
service failure and prevent any confusion or frustration. In addition, failure. Further, emotional self-recovery is an important aspect when
informational self-recovery provides step-by-step instructions on how dealing with service outcome failure. When chatbots’ service outcome
consumers can resolve problems themselves or what actions they need to does not meet consumers’ expectations or needs, it can lead to disap­
take to overcome problems. Through informational self-recovery, con­ pointment, frustration, or even a sense of loss (Huang and Dootson,
sumers can be equipped with the relevant knowledge or tools they need 2022). During such times, providing emotional support can help alle­
to deal with service failure. Effective and useful information support viate negative emotions and promote a sense of understanding and
displays the self-recovery ability of chatbots after service failure, which empathy (Meng and Dai, 2021; Pavone et al., 2023). Emotional
in turn improves consumers’ perception of service quality. Emotional self-recovery involves taking personal responsibility for managing con­
self-recovery is stronger than informational self-recovery on consumer sumers’ emotions, reassuring them that their feelings are valid, and
attitude satisfaction. Emotional support aims to provide encouragement finding ways to bounce back from service outcome failure.
and compassion to consumers after service failure and alleviate their
depression and dissatisfaction. Emotion is closely related to attitude 5.2. Theoretical implications
perception (Warren et al., 2019), and from an emotional perspective,
self-recovery is lending a compassionate ear to consumers’ concerns and This study facilitates the existing literature on chatbot service re­
experiences after service failure. Chatbots that are human-like present covery in four ways. First, it is one of the first studies to focus on self-
and show empathy can provide significant comfort, ultimately recovery strategies after service failure. Previous studies have simply
enhancing consumers’ satisfaction with service attitude. explored the difference between self-recovery and human recovery
Second, different anthropomorphic levels play a positive role in (Song et al., 2022; Xing et al., 2022), but failed to classify the details of
moderating the relationship between self-recovery strategies and con­ self-recovery. Based on social support theory, this study identifies two
sumer satisfaction. In detail, the higher the level of anthropomorphism, types of self-recovery strategies, including informational self-recovery
the more quality satisfaction the informational self-recovery has and emotional self-recovery. Social support theory has been widely
compared to emotional self-recovery. Similarly, the higher the level of applied in the field of healthcare (Liu et al., 2023a; Tan and Yan, 2020),
anthropomorphism, the greater the attitude satisfaction consumers but it has received limited attention in the context of service recovery.
experience when they engage in emotional self-recovery compared to Therefore, it is necessary to advance the understanding of this theory
informational self-recovery. After service failure, anthropomorphic and highlight its applicability in the context of service recovery.
chatbots can be designed to appear and interact in a human-like manner, Second, this study provides a novel understanding of consumers’
giving consumers the impression that they are talking with a person evaluation of self-recovery strategies by dividing consumer satisfaction
(Cheng et al., 2022; Xing et al., 2022). A high level of anthropomor­ into self-recovery quality satisfaction and self-recovery attitude satis­
phism can enhance the attractiveness and affinity of chatbots’ faction. Previous research has mainly used consumer satisfaction as the
self-recovery strategies to make them more popular and more acceptable sole criterion for evaluating service recovery (Jin et al., 2020; Xing et al.,
to consumers. 2022) thus ignoring the different satisfaction expressed by consumers
Third, perceived competence mediates the relationship between when evaluating service recovery strategies after service failure. This
informational self-recovery and consumer quality satisfaction, and the study further divides consumer satisfaction into two types and provides
relationship between informational self-recovery and consumer attitude a more comprehensive understanding of consumer satisfaction in the
satisfaction is mediated by perceived warmth. Chatbots’ informational context of service recovery.
self-recovery provides the causes of the failure, as well as advice and Third, this study identifies the relative role of informational self-
guidance to help consumers solve problems. This support strategy recovery and emotional self-recovery in influencing consumer satisfac­
tion after service failure. The positive impact of informational support

12
C. Zhou and Q. Chang
and emotional support has been extensively recognized (Huang et al.,
2019; Wang et al., 2021), but few studies have tried to investigate the
relative importance in the context of service recovery. This study also
confirms that informational self-recovery and emotional self-recovery
reveal different effects of consumer satisfaction with service recovery.
These findings offer an alternative view of the disparate effects of
self-recovery strategies in the context of service failure.
Fourth, this study innovatively examines the moderating role of
anthropomorphic levels in the domain of chatbot self-recovery.
Anthropomorphism has been widely used in the design of chatbots
(Blut et al., 2021; Selamat and Windasari, 2021). It allows for an un­
derstanding of non-human entities in a more familiar and relatable way.
Self-recovery is based on complex algorithms and is conducted by a
chatbot itself. Thus, anthropomorphism plays a significant role in
shaping consumers’ perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors towards these
non-human entities. However, there is a lack of studies that explore the
anthropomorphic level of chatbot self-recovery in the context of service
failure. This study takes an important step to focus on chatbots’
self-recovery anthropomorphism, providing a novel research perspec­
tive of its contingent effect.
Fifth, this study clarifies the underlying mechanism between chat­
bots’ self-recovery strategies and consumer satisfaction. Consumers hold
certain stereotypes (e.g., useful only for basic or repetitive tasks and
incapable of displaying empathy or emotion) on chatbots (Lee et al.,
2019; Seiler and Schär, 2021). Thus, changing the stereotype of chatbots
is crucial (Seiler et al., 2019). Drawing on SCM (Fiske et al., 2007), this
study innovatively claims that perceived competence and warmth
mediate the relationship between chatbots’ self-recovery strategies and
consumer satisfaction. We enrich the application of SCM in the context
of service failures and unpack the underlying mechanisms of how
chatbots’ service recovery strategies enhance user satisfaction.
5.3. Practical implications
There are some practical implications for chatbot service providers
or platforms. First, service providers can apply a multidimensional
evaluation mechanism to better understand consumers’ satisfaction
with self-recovery strategies. When encountering service failure, con­
sumers’ evaluation is a critical measurement of the effectiveness of re­
covery strategies, which in turn guides service providers on how to
design recovery strategies. Simply rating may vary from consumers’
evaluation of service recovery after service failure. This study shows that
consumer satisfaction includes two dimensions: quality-related and
attitude-related. Thus, service providers can offer a two-dimensional
channel for service recovery evaluation, which can make consumers
realize the performance of self-recovery strategies in different di­
mensions, thereby enabling them to make improvements accordingly.
Second, service providers should pay attention to the design of self-
recovery strategies. Compared to costly human recovery, self-recovery is
economical and can continuously provide service regardless of time
constraints. Accordingly, Self-recovery is widely used after a service
failure. In response to different service failure contexts, informational
self-recovery and emotional self-recovery are aware of consumers’
emotion-oriented and task-oriented needs. Informational support is a
more effective self-recovery strategy to enhance consumer quality
satisfaction and is more suitable for service process failure, whereas
emotional support aims to guarantee consumer attitude satisfaction and
is more suitable for service outcome failure. In addition, service pro­
viders can improve the anthropomorphic level of self-recovery to shape
consumers’ stereotypical perception of non-human attributes about
chatbots. As reported by the findings, service providers can add emojis
13
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 78 (2024) 103779
to the self-recovery design.
5.4. Limitations and future directions
Although this study has made some significant contributions, it also
has several limitations. First, similar to prior studies (Liu et al., 2023b;
Song et al., 2022; Xing et al., 2022), this study mainly focuses on the
self-recovery of text-based chatbots after service failure. Contrariwise,
the use of voice channels can convey information and emotion during
robot-human interaction (Ganapathy, 2020). Unlike text-based chat­
bots, voice-based chatbots (e.g., Apple’s Siri, Google Assistant) can
provide hands-free and eyes-free interaction experiences. Consumers
can speak to chatbots, and chatbots can also respond to consumers by
voice, and this enables a more natural and conversational interaction
compared to typing. As a result, voice-based chatbots have become an
important component of chatbot technology and can enhance conve­
nience and accessibility for consumers seeking information and assis­
tance (Roy and Naidoo, 2021). Thus, the effects of self-recovery
strategies and consumer satisfaction on voice-based chatbots should be
taken into account in the future. Second, with the development of
technology, despite its level of anthropomorphism, chatbots have other
features that may play a different role in consumer perception (Araujo,
2018). The selection of moderator variables is limited in this study, and
future research is encouraged to investigate other moderator variables
from different perspectives. Third, different consumers, with different
personal characteristics, have different perceptions of self-recovery
strategies, which affect their satisfaction. Thus, future research could
attempt to examine the effects of personal traits, such as cultural dif­
ferences (Shin et al., 2022) and implicit personality (Liu et al., 2023b).
Fourth, our sample primarily consisted of participants aged between 20
and 30 years old. This age group is known as Millennials or Generation Z
and is more tech-savvy (Gabrielova and Buchko, 2021); they are more
likely to engage with a chatbot for quicker assistance instead of waiting
on hold or searching through websites (De Cicco et al., 2020). Thus, the
sample is more suitable for validating the hypotheses presented in this
study. Admittedly, focusing on such a narrow age range limits the
generalizability of the findings. In future studies, efforts could be made
to balance the age distribution of the samples to ensure a more
comprehensive understanding of chatbots’ self-recover strategies.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Cheng Zhou: Writing – original draft, Methodology, Data curation,
Conceptualization. Qian Chang: Writing – review & editing, Supervi­
sion, Funding acquisition.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Data availability
Data will be made available on request.
Acknowledgments
This study was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of
China (72303168, 72203156) and the National Postdoctoral Program of
China (GZC20231864).
C. Zhou and Q. Chang Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 78 (2024) 103779

Appendix. Experiment stimuli materials

Fig. 1. Example of high informational self-recovery (used in experiments 1 and 2).

Fig. 2. Example of low informational self-recovery (used in experiments 1 and 2).

14
C. Zhou and Q. Chang Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 78 (2024) 103779

Fig. 3. Example of high emotional self-recovery (used in experiments 1 and 2).

Fig. 4. Example of low emotional self-recovery (used in experiments 1 and 2).

15
C. Zhou and Q. Chang Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 78 (2024) 103779

Fig. 5. Example of high anthropomorphism (high informational self-recovery, used in experiment 2).

Fig. 6. Example of high anthropomorphism (low informational self-recovery, used in experiment 2).

16
C. Zhou and Q. Chang Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 78 (2024) 103779

Fig. 7. Example of high anthropomorphism (high emotional self-recovery, used in experiment 2).

Fig. 8. Example of high anthropomorphism (low emotional self-recovery, used in experiment 2).

17
C. Zhou and Q. Chang Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 78 (2024) 103779

Fig. 9. Example of high informational self-recovery in Experiment 3.

18
C. Zhou and Q. Chang Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 78 (2024) 103779

Fig. 10. Example of low informational self-recovery in Experiment 3.

Fig. 11. Example of high emotional self-recovery in Experiment 3.

19
C. Zhou and Q. Chang Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 78 (2024) 103779

Fig. 12. Example of low emotional self-recovery in Experiment 3.

Fig. 13. Example of high anthropomorphism in Experiment 3 (high informational self-recovery).

20
C. Zhou and Q. Chang Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 78 (2024) 103779

Fig. 14. Example of high anthropomorphism in Experiment 3 (low informational self-recovery).

Fig. 15. Example of high anthropomorphism in Experiment 3 (high emotional self-recovery).

21
C. Zhou and Q. Chang Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 78 (2024) 103779

Fig. 16. Example of high anthropomorphism in Experiment 3 (low emotional self-recovery).

References Cheng, X., Zhang, X., Cohen, J., Mou, J., 2022. Human vs. AI: understanding the impact
of anthropomorphism on consumer response to chatbots from the perspective of
trust and relationship norms. Inf. Process. Manag. 59 (3), 102940.
Adam, M., Wessel, M., Benlian, A., 2021. AI-based chatbots in customer service and their
Choi, S., Mattila, A.S., Bolton, L.E., 2021. To err is human (-oid): how do consumers react
effects on user compliance. Electron. Mark. 31 (2), 427–445.
to robot service failure and recovery? J. Serv. Res. 24 (3), 354–371.
Agnihotri, A., Bhattacharya, S., 2023. Chatbots’ effectiveness in service recovery. Int. J.
Chun, J.W., Lee, M.J., 2017. When does individuals’ willingness to speak out increase on
Inf. Manag., 102679
social media? Perceived social support and perceived power/control. Comput. Hum.
Aiello, G., Donvito, R., Acuti, D., Grazzini, L., Mazzoli, V., Vannucci, V., Viglia, G., 2020.
Behav. 74, 120–129.
Customers’ willingness to disclose personal information throughout the customer
Crisafulli, B., Singh, J., 2017. Service failures in e-retailing: examining the effects of
purchase journey in retailing: the role of perceived warmth. J. Retailing 96 (4),
response time, compensation, and service criticality. Comput. Hum. Behav. 77,
490–506.
413–424.
Araujo, T., 2018. Living up to the chatbot hype: the influence of anthropomorphic design
Cuddy, A.J., Fiske, S.T., Glick, P., 2008. Warmth and competence as universal
cues and communicative agency framing on conversational agent and company
dimensions of social perception: the stereotype content model and the BIAS map.
perceptions. Comput. Hum. Behav. 85, 183–189.
Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 40, 61–149.
Baker, T., Meyer, T., 2014. Explanation information and source in service recovery
De Cicco, R., Silva, S.C., Alparone, F.R., 2020. Millennials’ attitude toward chatbots: an
initiatives. J. Serv. Market. 28 (4), 311–318.
experimental study in a social relationship perspective. Int. J. Retail Distrib. Manag.
Bartneck, C., Kulić, D., Croft, E., Zoghbi, S., 2009. Measurement instruments for the
48 (11), 1213–1233.
anthropomorphism, animacy, likeability, perceived intelligence, and perceived
Epley, N., Waytz, A., Cacioppo, J.T., 2007. On seeing human: a three-factor theory of
safety of robots. Int. J. Social Robot. 1, 71–81.
anthropomorphism. Psychol. Rev. 114 (4), 864–878.
Belanche, D., Casaló, L.V., Schepers, J., Flavián, C., 2021. Examining the effects of
Fatima, J.K., Khan, M.I., Bahmannia, S., Chatrath, S.K., Dale, N.F., Johns, R., 2024.
robots’ physical appearance, warmth, and competence in frontline services: the
Rapport with a chatbot? The underlying role of anthropomorphism in socio-
Humanness-Value-Loyalty model. Psychol. Market. 38 (12), 2357–2376.
cognitive perceptions of rapport and e-word of mouth. J. Retailing Consum. Serv. 77,
Blut, M., Wang, C., Wünderlich, N.V., Brock, C., 2021. Understanding anthropomorphism
103666.
in service provision: a meta-analysis of physical robots, chatbots, and other AI.
Fiske, S.T., 2018. Stereotype content: warmth and competence endure. Curr. Dir.
J. Acad. Market. Sci. 49, 632–658.
Psychol. Sci. 27 (2), 67–73.
Bozic, B., Kuppelwieser, V.G., 2019. Customer trust recovery: an alternative explanation.
Fiske, S.T., Cuddy, A.J., Glick, P., 2007. Universal dimensions of social cognition:
J. Retailing Consum. Serv. 49, 208–218.
warmth and competence. Trends Cognit. Sci. 11 (2), 77–83.
Castelo, N., Bos, M.W., Lehmann, D.R., 2019. Task-dependent algorithm aversion.
Gabrielova, K., Buchko, A.A., 2021. Here comes generation Z: Millennials as managers.
J. Market. Res. 56 (5), 809–825.
Bus. Horiz. 64 (4), 489–499.
Castillo, D., Canhoto, A.I., Said, E., 2021. The dark side of AI-powered service
Ganapathy, K., 2020. Voice controlled human assistence robot. In: 2020 6th
interactions: exploring the process of co-destruction from the customer perspective.
International Conference on Advanced Computing and Communication Systems
Serv. Ind. J. 41 (13–14), 900–925.
(ICACCS). IEEE, pp. 971–973.
Chaves, A.P., Gerosa, M.A., 2021. How should my chatbot interact? A survey on social
Gao, Y.L., Mattila, A.S., 2014. Improving consumer satisfaction in green hotels: the roles
characteristics in human–chatbot interaction design. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact.
of perceived warmth, perceived competence, and CSR motive. Int. J. Hospit. Manag.
37 (8), 729–758.
42, 20–31.
Chen, S., Guo, X., Wu, T., Ju, X., 2020. Exploring the online doctor-patient interaction on
Gieselmann, M., Sassenberg, K., 2023. The more competent, the better? the effects of
patient satisfaction based on text mining and empirical analysis. Inf. Process. Manag.
perceived competencies on disclosure towards conversational artificial intelligence.
57 (5), 102253.
Soc. Sci. Comput. Rev. 41 (6), 2342–2363.

22
C. Zhou and Q. Chang
Grace, E., Girsang, R.M., Simatupang, S., Candra, V., Sidabutar, N., 2021. Product quality
and customer satisfaction and their effect on consumer loyalty. Int. J. Soc. Sci. 1 (2),
69–78.
Harrison-Walker, L.J., 2019. The effect of consumer emotions on outcome behaviors
following service failure. J. Serv. Market. 33 (3), 285–302.
Haugeland, I.K.F., Følstad, A., Taylor, C., Bjørkli, C.A., 2022. Understanding the user
experience of customer service chatbots: an experimental study of chatbot
interaction design. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 161, 102788.
Honora, A., Chih, W.H., Wang, K.Y., 2022. Managing social media recovery: the
important role of service recovery transparency in retaining customers. J. Retailing
Consum. Serv. 64, 102814.
Huang, K.Y., Chengalur-Smith, I., Pinsonneault, A., 2019. Sharing is caring: social
support provision and companionship activities in healthcare virtual support
communities. MIS Q. 43 (2), 395–424.
Huang, K.Y., Nambisan, P., Uzuner, Ö., 2010. Informational support or emotional
support: preliminary study of an automated approach to analyze online support
community contents. In: ICIS, p. 210.
Huang, Y.S.S., Dootson, P., 2022. Chatbots and service failure: when does it lead to
customer aggression. J. Retailing Consum. Serv. 68, 103044.
Janssen, A., Cardona, D.R., Passlick, J., Breitner, M.H., 2022. How to Make chatbots
productive–A user-oriented implementation framework. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud.
168, 102921.
Jenneboer, L., 2022. Interaction Effects between Anthropomorphic Chatbot
Characteristics on the Customer Experience: Appearance, Language Style, and Emoji-
Use. Master’s Thesis. University of Twente.
Jin, D., DiPietro, R.B., Fan, A., 2020. The impact of customer controllability and service
recovery type on customer satisfaction and consequent behavior intentions.
J. Hospit. Market. Manag. 29 (1), 65–87.
Jones, C.L.E., Hancock, T., Kazandjian, B., Voorhees, C.M., 2022. Engaging the Avatar:
the effects of authenticity signals during chat-based service recoveries. J. Bus. Res.
144, 703–716.
Jun, M., Yang, Z., Kim, D., 2004. Customers’ perceptions of online retailing service
quality and their satisfaction. Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manag. 21 (8), 817–840.
Kim, W.B., Hur, H.J., 2023. What makes people feel empathy for AI chatbots? Assessing
the role of competence and warmth. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact. 1–14.
Konrad, A., Herring, S.C., Choi, D., 2020. Sticker and emoji use in Facebook Messenger:
implications for graphicon change. J. Computer-Mediated Commun. 25 (3),
217–235.
Kuo, Y.F., Wu, C.M., 2012. Satisfaction and post-purchase intentions with service
recovery of online shopping websites: perspectives on perceived justice and
emotions. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 32 (2), 127–138.
Lee, N., Madotto, A., Fung, P., 2019. Exploring social bias in chatbots using stereotype
knowledge. In: Wnlp@ Acl, pp. 177–180.
Lei, S.I., Shen, H., Ye, S., 2021. A comparison between chatbot and human service:
customer perception and reuse intention. Int. J. Contemp. Hospit. Manag. 33 (11),
3977–3995.
Liang, T.P., Ho, Y.T., Li, Y.W., Turban, E., 2011. What drives social commerce: the role of
social support and relationship quality. Int. J. Electron. Commer. 16 (2), 69–90.
Lin, T.C., Hsu, J.S.C., Cheng, H.L., Chiu, C.M., 2015. Exploring the relationship between
receiving and offering online social support: a dual social support model. Inf. Manag.
52 (3), 371–383.
Liu, D., Lv, Y., Huang, W., 2023b. How do consumers react to chatbots’ humorous emojis
in service failures. Technol. Soc. 73, 102244.
Liu, M., Wong, A., Pudipeddi, R., Hou, B., Wang, D., Hsieh, G., 2018. ReactionBot:
exploring the effects of expression-triggered emoji in text messages (CSCW). Proc.
ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 2, 1–16.
Liu, S., Wang, H., Gao, B., Deng, Z., 2022. Doctors’ provision of online health
consultation service and patient review valence: evidence from a quasi-experiment.
Inf. Manag. 59 (5), 103360.
Liu, Y., Zhang, X., Liu, L., Lai, K.H., 2023a. Does voice matter? Investigating patient
satisfaction on mobile health consultation. Inf. Process. Manag. 60 (4), 103362.
Lombart, C., Louis, D., 2012. Consumer satisfaction and loyalty: two main consequences
of retailer personality. J. Retailing Consum. Serv. 19 (6), 644–652.
Luo, X., Tong, S., Fang, Z., Qu, Z., 2019. Frontiers: machines vs. humans: the impact of
artificial intelligence chatbot disclosure on customer purchases. Market. Sci. 38 (6),
937–947.
Manganari, E.E., 2021. Emoji use in computer-mediated communication. Int. Technol.
Manag. Rev. 10 (1), 1–11.
Medeiros, L., Bosse, T., Gerritsen, C., 2021. Can a chatbot comfort humans? Studying the
impact of a supportive chatbot on users’ self-perceived stress. IEEE Trans. Hum.-
Mach. Syst. 52 (3), 343–353.
Meng, J., Dai, Y., 2021. Emotional support from AI chatbots: should a supportive partner
self-disclose or not? J. Computer-Mediated Commun. 26 (4), 207–222.
Ngai, E.W., Lee, M.C., Luo, M., Chan, P.S., Liang, T., 2021. An intelligent knowledge-
based chatbot for customer service. Electron. Commer. Res. Appl. 50, 101098.
Ngo, L.V., Nguyen, T.N.Q., Tran, N.T., Paramita, W., 2020. It takes two to tango: the role
of customer empathy and resources to improve the efficacy of frontline employee
empathy. J. Retailing Consum. Serv. 56, 102141.
Nicolas, S., Agnieszka, W., 2021. The personality of anthropomorphism: how the need
for cognition and the need for closure define attitudes and anthropomorphic
attributions toward robots. Comput. Hum. Behav. 122, 106841.
Nordheim, C.B., Følstad, A., Bjørkli, C.A., 2019. An initial model of trust in chatbots for
customer service—findings from a questionnaire study. Interact. Comput. 31 (3),
317–335.
23
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 78 (2024) 103779
Offermann, L.R., Bailey, J.R., Vasilopoulos, N.L., Seal, C., Sass, M., 2004. The relative
contribution of emotional competence and cognitive ability to individual and team
performance. Hum. Perform. 17 (2), 219–243.
Parker, C., Mathews, B.P., 2001. Customer satisfaction: contrasting academic and
consumers’ interpretations. Market. Intell. Plann. 19 (1), 38–44.
Pavone, G., Meyer-Waarden, L., Munzel, A., 2023. Rage against the machine:
experimental insights into customers’ negative emotional responses, attributions of
responsibility, and coping strategies in artificial intelligence–based service failures.
J. Interact. Market. 58 (1), 52–71.
Pelau, C., Dabija, D.C., Ene, I., 2021. What makes an AI device human-like? The role of
interaction quality, empathy and perceived psychological anthropomorphic
characteristics in the acceptance of artificial intelligence in the service industry.
Comput. Hum. Behav. 122, 106855.
Popp, B., Woratschek, H., 2017. Consumer–brand identification revisited: an integrative
framework of brand identification, customer satisfaction, and price image and their
role for brand loyalty and word of mouth. J. Brand Manag. 24, 250–270.
Prentice, C., Dominique Lopes, S., Wang, X., 2020. The impact of artificial intelligence
and employee service quality on customer satisfaction and loyalty. J. Hospit. Market.
Manag. 29 (7), 739–756.
Roongruangsee, R., Patterson, P., Ngo, L.V., 2022. Professionals’ interpersonal
communications style: does it matter in building client psychological comfort?
J. Serv. Market. 36 (3), 379–397.
Roy, R., Naidoo, V., 2021. Enhancing chatbot effectiveness: the role of anthropomorphic
conversational styles and time orientation. J. Bus. Res. 126, 23–34.
Ruan, Y., Mezei, J., 2022. When do AI chatbots lead to higher customer satisfaction than
human frontline employees in online shopping assistance? Considering product
attribute type. J. Retailing Consum. Serv. 68, 103059.
Salah, M., Alhalbusi, H., Ismail, M.M., Abdelfattah, F., 2023. Chatting with ChatGPT:
decoding the mind of Chatbot users and unveiling the intricate connections between
user perception, trust and stereotype perception on self-esteem and psychological
well-being. Res. Square 1–26.
Sarkar, S., Vance, A., Ramesh, B., Demestihas, M., Wu, D.T., 2020. The influence of
professional subculture on information security policy violations: a field study in a
healthcare context. Inf. Syst. Res. 31 (4), 1240–1259.
Schanke, S., Burtch, G., Ray, G., 2021. Estimating the impact of “humanizing” customer
service chatbots. Inf. Syst. Res. 32 (3), 736–751.
Seeger, A.M., Pfeiffer, J., Heinzl, A., 2021. Texting with humanlike conversational
agents: designing for anthropomorphism. J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. Online 22 (4), 8–19.
Seiler, R., Schär, A., 2021. Chatbots, conversational interfaces, and the stereotype
content model. In: 54th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences
(HICSS), Grand Wailea, HI, USA, 5-8 January 2021. University of Hawai’i at Manoa,
pp. 1860–1867.
Seiler, R., Müller, S., Beinert, M., 2019. Stereotype Content Model (SCM) and Chatbots/
Conversational Interfaces–an experiment comparing trust, competence and warmth
dimensions. In: 48th Annual European Marketing Academy Conference (EMAC),
Hamburg, Germany, 27-28 May 2019. European Marketing Academy, p. 8468.
Selamat, M.A., Windasari, N.A., 2021. Chatbot for SMEs: integrating customer and
business owner perspectives. Technol. Soc. 66, 101685.
Shalaby, W., Arantes, A., GonzalezDiaz, T., Gupta, C., 2020. Building chatbots from large
scale domain-specific knowledge bases: challenges and opportunities. In: 2020 IEEE
International Conference on Prognostics and Health Management (ICPHM). IEEE,
pp. 1–8.
Sharifi, S.S., Aghazadeh, H., 2016. Discount reference moderates customers’ reactions to
discount frames after online service failure. J. Bus. Res. 69 (10), 4074–4080.
Shazadi, M., Chaudhry, S.A., Usmani, S., Mahmood, M.A., 2021. Impact of social support
on customer satisfaction and citizenship behavior in online brand communities.
Compet. Social Sci. Res. J. 2 (4), 10–32.
Sheehan, B., Jin, H.S., Gottlieb, U., 2020. Customer service chatbots: anthropomorphism
and adoption. J. Bus. Res. 115, 14–24.
Shin, D., Chotiyaputta, V., Zaid, B., 2022. The effects of cultural dimensions on
algorithmic news: how do cultural value orientations affect how people perceive
algorithms? Comput. Hum. Behav. 126, 107007.
Shokouhyar, S., Shokoohyar, S., Safari, S., 2020. Research on the influence of after-sales
service quality factors on customer satisfaction. J. Retailing Consum. Serv. 56,
102139.
Smith, A.K., Bolton, R.N., Wagner, J., 1999. A model of customer satisfaction with
service encounters involving failure and recovery. J. Market. Res. 36 (3), 356–372.
Song, M., Du, J., Xing, X., Mou, J., 2022. Should the chatbot “save itself” or “be helped by
others”? The influence of service recovery types on consumer perceptions of
recovery satisfaction. Electron. Commer. Res. Appl. 55, 101199.
Song, M., Zhang, H., Xing, X., Duan, Y., 2023. Appreciation vs. apology: research on the
influence mechanism of chatbot service recovery based on politeness theory.
J. Retailing Consum. Serv. 73, 103323.
Sparks, B.A., Browning, V., 2010. Complaining in cyberspace: the motives and forms of
hotel guests’ complaints online. J. Hospit. Market. Manag. 19 (7), 797–818.
Spreng, R.A., Harrell, G.D., Mackoy, R.D., 1995. Service recovery: impact on satisfaction
and intentions. J. Serv. Market. 9 (1), 15–23.
Suta, P., Lan, X., Wu, B., Mongkolnam, P., Chan, J.H., 2020. An overview of machine
learning in chatbots. Int. J. Mech. Eng. Robot. Res. 9 (4), 502–510.
Tan, H., Yan, M., 2020. Physician-user interaction and users’ perceived service quality:
evidence from Chinese mobile healthcare consultation. Inf. Technol. People 33 (5),
1403–1426.
Um, T., Kim, T., Chung, N., 2020. How does an intelligence chatbot affect customers
compared with self-service technology for sustainable services? Sustainability 12
(12), 5119.
C. Zhou and Q. Chang
Uzir, M.U.H., Al Halbusi, H., Thurasamy, R., Hock, R.L.T., Aljaberi, M.A., Hasan, N.,
Hamid, M., 2021. The effects of service quality, perceived value and trust in home
delivery service personnel on customer satisfaction: evidence from a developing
country. J. Retailing Consum. Serv. 63, 102721.
Van Vaerenbergh, Y., Varga, D., De Keyser, A., Orsingher, C., 2019. The service recovery
journey: Conceptualization, integration, and directions for future research. J. Serv.
Res. 22 (2), 103–119.
Wamba, S.F., Bawack, R.E., Guthrie, C., Queiroz, M.M., Carillo, K.D.A., 2021. Are we
preparing for a good AI society? A bibliometric review and research agenda.
Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 164, 120482.
Wang, C., Li, Y., Fu, W., Jin, J., 2023. Whether to trust chatbots: applying the event-
related approach to understand consumers’ emotional experiences in interactions
with chatbots in e-commerce. J. Retailing Consum. Serv. 73, 103325.
Wang, X., Lu, J., Ow, T.T., Feng, Y., Liu, L., 2021. Understanding the emotional and
informational influence on customer knowledge contribution through quantitative
content analysis. Inf. Manag. 58 (2), 103426.
Warren, C., Carter, E.P., McGraw, A.P., 2019. Being funny is not enough: the influence of
perceived humor and negative emotional reactions on brand attitudes. Int. J. Advert.
38 (7), 1025–1045.
Waytz, A., Cacioppo, J., Epley, N., 2010. Who sees human? The stability and importance
of individual differences in anthropomorphism. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 5 (3),
219–232.
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. J. Serv. Manag. 29 (5), 907–931.
24
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 78 (2024) 103779
Xing, X., Song, M., Duan, Y., Mou, J., 2022. Effects of different service failure types and
recovery strategies on the consumer response mechanism of chatbots. Technol. Soc.
70, 102049.
Xu, Y., Goedegebuure, R., Van der Heijden, B., 2007. Customer perception, customer
satisfaction, and customer loyalty within Chinese securities business: towards a
mediation model for predicting customer behavior. J. Relatsh. Mark. 5 (4), 79–104.
Zheng, T., Duan, X., Zhang, K., Yang, X., Jiang, Y., 2023. How chatbots’
anthropomorphism affects user satisfaction: the mediating role of perceived warmth
and competence. In: Wuhan International Conference on E-Business. Springer Nature
Switzerland, Cham, pp. 96–107.
Zhou, C., Xiu, H., Wang, Y., Yu, X., 2021. Characterizing the dissemination of
misinformation on social media in health emergencies: an empirical study based on
COVID-19. Inf. Process. Manag. 58 (4), 102554.
Zhou, R., Wang, X., Shi, Y., Zhang, R., Zhang, L., Guo, H., 2019. Measuring e-service
quality and its importance to customer satisfaction and loyalty: an empirical study in
a telecom setting. Electron. Commer. Res. 19, 477–499.
Zhu, D.H., Sun, H., Chang, Y.P., 2016. Effect of social support on customer satisfaction
and citizenship behavior in online brand communities: the moderating role of
support source. J. Retailing Consum. Serv. 31, 287–293.
Zogaj, A., Mähner, P.M., Yang, L., Tscheulin, D.K., 2023. It’sa Match! The effects of
chatbot anthropomorphization and chatbot gender on consumer behavior. J. Bus.
Res. 155, 113412.