Investigating consumers’ adoption of AI chatbots for apparel shopping

Abstract

Purpose

Driven by Davis’s (1989) technology acceptance model (TAM) and Westaby’s (2005) behavioral reasoning theory (BRT), the purpose of this study is to develop and test a conceptual model and examine consumers’ acceptance of artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots for apparel shopping.

Design/methodology/approach

Data from 353 eligible US respondents was collected through a self-administered questionnaire distributed on Amazon Mechanical Turk, an online panel. Confirmatory factor analysis and path analysis were used to test all hypothesized relationships using the structural equation model.

Findings

The results show that optimism and relative advantage of “reasons for” dimensions have a positive and significant influence on perceived ease of use (PEU), while innovativeness and relative advantage have a positive and significant influence on perceived usefulness (PUF). Discomfort and insecurity have no significant impact on PEU and PUF. However, complexity has a negative and significant impact on PEU but not on PUF. Additionally, PEU has a positive influence on PUF. Both PEU and PUF have a positive and significant influence on consumers’ attitudes toward using AI chatbots, which, in turn, affects the intention to use AI chatbots for apparel shopping. Overall, this study identifies that optimism, innovativeness and relative advantage are enablers and good reasons to adopt AI chatbots. Complexity is a prohibitor, making it the only reason against adopting AI chatbots for apparel shopping.

Originality/value

This study contributes to the literature by integrating TAM and BRT to develop a research model to understand what “reasons for” and “reasons against” factors are enablers or prohibitors that significantly impact consumers’ attitude and intention to use AI chatbots for apparel shopping through PEU and PUF.

Citation

Myin, M.T. and Watchravesringkan, K. (2024), "Investigating consumers’ adoption of AI chatbots for apparel shopping", Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 41 No. 3, pp. 314-327. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCM-03-2022-5234