573 
661服务机器人的外观拟人化设计主要是为了获得消费者的认可和信赖，但当外观拟人化达到某一临界点时，外观拟人化设计将带来消极结果。在这一临界点尚未明确的背景下，本文基于拟人化理论探讨机器人拟人化与任务类型对消费者偏好的交互作用。三项实验表明，任务类型会引发消费者对服务机器人行为拟人化程度的预期。当高外观拟人化与高互动性任务所引发的高行为拟人化预期相匹配时，消费者更偏好高（vs.低）外观拟人化机器人执行高互动性服务任务，信赖感发挥中介作用；相反，当高外观拟人化与低互动性任务所引发的低行为拟人化预期不一致时，消费者对高（vs.低）外观拟人化机器人产生怪异感，更倾向于接受低（vs.高）外观拟人化的机器人执行低互动性服务任务。本研究不仅丰富了服务机器人拟人化研究情境，深化了拟人化理论，同时有助于管理者在不改变机器人拟人化程度的基础上发挥拟人化的积极作用并规避消极影响，对企业有效应用拟人化服务机器人具有重要启示。
“形”“动”相映：机器人拟人化与任务类型对消费者偏好的影响
摘要
参考文献
2 黄敏学, 吕林祥, 毛文萱. 服务机器人拟人化策略与消费任务类型的交互影响——双重信任视角[J]. 营销科学学报, 2023, 3(2): 115-136. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.2097-0099.2023.2.yxkxxb202302007
3 蒋玉石, 李倩, 刘好, 等. 任是“无情”也动人? AI机器人服务失败后道歉主体对消费者宽恕的影响[J/OL]. 南开管理评论, http://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/12.1288.F.20230814.1651.002.html, 2023-08-14.
7 王海忠, 谢涛, 詹纯玉. 服务失败情境下智能客服化身拟人化的负面影响: 厌恶感的中介机制[J]. 南开管理评论, 2021, 24(4): 194-204. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1008-3448.2021.04.019
8 吴继飞, 于洪彦, 朱翊敏, 等. 人工智能推荐对消费者采纳意愿的影响[J]. 管理科学, 2020, 33(5): 29-43. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1672-0334.2020.05.003
9 许丽颖, 喻丰. 机器人接受度的影响因素[J]. 科学通报, 2020, 65(6): 496-510.
11 Aggarwal P, Mcgill A L. When brands seem human, do humans act like brands? Automatic behavioral priming effects of brand anthropomorphism[J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 2012, 39(2): 307-323. DOI:10.1086/662614
12 Alsaad A. The dual effect of anthropomorphism on customers’ decisions to use artificial intelligence devices in hotel services[J]. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 2023, 32(8): 1048-1076.
13 Ashfaq M, Yun J, Yu S B, et al. I, chatbot: Modeling the determinants of users’ satisfaction and continuance intention of AI-powered service agents[J]. Telematics and Informatics, 2020, 54: 101473. DOI:10.1016/j.tele.2020.101473
14 Blekher M, Danziger S, Grinstein A. Salient volunteering behavior increases monetary risk-taking[J]. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 2020, 30(3): 525-533. DOI:10.1002/jcpy.1146
15 Broadbent E, Stafford R, MacDonald B. Acceptance of healthcare robots for the older population: Review and future directions[J]. International Journal of Social Robotics, 2009, 1(4): 319-330. DOI:10.1007/s12369-009-0030-6
16 Cabibihan J J, Joshi D, Srinivasa Y M, et al. Illusory sense of human touch from a warm and soft artificial hand[J]. IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering, 2015, 23(3): 517-527. DOI:10.1109/TNSRE.2014.2360533
17 Castelo N, Bos M W, Lehmann D R. Task-dependent algorithm aversion[J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 2019, 56(5): 809-825. DOI:10.1177/0022243719851788
18 Chattopadhyay D, MacDorman K F. Familiar faces rendered strange: Why inconsistent realism drives characters into the uncanny valley[J]. Journal of Vision, 2016, 16(11): 7. DOI:10.1167/16.11.7
19 Chi R, Zhang J Y, Pan M Q. The effect of anthropomorphic competence-warmth congruence of service robots on recommendation intention[J]. Current Psychology, 2024, 43(7): 6570-6583. DOI:10.1007/s12144-023-04825-5
20 Choi K, Wang Y, Sparks B. Travel app users’ continued use intentions: It’s a matter of value and trust[J]. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 2019, 36(1): 131-143.
21 Dabholkar P A, Bagozzi R P. An attitudinal model of technology-based self-service: Moderating effects of consumer traits and situational factors[J]. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 2002, 30(3): 184-201. DOI:10.1177/0092070302303001
22 Davenport T, Guha A, Grewal D, et al. How artificial intelligence will change the future of marketing[J]. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 2020, 48(1): 24-42. DOI:10.1007/s11747-019-00696-0
23 Duffy B R. Anthropomorphism and the social robot[J]. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 2003, 42(3-4): 177-190. DOI:10.1016/S0921-8890(02)00374-3
24 Goetz J, Kiesler S, Powers A. Matching robot appearance and behavior to tasks to improve human-robot cooperation[A]. The 12th IEEE international workshop on robot and human interactive communication[C]. Millbrae: IEEE, 2003.
25 Gong L. How social is social responses to computers? The function of the degree of anthropomorphism in computer representations[J]. Computers in Human Behavior, 2008, 24(4): 1494-1509. DOI:10.1016/j.chb.2007.05.007
26 Gray H M, Gray K, Wegner D M. Dimensions of mind perception[J]. Science, 2007, 315(5812): 619. DOI:10.1126/science.1134475
27 Gray K, Wegner D M. Feeling robots and human zombies: Mind perception and the uncanny valley[J]. Cognition, 2012, 125(1): 125-130. DOI:10.1016/j.cognition.2012.06.007
28 Guiry M, Mägi A W, Lutz R J. Defining and measuring recreational shopper identity[J]. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 2006, 34(1): 74-83. DOI:10.1177/0092070305282042
29 Hayes A F, Rockwood N J. Conditional process analysis: Concepts, computation, and advances in the modeling of the contingencies of mechanisms[J]. American Behavioral Scientist, 2020, 64(1): 19-54. DOI:10.1177/0002764219859633
30 Hoff K A, Bashir M. Trust in automation: Integrating empirical evidence on factors that influence trust[J]. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 2015, 57(3): 407-434. DOI:10.1177/0018720814547570
31 Hur J D, Koo M, Hofmann W. When temptations come alive: How anthropomorphism undermines self-control[J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 2015, 42(2): 340-358.
32 Kätsyri J, Förger K, Mäkäräinen M, et al. A review of empirical evidence on different uncanny valley hypotheses: Support for perceptual mismatch as one road to the valley of eeriness[J]. Frontiers in Psychology, 2015, 6: 390.
33 Kessler T, Dutta C N, Marlowe T A, et al. A comparison of trust measures in human-robot interaction scenarios[A]. AHFE international applied human factors and ergonomics conference (7th annual)[C]. Orlando: University of Central Florida, 2016.
34 Kiesler S, Sproull L, Waters K. A prisoner’s dilemma experiment on cooperation with people and human-like computers[J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1996, 70(1): 47-65. DOI:10.1037/0022-3514.70.1.47
35 Kim S, Chen R P, Zhang K. Anthropomorphized helpers undermine autonomy and enjoyment in computer games[J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 2016, 43(2): 282-302. DOI:10.1093/jcr/ucw016
36 Kim S Y, Schmitt B H, Thalmann N M. Eliza in the uncanny valley: Anthropomorphizing consumer robots increases their perceived warmth but decreases liking[J]. Marketing Letters, 2019, 30(1): 1-12. DOI:10.1007/s11002-019-09485-9
37 Lee I. Service robots: A systematic literature review[J]. Electronics, 2021, 10(21): 2658. DOI:10.3390/electronics10212658
38 Lee N, Kim J, Kim E, et al. The influence of politeness behavior on user compliance with social robots in a healthcare service setting[J]. International Journal of Social Robotics, 2017, 9(5): 727-743. DOI:10.1007/s12369-017-0420-0
39 Lee J G, Kim K J, Lee S, et al. Can autonomous vehicles be safe and trustworthy? Effects of appearance and autonomy of unmanned driving systems[J]. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 2015, 31(10): 682-691. DOI:10.1080/10447318.2015.1070547
40 Lee H R, Šabanović S. Culturally variable preferences for robot design and use in South Korea, Turkey, and the United States[A]. Proceedings of the 2014 9th ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction[C]. Bielefeld: IEEE, 2014.
41 MacDorman K F, Chattopadhyay D. Categorization-based stranger avoidance does not explain the uncanny valley effect[J]. Cognition, 2017, 161: 132-135. DOI:10.1016/j.cognition.2017.01.009
42 Mende M, Scott M L, Van Doorn J, et al. Service robots rising: How humanoid robots influence service experiences and elicit compensatory consumer responses[J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 2019, 56(4): 535-556. DOI:10.1177/0022243718822827
43 Miao F, Kozlenkova I V, Wang H Z, et al. An emerging theory of avatar marketing[J]. Journal of Marketing, 2022, 86(1): 67-90. DOI:10.1177/0022242921996646
44 Mori M, MacDorman K F, Kageki N. The uncanny valley[J]. IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine, 2012, 19(2): 98-100.
45 Mulcahy R F, Riedel A, Keating B, et al. Avoiding excessive AI service agent anthropomorphism: Examining its role in delivering bad news[J]. Journal of Service Theory and Practice, 2024, 34(1): 98-126. DOI:10.1108/JSTP-04-2023-0118
46 Nass C, Moon Y. Machines and mindlessness: Social responses to computers[J]. Journal of Social Issues, 2000, 56(1): 81-103. DOI:10.1111/0022-4537.00153
47 Nguyen M, Casper Ferm L E, Quach S, et al. Chatbots in frontline services and customer experience: An anthropomorphism perspective[J]. Psychology & Marketing, 2023, 40(11): 2201-2225.
48 Pelau C, Dabija D C, Ene I. 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[J]. Computers in Human Behavior, 2021, 122: 106855. DOI:10.1016/j.chb.2021.106855
49 Premathilake G W, Li H X. Users’ responses to humanoid social robots: A social response view[J]. Telematics and Informatics, 2024, 91: 102146. DOI:10.1016/j.tele.2024.102146
50 Qin M, Li S Q, Zhu W, et al. Trust in service robot: The role of appearance anthropomorphism[J]. Current Issues in Tourism, 2023, DOI: 10.1080/13683500.2023.2295923.
51 Sääksjärvi M, Hellén K. How designers and marketers can work together to support consumers’ happiness[J]. International Journal of Design, 2013, 7(3): 33-44.
52 Saygin A P, Chaminade T, Ishiguro H, et al. The thing that should not be: Predictive coding and the uncanny valley in perceiving human and humanoid robot actions[J]. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 2012, 7(4): 413-422. DOI:10.1093/scan/nsr025
53 Shechtman N, Horowitz L M. Interpersonal and noninterpersonal interactions, interpersonal motives, and the effect of frustrated motives[J]. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 2006, 32(8): 1126-1139. DOI:10.1177/0146167206288669
54 So K K F, Kim H, Liu S Q, et al. Service robots: The dynamic effects of anthropomorphism and functional perceptions on consumers’ responses[J]. European Journal of Marketing, 2024, 58(1): 1-32. DOI:10.1108/EJM-03-2022-0176
55 Song X X, Li Y P, Leung X Y, et al. Service robots and hotel guests’ perceptions: Anthropomorphism and stereotypes[J]. Tourism Review, 2024, 79(2): 505-522. DOI:10.1108/TR-04-2023-0265
56 Stratistics Market Research Consulting. Service robotics[R/OL]. https://www.marketresearch.com/Global-Industry-Analysts-v1039/Service-Robotics, 2024-07-11.
57 Stroessner S J, Benitez J. The social perception of humanoid and non-humanoid robots: Effects of gendered and machinelike features[J]. International Journal of Social Robotics, 2019, 11(2): 305-315. DOI:10.1007/s12369-018-0502-7
58 Tian M, Yan J R, Li X T. Anthropomorphism of service-oriented AI and customers’ propensity for value co-creation[J]. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 2024, DOI: 10.1108/mip-08-2023-0388.
59 Tinwell A, Grimshaw M, Nabi D A, et al. Facial expression of emotion and perception of the uncanny valley in virtual characters[J]. Computers in Human Behavior, 2011, 27(2): 741-749. DOI:10.1016/j.chb.2010.10.018
60 Tojib D, Sujan R, Ma J Z, et al. How does service robot anthropomorphism affect human co-workers?[J]. Journal of Service Management, 2023, 34(4): 750-769. DOI:10.1108/JOSM-03-2022-0090
61 Wang P X, Kim S, Kim M. Robot anthropomorphism and job insecurity: The role of social comparison[J]. Journal of Business Research, 2023, 164: 114003. DOI:10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.114003
62 Waytz A, Epley N, Cacioppo J T. Social cognition unbound: Insights into anthropomorphism and dehumanization[J]. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 2010, 19(1): 58-62. DOI:10.1177/0963721409359302
63 Wirtz J, Lovelock C. Services marketing: People, technology, strategy[M]. 8th ed. Hackensack, NJ: World Scientific Publishing Company, 2016.
64 Wirtz J, Patterson P G, Kunz W H, et al. Brave new world: Service robots in the frontline[J]. Journal of Service Management, 2018, 29(5): 907-931. DOI:10.1108/JOSM-04-2018-0119
65 Xie Y G, Zhu K Y, Zhou P Y, et al. How does anthropomorphism improve human-AI interaction satisfaction: A dual-path model[J]. Computers in Human Behavior, 2023, 148: 107878. DOI:10.1016/j.chb.2023.107878
66 Yao Q, Wu Z J, Zhou W K. The impact of social class and service type on preference for AI service robots[J]. International Journal of Emerging Markets, 2022, 17(4): 1049-1066. DOI:10.1108/IJOEM-05-2021-0804
引用本文
杜建刚, 吴章建, 王依冉. “形”“动”相映：机器人拟人化与任务类型对消费者偏好的影响[J]. 外国经济与管理, 2025, 47(4): 135-152.
导出参考文献，格式为：
上一篇：数字激励：概念、过程与反思
