心理科学进展 ›› 2025, Vol. 33 ›› Issue (1): 146-162.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2025.0146 cstr: 32111.14.2025.0146
收稿日期:
2024-01-09
出版日期:
2025-01-15
发布日期:
2024-10-28
通讯作者:
陈潇潇, E-mail: chenxiaoxiao0126@163.com基金资助:
WENG Zhigang1, CHEN Xiaoxiao1(), ZHANG Xiaomei1, ZHANG Ju2
Received:
2024-01-09
Online:
2025-01-15
Published:
2024-10-28
摘要:
社会临场感(Social Presence, SP)又称社会存在, 是一种与他人在一起的共在感。社会临场感作为面向新型人机关系态度形成机制的经典与主流中介变量, 亟待对多学科相关文献进行系统性梳理与理论体系的整体性构建。本文以人机关系演进为背景, 从人与计算机交互(Human-Computer Interaction, HCI)和人与机器人交互(Human-Robot Interaction, HRI)的历史视角对社会临场的概念内涵与适用边界进行界定。再以拟人化为前置变量, 个体因素为调节变量, 认知、情感、行为的态度为结果变量, 构建了以社会临场感为中介变量的整合性理论框架, 解构面向新型人机关系的心理机制。最后, 对人机关系调整与机器社会心理、社会临场感的概念内涵外延的扩展、拟人化与社会临场感三方面进行了展望。
中图分类号:
翁智刚, 陈潇潇, 张小妹, 张琚. (2025). 面向新型人机关系的社会临场感. 心理科学进展 , 33(1), 146-162.
WENG Zhigang, CHEN Xiaoxiao, ZHANG Xiaomei, ZHANG Ju. (2025). Social presence oriented toward new human-machine relationships. Advances in Psychological Science, 33(1), 146-162.
要点 | 详情 |
---|---|
最后检索时间 | 2000~2023年 |
数据来源 | (1)Web of Science核心集合, SCI&SSCI数据库 (2)中国知网数据库 |
检索式 | (TS = (Human-Computer Interaction) OR TS = (Human-Robot Interaction) OR TS = (Human-AI Interaction) OR TS = (AI) OR TS = (robot) OR TS = (assistant) OR TS = (agent) OR TS = (chatbot) OR TS = (avatar)) AND (TS = (social presence) OR TS = (automated social presence)) AND (PY = (2000-2023)) SU% = ('人机关系'+'人机交互'+'人工智能'+'机器人'+'聊天机器人') * '社会临场感' |
筛选依据 | (1)将研究方向限定为管理学、商业、心理学、社会学、计算机科学的相关方向。 (2)初筛结果为3111篇文献(中文18篇, 英文3093篇)。 (3)限定学科领域, 剔除无关与重复文献, 得到英文598篇, 中文15篇。 (4)进一步筛查管理学、心理学及交叉学科、社会学及交叉学科、计算机科学及交叉学科等领域的重点期刊后, 并逐个阅读文章标题、摘要, 对引用的重要研究进行整理与查漏补缺。 |
筛选结果 | 合计精炼出77篇相关文献 |
表1 检索流程与规则
要点 | 详情 |
---|---|
最后检索时间 | 2000~2023年 |
数据来源 | (1)Web of Science核心集合, SCI&SSCI数据库 (2)中国知网数据库 |
检索式 | (TS = (Human-Computer Interaction) OR TS = (Human-Robot Interaction) OR TS = (Human-AI Interaction) OR TS = (AI) OR TS = (robot) OR TS = (assistant) OR TS = (agent) OR TS = (chatbot) OR TS = (avatar)) AND (TS = (social presence) OR TS = (automated social presence)) AND (PY = (2000-2023)) SU% = ('人机关系'+'人机交互'+'人工智能'+'机器人'+'聊天机器人') * '社会临场感' |
筛选依据 | (1)将研究方向限定为管理学、商业、心理学、社会学、计算机科学的相关方向。 (2)初筛结果为3111篇文献(中文18篇, 英文3093篇)。 (3)限定学科领域, 剔除无关与重复文献, 得到英文598篇, 中文15篇。 (4)进一步筛查管理学、心理学及交叉学科、社会学及交叉学科、计算机科学及交叉学科等领域的重点期刊后, 并逐个阅读文章标题、摘要, 对引用的重要研究进行整理与查漏补缺。 |
筛选结果 | 合计精炼出77篇相关文献 |
[1] | 黄敏学, 吕林祥, 毛文萱. (2023). 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. 营销科学学报, 3(2), 115-136. |
[2] | 刘伟. (2021). 人机融合——超越人工智能. 北京: 清华大学出版社. |
[3] |
磨然, 方建东, 常保瑞. (2023). 从“拟人归因”到“联盟建立”: 人与聊天机器人关系对参与度的影响. 心理科学进展, 31(9), 1742-1755.
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2023.01742 |
[4] | 戚娅玮, 李斯盛, 杨若欣, 何清华. (2023). ChatGPT热潮下的冷思考: 基于心理学算法厌恶与欣赏的视角. 重庆理工大学学报(社会科学), 37(6), 34-41. |
[5] | 邱海莲. (2020). 服务机器人感知属性对顾客款待体验的影响——技术补偿的视角 [博士学位论文]. 中南财经政法大学, 武汉. |
[6] | 王海忠, 谢涛, 詹纯玉. (2021). 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. 南开管理评论, 24(4), 194-204. |
[7] | 王红卫, 李珏, 刘建国, 樊瑛, 马靓, 霍红,... 丁烈云. (2023). 人机融合复杂社会系统研究. 中国管理科学, 31(7), 1-21. |
[8] | 向安玲, 许可. (2023). 人机何以交互: 理论溯源、范式演变与前景趋势. 全球传媒学刊, 10(5), 88-105. |
[9] | 谢小云, 左玉涵, 胡琼晶. (2021). 数字化时代的人力资源管理: 基于人与技术交互的视角. 管理世界, 37(1), 200-216, 13. |
[10] |
许丽颖, 喻丰, 邬家骅, 韩婷婷, 赵靓. (2017). 拟人化: 从“它”到“他”. 心理科学进展, 25(11), 1942-1954.
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2017.01942 |
[11] | 薛澄岐, 王琳琳. (2021). 智能人机系统的人机融合交互研究综述. 包装工程, 42(20), 112-124, 14. |
[12] | 余南平, 张翌然. (2023). ChatGPT/生成式人工智能对教育的影响: 大国博弈新边疆. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 41(7), 15-25. |
[13] | Abdullah, M. H. (2004). Social presence in online conferences: What makes people “real”?. Malaysian Journal of Distance Education, 6(2), 1-22. |
[14] | Adam, M., Wessel, M., & Benlian, A. (2021). AI-based chatbots in customer service and their effects on user compliance. Electronic Markets, 31(2), 427-445. |
[15] | Airenti, G. (2015). The cognitive bases of anthropomorphism: From relatedness to empathy. International Journal of Social Robotics, 7(1), 117-127. |
[16] | Araujo, T. (2018). Living up to the chatbot hype: The influence of anthropomorphic design cues and communicative agency framing on conversational agent and company perceptions. Computers in Human Behavior, 85, 183-89. |
[17] | Bagozzi, R. P., Brady, M. K., & Huang, M. H. (2022). AI service and emotion. Journal of Service Research, 25(4), 499-504. |
[18] |
Bailenson, J. N., & Yee, N. (2005). Digital chameleons: Automatic assimilation of nonverbal gestures in immersive virtual environments. Psychological Science, 16(10), 814-819.
pmid: 16181445 |
[19] |
Bailenson, J. N., Blascovich, J., Beall, A. C., & Loomis, J. M. (2003). Interpersonal distance in immersive virtual environments. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29(7), 819-833.
doi: 10.1177/0146167203029007002 pmid: 15018671 |
[20] | Balakrishnan, J., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2021). Role of cognitive absorption in building user trust and experience. Psychology & Marketing, 38(4), 643-668. |
[21] | Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall. |
[22] | Ben Mimoun, M. S., Poncin, I., & Garnier, M. (2017). Animated conversational agents and e-consumer productivity: The roles of agents and individual characteristics. Information & Management, 54(5), 545-559. |
[23] | Bernotat, J., & Eyssel, F. (2017). A robot at home-how affect, technology commitment, and personality traits influence user experience in an intelligent robotics apartment. In 2017 26th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN) (pp. 641-646). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE. |
[24] | Biocca, F., & Nowak, K. (2001). Plugging your body into the telecommunication system:Mediated embodiment, media interfaces, and social virtual environments. In In C. Lin & D. Atkin (Eds.), Communication technology and society: Audience adoption and uses (pp. 407-447). Hampton Press. |
[25] | Blut, M., Wang, C., Wünderlich, N. V., & Brock, C. (2021). Understanding anthropomorphism in service provision: A meta-analysis of physical robots, chatbots, and other AI. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 49, 632-658. |
[26] | Breazeal, C. (2003). Toward sociable robots. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 42(3-4), 167-175. |
[27] | Butz, M. V. (2021). Towards strong AI. KI-Künstliche Intelligenz, 35(1), 91-101. |
[28] | Čaić, M., Mahr, D., & Oderkerken-Schröder, G. (2019). Value of social robots in services: Social cognition perspective. Journal of Services Marketing, 29(2), 178-205. |
[29] | Čaić, M., Odekerken-Schröder, G., & Mahr, D. (2018). Service robots: Value co-creation and co-destruction in elderly care networks. Journal of Service Management, 29(2), 178-205. |
[30] | Chandra, B., & Rahman, Z. (2024). Artificial intelligence and value co-creation: A review, conceptual framework and directions for future research. Journal of Service Theory and Practice, 34(1), 7-32. |
[31] |
Chattaraman, V., Kwon, W. S., Gilbert, J. E., & Ross, K. (2019). Should AI-Based, conversational digital assistants employ social-or task-oriented interaction style? A task-competency and reciprocity perspective for older adults. Computers in Human Behavior, 90, 315-330.
doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2018.08.048 |
[32] | Chen, L., Zhang, D., & Hou, M. (2022). The influence of perceived social presence on the willingness to communicate in mobile medical consultations: Experimental study. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 24(5), e31797. |
[33] | Chen, Q., & Park, H. J. (2021). How anthropomorphism affects trust in intelligent personal assistants. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 121(12), 2722-2737. |
[34] | Cheng, Y., & Jiang, H. (2020). How do AI-driven chatbots impact user experience? Examining gratifications, perceived privacy risk, satisfaction, loyalty, and continued use. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 64(4), 592-614. |
[35] | Choung, H., David, P., & Ross, A. (2023). Trust in AI and its role in the acceptance of AI technologies. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 39(9), 1727-1739. |
[36] | Ciechanowski, L., Przegalinska, A., Magnuski, M., & Gloor, P. (2018). In the shades of the uncanny valley: An experimental study of human-chatbot interaction. Future Generation Computer Systems, 92(3), 539-548. |
[37] | Crocetti, E., Prati, F., & Rubini, M. (2018). The interplay of personal and social identity. European Psychologist, 23(3), 210-220. |
[38] | Cuddy, A. J. C., Fiske, S. T., & Glick, P. (2008). Warmth and competence as universal dimensions of social perception: The stereotype content model and the BIAS map. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 61-149. |
[39] |
Damiano, L., & Dumouchel, P. (2018). Anthropomorphism in human-robot co-evolution. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 468.
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00468 pmid: 29632507 |
[40] | Davenport, T., Guha, A., Grewal, D., & Bressgott, T. (2020). How artificial intelligence will change the future of marketing. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 48(1), 24-42. |
[41] | Davis, M. H. (1983). Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44(1), 113-126. |
[42] |
De Visser, E. J., Pak, R., & Shaw, T. H. (2018). From ‘automation’ to ‘autonomy’: The importance of trust repair in human-machine interaction. Ergonomics, 61(10), 1409-1427.
doi: 10.1080/00140139.2018.1457725 pmid: 29578376 |
[43] |
Diel, A., & MacDorman, K. F. (2021). Creepy cats and strange high houses: Support for configural processing in testing predictions of nine uncanny valley theories. Journal of Vision, 21(4), 1-1.
doi: 10.1167/jov.21.4.1 pmid: 33792617 |
[44] | Dignum, V. (2018). Ethics in artificial intelligence: Introduction to the special issue. Ethics and Information Technology, 20(1), 1-3. |
[45] | Duffy, B. R. (2003). Anthropomorphism and the social robot. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 42(3), 177-190. |
[46] |
Edwards, A., Edwards, C., Westerman, D., & Spence, P. R. (2019). Initial expectations, interactions, and beyond with social robots. Computers in Human Behavior, 90, 308-314.
doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2018.08.042 |
[47] | Edwards, C., Beattie, A. J., Edwards, A., & Spence, P. R. (2016). Differences in perceptions of communication quality between a Twitterbot and human agent for information seeking and learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 65, 666-671. |
[48] |
Epley, N., Akalis, S., Waytz, A., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2008). Creating social connection through inferential reproduction: Loneliness and perceived agency in gadgets, gods, and greyhounds. Psychological Science, 19(2), 114-120.
doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02056.x pmid: 18271858 |
[49] |
Epley, N., Waytz, A., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2007). On seeing human: A three-factor theory of anthropomorphism. Psychological Review, 114(4), 864.
doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.114.4.864 pmid: 17907867 |
[50] | Esmaeilzadeh, H., & Vaezi, R. (2022). Conscious empathic AI in service. Journal of Service Research, 25(4), 549-564. |
[51] |
Eyssel, F., & Kuchenbrandt, D. (2012). Social categorization of social robots: Anthropomorphism as a function of robot group membership. British Journal of Social Psychology, 51(4), 724-731.
doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8309.2011.02082.x pmid: 22103234 |
[52] | Fakhimi, A., Garry, T., & Biggemann, S. (2023). The effects of anthropomorphised virtual conversational assistants on consumer engagement and trust during service encounters. Australasian Marketing Journal, 31(4), 314-324. |
[53] | Fernandes, T., & Oliveira, E. (2021). Understanding consumers’ acceptance of automated technologies in service encounters: Drivers of digital voice assistants adoption. Journal of Business Research, 122, 180-191. |
[54] | Fong, T., Nourbakhsh, I., & Dautenhahn, K. (2003). A survey of socially interactive robots. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 42(3-4), 143-166. |
[55] | Fox, J., & Gambino, A. (2021). Relationship development with humanoid social robots: Applying interpersonal theories to human-robot interaction. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 24(5), 294-299. |
[56] | Gillath, O., Ai, T., Branicky, M. S., Keshmiri, S., Davison, R. B., & Spaulding, R. (2021). Attachment and trust in artificial intelligence. Computers in Human Behavior, 115, Article 106607. |
[57] | Go, E., & Sundar, S. S. (2019). Humanizing chatbots: The effects of visual, identity and conversational cues on humanness perceptions. Computers in Human Behavior, 97, 304-316. |
[58] | Goodrich, M. A., & Schultz, A. C. (2007). Human-robot interaction: A survey. Foundations and Trends in Human- Computer Interaction, 1(3), 203-275. |
[59] |
Greenaway, K. H., Haslam, S. A., Cruwys, T., Branscombe, N. R., Ysseldyk, R., & Heldreth, C. (2015). From "we" to "me": Group identification enhances perceived personal control with consequences for health and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109(1), 53-74.
doi: 10.1037/pspi0000019 pmid: 25938701 |
[60] | Guadagno, R. E., Swinth, K. R., & Blascovich, J. (2011). Social evaluations of embodied agents and avatars. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(6), 2380-2385. |
[61] | Guingrich, R., & Graziano, M. S. A. (2023). Chatbots as social companions: How people perceive consciousness, human likeness, and social health benefits in machines. arXiv E-Prints, 2311. |
[62] | Gursoy, D., Chi, O. H., Lu, L., & Nunkoo, R. (2019). Consumers acceptance of artificially intelligent (AI) device use in service delivery. International Journal of Information Management, 49, 157-169. |
[63] | Han, E., Yin, D., & Zhang, H. (2023). Bots with feelings: Should AI agents express positive emotion in customer service?. Information Systems Research, 34(3), 1296-1311. |
[64] | Harris-Watson, A. M., Larson, L. E., Lauharatanahirun, N., DeChurch, L. A., & Contractor, N. S. (2023). Social perception in human-AI teams: Warmth and competence predict receptivity to AI teammates. Computer in Human Behavior, 145, Article 107765. |
[65] | Hassanein, K., & Head, M. (2007). Manipulating perceived social presence through the web interface and its impact on attitude towards online shopping. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 65(8), 689-708. |
[66] | Heerink, M., Kröse, B., Evers, V., & Wielinga, B. (2008). The influence of social presence on enjoyment and intention to use of a robot and screen agent by elderly users. Journal of Physical Agents, 2(2), 33-40. |
[67] | Heerink, M., Kröse, B., Evers, V., & Wielinga, B. (2010). Relating conversational expressiveness to social presence and acceptance of an assistive social robot. Virtual Reality, 14(1), 77-84. |
[68] | Herse, S., Vitale, J., Johnston, B., & Williams, M. A. (2021). Using trust to determine user decision making & task outcome during a human-agent collaborative task. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (pp. 73-82). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE. |
[69] | Hinz, N. A., Ciardo, F., & Wykowska, A. (2019). Individual differences in attitude toward robots predict behavior in human-robot interaction. In M. A. Salichs, S. Sam Ge, E. I. Barakova, J.J. Cabibihan, A. R. Wagner, Á. Castro- González, & H. He (Eds.), Lecture notes in computer science: Vol. 11876: Social robotics ICSR 2019 (pp. 64-73). Springer. |
[70] | Hoc, J. M. (2001). Towards a cognitive approach to human- machine cooperation in dynamic situations. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 54(4), 509-540. |
[71] | Hu, Q., Lu, Y., Pan, Z., Gong, Y., & Yang, Z. (2021). Can AI artifacts influence human cognition? The effects of artificial autonomy in intelligent personal assistants. International Journal of Information Management, 56, Article 102250. |
[72] | Huang, M. H., & Rust, R. T. (2018). Artificial intelligence in service. Journal of Service Research, 21(2), 155-172. |
[73] | Huang, M. H., & Rust, R. T. (2021). Engaged to a robot? The role of AI in service. Journal of Service Research, 24(1), 30-41. |
[74] | Jeong, J., Chen, Q., Kim, N., & Lee, H. (2022). Virtual reality collaborative platform for e-learning: Analysis of student engagement and perceptions. In Proceedings of the 27th CAADRIA Conference (vol. 1, pp. 19-28). Hong Kong: Association for Computer-Aided Architectural Design Research in Asia. |
[75] |
Jörling, M., Böhm, R., & Paluch, S. (2019). Service robots: Drivers of perceived responsibility for service outcomes. Journal of Service Research, 22(4), 404-420.
doi: 10.1177/1094670519842334 |
[76] | Kim, K., Bruder, G., Maloney, D., & Welch, G. (2016). The influence of real human personality on social presence with a virtual human in augmented reality. In International Conference on Artificial Reality and Telexistence Eurographics Symposium on Virtual Environments (pp. 115-122). Lisbon: The Eurographics Association. |
[77] | Kim, K. J., Eunil, P., & Shyam, S. S. (2013). Caregiving role in human-robot interaction: A study of the mediating effects of perceived benefit and social presence. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(4), 1799-1806. |
[78] | Kim, W. B., & Hur, H. J. (2023). What makes people feel empathy for AI chatbots? Assessing the role of competence and warmth. International Journal of Human- Computer Interaction, 40(17),4674-4687. |
[79] | Lee, K. M., & Nass, C. (2005). Social-psychological origins of feelings of presence: Creating social presence with machine-generated voices. Media Psychology, 7(1), 31-45. |
[80] | Lee, K. M., Peng, W., Jin, S., & Yan, C. (2006). Can robots manifest personality? An empirical test of personality recognition, social responses, and social presence in human-robot interaction. Journal of Communication, 56(4), 754-772. |
[81] | Lemay, D. J., Basnet, R. B., & Doleck, T. (2024). Fearing the robot apocalypse: Correlates of AI anxiety. International Journal of Learning Analytics & Artificial Intelligence for Education, 2(2), 24-33. |
[82] | Li, B., Yao, R., & Nan, Y. (2023). How do friendship artificial intelligence chatbots (FAIC) benefit the continuance using intention and customer engagement?. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 22(6), 1376-1398. |
[83] | Liehner, G. L., Biermann, H., Hick, A., Brauner, P., & Ziefle, M. (2023). Perceptions, attitudes and trust toward artificial intelligence-an assessment of the public opinion. Artificial Intelligence and Social Computing, 782, 32-41. |
[84] | Liu-Thompkins, Y., Okazaki, S., & Li, H. (2022). Artificial empathy in marketing interactions: Bridging the human-AI gap in affective and social customer experience. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 50(6), 1198-1218. |
[85] | Lowenthal, P. R., & Snelson, C. (2017). In search of a better understanding of social presence: An investigation into how researchers define social presence. Distance Education, 38(2), 1-19. |
[86] | Lu, B., Fan, W., & Zhou, M. (2016). Social presence, trust, and social commerce purchase intention: An empirical research. Computers in Human Behavior, 56, 225-237. |
[87] | Mahmud, H., Islam, A. K. M. N., AHMED, S. I., & Smolander, K. (2022). What influences algorithmic decision-making? A systematic literature review on algorithm aversion. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 175, 121390-121416. |
[88] | Malhotra, A., & Hoey, J. (2021). Emotions in socio-cultural interactive AI agents. In 2021 9th International Conference on Affective Computing and Intelligent Interaction Workshops and Demos (ACIIW) (pp. 1-6). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE. |
[89] | Maroufkhani, P., Asadi, S., Ghobakhloo, M., Jannesari, M. T., & Ismail, W. K. W. (2022). How do interactive voice assistants build brands’ loyalty? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 183, Article 121870. |
[90] | Mayes, E. (1998). The fantasy of internatlization in the theoretical imaginary. Representations, 62, 100-110. |
[91] | McCrae, R. R., & Costa Jr, P. T. (1997). Conceptions and correlates of openness to experience. In R. Hogan, J. Johnson & S. Briggs (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 825-847). Academic Press. |
[92] | McLean, G., Osei-Frimpong, K., & Barhorst, J. (2021). Alexa, do voice assistants influence consumer brand engagement?-Examining the role of AI powered voice assistants in influencing consumer brand engagement. Journal of Business Research, 124, 312-328. |
[93] | Mende, M., Scott, M. L., van Doorn, J., Grewal, D., & Shanks, I. (2019). Service robots rising: How humanoid robots influence service experiences and elicit compensatory consumer responses. Journal of Marketing Research, 56(4), 535-556. |
[94] | Merrill, K., Kim, J., & Collins, C. (2022). AI companions for lonely individuals and the role of social presence. Communication Research Reports, 39(2), 93-103. |
[95] | Minsky, M. (2007). The emotion machine: Commonsense thinking, artificial intelligence, and the future of the human mind. Simon and Schuster. |
[96] | Morelli, S., Pazzi, V., Nardini, O., & Bonati, S. (2022). Framing disaster risk perception and vulnerability in social media communication: A literature review. Sustainability, 14(15), Article 9148. |
[97] | Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2004). Personalized messages that promote science learning in virtual environments. Journal of Education Psychology, 96(1), 165-173. |
[98] | Mori, M. (1970). The uncanny valley. Energy, 7(4), 33-35. |
[99] | Mori, M., MacDorman, K. F., & Kageki, N. (2012). The uncanny valley [from the field], IEEE Robotics and Automation Magazine, 19(2), 98-100. |
[100] | Munnukka, J., Talvitie-Lamberg, K., & Maity, D. (2022). Anthropomorphism and social presence in human-virtual service assistant interactions: The role of dialog length and attitudes. Computers in Human Behavior, 135, Article 107343. |
[101] | Murphy, J., Gretzel, U., & Pesonen, J. (2019). Marketing robot services in hospitality and tourism: The role of anthropomorphism. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 36(7), 784-795. |
[102] | Nass, C., & Moon, Y. (2000). Machines and mindlessness: Social responses to computers. Journal of Social Issues, 56(1), 81-103. |
[103] | Nielsen, J. (1994). Usability engineering. Morgan Kaufmann. |
[104] | Norman, D. A. (2013). The design of everyday things. MIT Press. |
[105] | Nowak, K. L., & Biocca, F. (2003). The effect of the agency and anthropomorphism on users' sense of telepresence, copresence, and social presence in virtual environments. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 12(5), 481-494. |
[106] | Odekerken-Schröder, G., Mennens, K., Steins, M., & Mahr, D. (2022). The service triad: An empirical study of service robots, customers and frontline employees. Journal of Service Management, 33(2), 246-292. |
[107] | Oh, C. S., Bailenson, J. N., & Welch, G. F. (2018). A systematic review of social presence: Definition, antecedents, and implications. Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 10(5), 1-35. |
[108] | Oksanen, A., Savela, N., Latikka, R., & Koivula, A. (2020). Trust toward robots and artificial intelligence: An experimental approach to human-technology interactions online. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, Article 568256. |
[109] | O’Neil, T., McNeese, N., Barron, A., & Schelble, B. (2020). Human-autonomy teaming: A review and analysis of the empirical literature. Human Factors, 64(5), 1-35. |
[110] | O'Reilly, C., Maher, P. J., Smith, E. M., MacCarron, P., & Quayle, M. (2024). Social identity emergence in attitude interactions and the identity strengthening effects of cumulative attitude agreement. European Journal of Social Psychology, 54(1), 97-117. |
[111] | Payne, E., Dahl, A. J., & Peltier, J. (2021). Digital servitization value co-creation framework for AI services: A research agenda for digital transformation in financial service ecosystems. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, 15(2), 200-222. |
[112] | Pelau, C., Dabija, D.-C., & Stanescu, M. (2024). Can I trust my AI friend? The role of emotions, feelings of friendship and trust for consumers' information-sharing behavior toward AI. Oeconomia Copernicana, 15(2), 407-433. |
[113] | Pentina, I., Hancock, T., & Xie, T. (2023). Exploring relationship development with social chatbots: A mixed-method study of replika. Computers in Human Behavior, 140, Article 107600. |
[114] | Pereira, A., Prada, R., & Paiva, A. (2014). Improving social presence in human-agent interaction. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1449-1458). New York, NY: Association for Computing Machinery. |
[115] | Pimentel, D., Kalyanaraman, S., Lee, Y. H., & Halan, S. (2021). Voices of the unsung: The role of social presence and interactivity in building empathy in 360 video. New Media & Society, 23(8), 2230-2254. |
[116] | Pitardi, V., & Marriott, H. R. (2021). Alexa, she's not human but... unveiling the drivers of consumers' trust in voice- based artificial intelligence. Psychology& Marketing, 38(4), 626-642. |
[117] | Pusztahelyi, R., & Stefán, I. (2022). Household social robots-special issues relating to data protection. Acta Universitatis Sapientiae Legal Studies, 11(1), 95-118. |
[118] | Qiu, L., & Benbasat, I. (2009). Evaluating anthropomorphic product recommendation agents: A social relationship perspective to designing information systems. Journal of Management Information Systems, 25(4), 145-182. |
[119] | Reeves, B., & Nass, C. I. (1996). The media equation: How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. Cambridge University Press. |
[120] | Roy, R., & Naidoo, V. (2021). Enhancing chatbot effectiveness: The role of anthropomorphic conversational styles and time orientation. Journal of Business Research, 126, 23-34. |
[121] |
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68-78.
doi: 10.1037//0003-066x.55.1.68 pmid: 11392867 |
[122] | Schellen, E., & Wykowska, A. (2019). Intentional mindset toward robots-open questions and methodological challenges. Frontiers in Robot and AI, 5, 139. |
[123] | Sheehan, B., Jin, H. S., & Gottlieb, U. (2020). Customer service chatbots: Anthropomorphism and adoption. Journal of Business Research, 115, 14-24. |
[124] | Shin, J. G., Kim, J. B., & Kim, S. H. (2019). A framework to identify critical design parameters for enhancing user’s satisfaction in human-AI interactions. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1284(1), 12036. |
[125] | Shneiderman, B., & Plaisant, C. (2010). Designing the user interface: Strategies for effective human-computer interaction. Pearson Education India. |
[126] | Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications. Wiley. |
[127] | Sun, X., & Guan, H. (2022). Research on empathic remediation mechanism of chatbots mediated by social presence and trust. In Proceedings of the 2022 6th International Conference on Electronic Information Technology and Computer Engineering (pp. 772-776). New York, NY: Association for Computing Machinery. |
[128] | Sundar, S. S. (2008). The MAIN model:A heuristic approach to understanding technology effects on credibility. In M. J. Metzger & A. J. Flanagin (Eds.), Digital media, youth, and credibility (pp. 73-100). MIT Press. |
[129] | Sundar, S. S. (2020). Rise of machine agency: A framework for studying the psychology of human-AI interaction (HAII). Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 25(1), 74-88. |
[130] | Sung, E., & Mayer, R. E. (2012). Five facets of social presence in online distance education. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(5), 1738-1747. |
[131] | Swan, K. P., & Shih, L. (2005). On the nature and development of social presence in online course discussions. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 9(3), 115-136. |
[132] | Titchener, E. B. (1908). Lectures on the Elementary Psychology of Feeling and Attention. Macmillan. |
[133] | Tsai, W. H. S., Liu, Y., & Chuan, C. H. (2021). How chatbots’ social presence communication enhances consumer engagement: The mediating role of parasocial interaction and dialogue. Indian Journal of Medical Research, 15(3), 460-482. |
[134] | Tu, C. H. (2002). The measurement of social presence in an online learning environment. International Journal on E-Learning, 1(2), 34-45. |
[135] | Tung, V. W. S., & Au, N. M. (2018). Exploring customer experiences with robotics in hospitality. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 30(7), 2680-2697. |
[136] | van Doorn, J., Mende, M., Noble, S. M., Hulland, J., Ostrom, A. L., Grewal, D., & Petersen, J. A. (2017). Domo arigato Mr. Roboto: Emergence of automated social presence in organizational frontlines and customers’ service experiences. Journal of Service Research, 20(1), 43-58. |
[137] | Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186-204. |
[138] | Wagner, K., & Schramm-Klein, H. (2019). Alexa, are you human? Investigating anthropomorphism of digital voice assistants-a qualitative approach. In Fortieth International Conference on Information Systems (pp. 1-17). Munich, Germany: ICIS. |
[139] | Wienrich, C., & Latoschik, M. (2021). Extended artificial intelligence: New prospects of human-AI interaction research. Frontiers in Virtual Reality, 2, Article 686783. |
[140] | Wieseke, J., Geigenmüller, A., & Kraus, F. (2012). On the role of empathy in customer-employee interactions. Journal of Service Research, 15(3), 316-331. |
[141] | Wirtz, J., Patterson, P. G., Kunz, W. H., Gruber, T., Lu, V. N., Paluch, S., & Martins, A. (2018). Brave new world: Service robots in the frontline. Journal of Service Management, 29(5), 907-931. |
[142] | Xu, Y., Zhang, J., Chi, R., & Deng, G. (2022). Enhancing customer satisfaction with chatbots: The influence of anthropomorphic communication styles and anthropomorphised roles. Nankai Business Review International, 14(2), 249-271. |
[143] | Yam, K. C., Tang, P. M., Jackson, J. C., Su, R., & Gray, K. (2023). The rise of robots increases job insecurity and maladaptive workplace behaviors: Multimethod evidence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 108(5), 850-870. |
[144] | Yang, Y., Liu, Y., Lv, X., Ai, J., & Li, Y. (2022). Anthropomorphism and customers’ willingness to use artificial intelligence service agents. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 31(1), 1-23. |
[145] | Yassien, A., Elagroudy, P., Makled, E., & Abdennadher, S. (2020). A design space for social presence in VR. In Proceedings of the 11th Nordic Conference on Human- Computer Interaction: Shaping Experiences, Shaping Society (pp. 1-12). New York, NY: Association for Computing Machinery. |
[146] | Ye, S., Ying, T., Zhou, L., & Wang, T. (2019). Enhancing customer trust in peer-to-peer accommodation: A “soft” strategy via social presence. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 79, 1-10. |
[147] | Yen, C. J., & Tu, C. H. (2008). Online social presence: A study of score validity of the computer-mediated communication questionnaire. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 9(3), 297-310. |
[148] | Yoganathan, V., Osburg, V.-S., Kunz, W., & Toporowski, W. (2021). Check-in at the Robo-desk: Effects of automated social presence on social cognition and service implications. Tourism Management, 85, Article 104309. |
[149] | Zhang, M., Gursoy, D., Zhu, Z., & Shi, S. (2021). Impact of anthropomorphic features of artificially intelligent service robots on consumer acceptance: Moderating role of sense of humor. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 33(11), 3883-3905. |
[1] | 彭晨明, 屈奕帆, 郭晓凌, 陈增祥. 人工智能服务对消费者道德行为的双刃剑效应[J]. 心理科学进展, 2025, 33(2): 236-255. |
[2] | 吴波, 张傲杰, 曹菲. 专业设计、用户设计还是AI设计?设计源效应的心理机制[J]. 心理科学进展, 2024, 32(6): 995-1009. |
[3] | 侯悍超, 倪士光, 林书亚, 王蒲生. 当AI学习共情:心理学视角下共情计算的主题、场景与优化[J]. 心理科学进展, 2024, 32(5): 845-858. |
[4] | 舒丽芳, 王魁, 吴月燕, 陈斯允. 人工智能指导对消费者长期目标追求的多阶段影响机制[J]. 心理科学进展, 2024, 32(3): 451-464. |
[5] | 王红丽, 李振, 周梦楠, 陈政任. 赋能或去能:人工智能对创造性人格的影响[J]. 心理科学进展, 2024, 32(12): 1990-2004. |
[6] | 王永跃, 黄飘飘, 金杨华, 白新文, 岳峰凯, 张范颖, 郭子浩. 人工智能背景下制造业知识型员工技术空心化: 内涵、生成及影响机制[J]. 心理科学进展, 2024, 32(12): 2005-2017. |
[7] | 齐玥, 陈俊廷, 秦邵天, 杜峰. 通用人工智能时代的人与AI信任[J]. 心理科学进展, 2024, 32(12): 2124-2136. |
[8] | 涂画, 张春妹. 亲密伴侣暴力的成因:社会学习和女性主义理论下基于态度的解释[J]. 心理科学进展, 2024, 32(11): 1898-1911. |
[9] | 蒋建武, 龙晗寰, 胡洁宇. 工作场所人工智能应用对员工影响的元分析[J]. 心理科学进展, 2024, 32(10): 1621-1639. |
[10] | 尹萌, 牛雄鹰. 与AI“共舞”:系统化视角下的AI−员工协作[J]. 心理科学进展, 2024, 32(1): 162-176. |
[11] | 许销冰, 程兰萍, 孙洪杰. 时间拟人化倾向及其对亲社会行为的影响[J]. 心理科学进展, 2023, 31(9): 1569-1582. |
[12] | 涂艳, 蒿坡, 龙立荣. 工作替代还是工作转型?技术型工作不安全感的内涵、影响后果及来源[J]. 心理科学进展, 2023, 31(8): 1359-1373. |
[13] | 李鑫, 刘振会, 罗杰, 金童林, 贾彦茹, 乌云特娜. 亲环境态度与行为的代际传递效应及其机制[J]. 心理科学进展, 2023, 31(7): 1254-1268. |
[14] | 成美霞, 匡子翌, 冷晓雪, 张洋, 王福兴. 以教促学:学习者自我生成教学对学习的影响[J]. 心理科学进展, 2023, 31(5): 769-782. |
[15] | 李静, 吴旭瑶, 岳磊, 曾祥丽, 方庆园. 物质主义对绿色消费的影响:促进还是抑制?[J]. 心理科学进展, 2022, 30(6): 1191-1204. |
阅读次数 | ||||||
全文 |
|
|||||
摘要 |
|
|||||