Table A3

Full model explaining brand attitudes

Coefficient (SE)tp
Outcome variable: Brand Attitudes
X1: voice vs voice + IH0.08 (0.14)0.600.549
X2: voice vs text−0.16 (0.14)−1.180.237
X3: voice + IH vs text−0.24 (0.13)−1.900.059
Perceived Human-likeness0.48 (0.04)13.330.000
Cognitive Load0.06 (0.04)1.660.099
Persuasion Knowledge−0.17 (0.04)−4.200.000
Indirect effects
Confidence interval
Effect (SE)Lower limitUpper limit
X1 → HL → A0.10 (0.08)−0.060.26
X2 → HL → A0.30 (0.09)0.140.48
X3 → HL → A0.20 (0.09)0.030.39
X1 → CL → A0.00 (0.01)−0.030.03
X2 → CL → A−0.02 (0.02)−0.070.01
X3 → CL → A−0.03 (0.02)−0.070.01
X1 → PK → A−0.03 (0.03)−0.090.03
X2 → PK → A−0.02 (0.03)−0.080.03
X3 → PK → A0.002 (0.03)−0.050.05
X1 → HL → PK → A0.00 (0.00)−0.010.00
X2 → HL → PK → A0.00 (0.01)−0.020.01
X3 → HL → PK → A−0.003 (0.00)−0.010.005
X1 → CL → PK → A0.00 (0.00)−0.010.01
X2 → CL → PK → A0.01 (0.01)0.00020.02
X3 → CL → → PK → A0.01 (0.01)0.00020.02

Note(s):F(8, 441) = 27.91, p < 0.001, R2 = 0.34; controlled for brand familiarity, familiarity with virtual assistants, modality preference; IH = Interaction History; HL = Perceived Human-likeness; CL = Cognitive Load; PK = Persuasion Knowledge; A = Brand Attitudes

or Create an Account

Close subscription notice
Close access options