Ijraset Journal For Research in Applied Science and Engineering Technology
Authors: Dr. Vikas Saxena, Amardeep Gautam
DOI Link: https://doi.org/10.22214/ijraset.2022.42967
Certificate: View Certificate
When interaction comes in digital world means interacting with AI- enabled chatbot, this study focuses on customer perception and attitude to conclude can AI replaced the human? Primary survey was done for collected the customer data, 300 people were targeted out of which 219 responds. The study concludes that customer still prefer human interaction over chatbot even chatbot provides many benefits like quick response, easy to use and convenient to interact at any time. After conclusion there is future scope of this study and some recommendation for food service providers in India.
I. INTRODUCTION
Artificial intelligence (AI) is a branch of computer science concerned with building smart machines capable of performing tasks that typically require human intelligence. Since there are advancements in machine learning and deep learning which is creating a shift in every industries sector and handling various types of operations even better than humans. Majority of the repetitive tasks are now replaced with AI which was previously done by humans. This intelligent behaviour can be helpful to replace humans as it can imitate the human behaviour and can do the same work arguably more effectively and efficiently. [1]
A. Chatbot and How it Works
One of the industries that have introduced this technology in their operations is Food service/ Delivery Apps. To replace the Human element in customer support AI is used in the form of Chatbots [1]. A chatbot is a computer program that allows humans to interact with technology using a variety of input methods such as voice, text, gesture and touch [2]. Chatbots attend to customers at all times of the day and week and are not limited by time or a physical location [1].
On a simple level, a human interacts with a chatbot. If voice is used, the chatbot first turns the voice data input into text (using Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR) technology). Text only chatbots such as text-based messaging services skip this step. The chatbot then analyses the text input, considers the best response and delivers that back to the user.
The chatbot’s reply output may be delivered in any number of ways such as written text, voice via Text to Speech (TTS) tools, or perhaps by completing a task.
It’s worth noting that, understanding humans isn’t easy for a machine. The subtle and nuanced way humans communicate is a very complex task to recreate artificially, which is why chatbots use several natural language principles: Natural Language Processing (NLP) Natural Language Processing is used to split the user input into sentences and words. It also standardizes the text through a series of techniques, for example, converting it all to lowercase or correcting spelling mistakes before determining if the word is an adjective or verb – it’s at this stage where other factors such as sentiment are also considered. Natural Language Understanding (NLU) Natural Language Understanding helps the chatbot understand what the user said using both general and domain specific language objects such as lexicons, synonyms and themes. These are then used in conjunction with algorithms or rules to construct dialogue flows that tell the chatbot how to respond. Natural Language Generation (NLG) Delivering a meaningful, personalized experience beyond pre-scripted responses requires natural language generation. This enables the chatbot to interrogate data repositories, including integrated back-end systems and third-party databases, and to use that information in creating a response. Conversational AI technology takes NLP and NLU to the next level. It allows enterprises to create advanced dialogue systems that utilize memory, personal preferences and contextual understanding to deliver a realistic and engaging natural language interface [2].
B. Research Problem
Nowadays, in food delivery app businesses like Zomato, swiggy, chatbots are used to solve customers’ queries or problems, but chatbots are effective in that business model? The target customer of this business model are the people who don’t have time to go outside to take food, they want convenience at their home, or are not ready to take the pain, so their queries should also be solved most conveniently. A chatbot is used to serve the user's request. The chatbot must plan how to perform the task requested by a user. Chatbot responds to each user request by learning from the conversation to what the request is. There is no doubt that machines are much better when it comes to working efficiently but they cannot replace the human connection that customer executive makes with their customers as the customers find the real interaction more reliable and engaging. More questions arise when a chatbot is used, is the customer is satisfied with the chatbot? Is customer trust chatbot for the solution of their problem? Which one do customers prefer between AI-based chatbot interaction and human interaction? Considering all these factors there was a need to understand consumer perception and attitude towards the adoption of AI-based Chatbots by online food services in India.
C. Scope of the Study
This study focusing on the analysis of Consumer perception and attitude towards adoption of AI- based Chatbots by online food service in India. As we all know In India consumer wants to talk directly to the customer executive rather than addressing their problem to the chatbots, if the chatbots doesn’t solve the query of the customer problem and took time to solve the customer problem then it demotivates the customer and customer loses their interest in service. Study will be beneficial for the business models like Zomato, Swiggy, Ubereats, etc. to understand the impact of AI-based chatbot on customers and their preference towards chatbot and plan their marketing strategy accordingly.
D. Objective of the study
II. LITERATURE REVIEW
III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
A. Data Collection
Data was collected through primary source. Primary data was collected through survey method. Primary data was collected in the month of March, 2022. A questionnaire (Annexure I) was prepared to get responses. Questionnaire was shared through google form to about 650 respondents. Out of which 219 people responded to the Google form link of the questionnaire. Sample size 219 was studied in this study. The questionnaire consists of two sections: - Section-1 contains demographic profile of the respondents and section-2 contains questions to know perception and attitude of customers towards AI- based chatbot in food services.
A questionnaire consists of different types of questions and includes some short type questions, some multiple choices, and some of them are Likert scale rating questions (ratings between 1 to 5, and 1 to 10). Based upon the responses, tables and charts were prepared to analyze the result.
B. Data Analysis
Collected data was analysed with the help of IBM SPSS statistics. Demographic Data were analysed and displayed in the form of pie charts and graphs, Frequency & measures of central tendency analysis was carried out for those questions which consist behaviour of respondents, Correlation, & Regression were test carried out for predefined Variables (dependent and independent variables)
IV. DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
A. Sample Characteristics (From Demographic profile)
B. Studying Customer behaviour towards chatbot.
2.5 Do you ever raise a complaint on chatbot? |
|||||
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
Valid |
.0 |
123 |
55.9 |
56.2 |
56.2 |
1.0 |
96 |
43.6 |
43.8 |
100.0 |
|
Total |
219 |
99.5 |
100.0 |
|
|
Missing |
System |
1 |
.5 |
|
|
Total |
220 |
100.0 |
|
|
Table 1- represents responses against do you ever raise a complaint on chatbot? where .0 represents YES and 1.0 represents NO.
2.6 How much time does the chatbot take to answer the problem? |
|||||
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
Valid |
|
1 |
.5 |
.5 |
.5 |
0-30 seconds |
107 |
48.6 |
48.6 |
49.1 |
|
1 min – 2 minutes |
12 |
5.5 |
5.5 |
54.5 |
|
30 seconds - 1 minute |
74 |
33.6 |
33.6 |
88.2 |
|
More than 2 minutes |
26 |
11.8 |
11.8 |
100.0 |
|
Total |
220 |
100.0 |
100.0 |
|
Table 2- Shows how much time a chatbot take to answer a problem.
2.7 How satisfied or dissatisfied are you with the chatbot? |
|||||
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
Valid |
|
1 |
.5 |
.5 |
.5 |
Dissatisfied |
14 |
6.4 |
6.4 |
6.8 |
|
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied |
95 |
43.2 |
43.2 |
50.0 |
|
Satisfied |
89 |
40.5 |
40.5 |
90.5 |
|
Very dissatisfied |
2 |
.9 |
.9 |
91.4 |
|
Very satisfied |
19 |
8.6 |
8.6 |
100.0 |
|
Total |
220 |
100.0 |
100.0 |
|
Table 3- shows the satisfaction level of customer with chatbot.
2.8 Trust on chatbot? (Rate on a scale of 5, 1 is for highly distrusted, 5 is for highly trusted and 3 is for neutral) |
|||||
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
Valid |
1.0 |
6 |
2.7 |
2.7 |
2.7 |
2.0 |
25 |
11.4 |
11.4 |
14.2 |
|
3.0 |
99 |
45.0 |
45.2 |
59.4 |
|
4.0 |
61 |
27.7 |
27.9 |
87.2 |
|
5.0 |
28 |
12.7 |
12.8 |
100.0 |
|
Total |
219 |
99.5 |
100.0 |
|
|
Missing |
System |
1 |
.5 |
|
|
Total |
220 |
100.0 |
|
|
Table 4- shows trust level on chatbot.
2.9 Your preference for interaction? |
|||||
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
Valid |
.0 |
179 |
81.4 |
81.7 |
81.7 |
1.0 |
40 |
18.2 |
18.3 |
100.0 |
|
Total |
219 |
99.5 |
100.0 |
|
|
Missing |
System |
1 |
.5 |
|
|
Total |
220 |
100.0 |
|
|
Table 5- Shows preference of interaction where .0 denotes Human customer executive and 1.0 denotes AI- based chatbot.
Question number 10 of questionnaire contains few statements on which respondents have to choose number from 1.0 – 5.0. Where-
2.10 how much agree or disagree are you with below statements. . [Chatbots are risky in terms of data security and privacy] |
|||||
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
Valid |
1.0 |
40 |
18.2 |
18.3 |
18.3 |
2.0 |
75 |
34.1 |
34.2 |
52.5 |
|
3.0 |
70 |
31.8 |
32.0 |
84.5 |
|
4.0 |
23 |
10.5 |
10.5 |
95.0 |
|
5.0 |
11 |
5.0 |
5.0 |
100.0 |
|
Total |
219 |
99.5 |
100.0 |
|
|
Missing |
System |
1 |
.5 |
|
|
Total |
220 |
100.0 |
|
|
Table 6- represents the response against “chatbot’s are risky in terms of data security and privacy”.
2.10 how much agree or disagree are you with below statements. [Chatbot has the capability of understanding problem] |
|||||
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
Valid |
1.0 |
28 |
12.7 |
12.8 |
12.8 |
2.0 |
64 |
29.1 |
29.2 |
42.0 |
|
3.0 |
79 |
35.9 |
36.1 |
78.1 |
|
4.0 |
35 |
15.9 |
16.0 |
94.1 |
|
5.0 |
13 |
5.9 |
5.9 |
100.0 |
|
Total |
219 |
99.5 |
100.0 |
|
|
Missing |
System |
1 |
.5 |
|
|
Total |
220 |
100.0 |
|
|
Table 7- represents the response against “Chatbot has the capability of understanding problem”.
2.10 how much agree or disagree are you with below statements. [Chatbots help in engagement in customer service] |
|||||
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
Valid |
1.0 |
31 |
14.1 |
14.2 |
14.2 |
2.0 |
124 |
56.4 |
56.6 |
70.8 |
|
3.0 |
57 |
25.9 |
26.0 |
96.8 |
|
4.0 |
6 |
2.7 |
2.7 |
99.5 |
|
5.0 |
1 |
.5 |
.5 |
100.0 |
|
Total |
219 |
99.5 |
100.0 |
|
|
Missing |
System |
1 |
.5 |
|
|
Total |
220 |
100.0 |
|
|
Table 8- represents the response against “Chatbots help in engagement in customer service”
2.10 how much agree or disagree are you with below statements. [Chatbot can be considered as the future of customer service] |
|||||
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
Valid |
1.0 |
36 |
16.4 |
16.4 |
16.4 |
2.0 |
85 |
38.6 |
38.8 |
55.3 |
|
3.0 |
63 |
28.6 |
28.8 |
84.0 |
|
4.0 |
27 |
12.3 |
12.3 |
96.3 |
|
5.0 |
8 |
3.6 |
3.7 |
100.0 |
|
Total |
219 |
99.5 |
100.0 |
|
|
Missing |
System |
1 |
.5 |
|
|
Total |
220 |
100.0 |
|
|
Table 9 - represents the response against “Chatbot can be considered as the future of customer service”
Correlations |
|||
|
2.5 Do you ever raise a complaint on chatbot? |
2.7 How Satisfied or Dissatisfied are you with the chatbot? |
|
2.5 Do you ever raise a complaint on chatbot? |
Pearson Correlation |
1 |
-.014 |
Sig. (2-tailed) |
|
.832 |
|
N |
219 |
219 |
|
2.7 How Satisfied or Dissatisfied are you with the chatbot? |
Pearson Correlation |
-.014 |
1 |
Sig. (2-tailed) |
.832 |
|
|
N |
219 |
219 |
Table 10 – Correlation between complaint raised by respondents and satisfaction level of respondents.
Correlations |
|||
|
2.8 Trust on chatbot? |
2.10 Chatbot has the capability of understanding problem |
|
2.8 Trust on chatbot? |
Pearson Correlation |
1 |
-.341** |
Sig. (2-tailed) |
|
.000 |
|
N |
219 |
219 |
|
2.10 Chatbot has the capability of understanding problem |
Pearson Correlation |
-.341** |
1 |
Sig. (2-tailed) |
.000 |
|
|
N |
219 |
219 |
|
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). |
|||
Table 11 - Correlation between Trust on chatbot and chatbot has the capability of understanding problem.
|
|||
Correlations |
|||
|
2.10 Chatbots help in engagement in customer service |
2.10 Chatbot can be considered as the future of customer service |
|
2.10 Chatbots help in engagement in customer service |
Pearson Correlation |
1 |
.369** |
Sig. (2-tailed) |
|
.000 |
|
N |
219 |
219 |
|
2.10 Chatbot can be considered as the future of customer service |
Pearson Correlation |
.369** |
1 |
Sig. (2-tailed) |
.000 |
|
|
N |
219 |
219 |
|
Table 12 – Correlation between Chatbots help in engagement in customer service and Chatbot can be considered as the future of customer service.
|
According to the data collected and analysed we can conclude that most of the AI chatbot users are youth and literate belongs to all over India. Customers are well aware about Chatbot technology and uses it in their lifestyle. Chatbot takes less time to provide the solution of customer problems and customer says it is easy to interact with Chatbot and it can understand there problem not all but it can, and they have trust on chatbot that it will give easy and quick solution to their problem. But as we know everything has its pros and cons, meanwhile even though chatbot provide easy and quick response customer still wants to interact with Human customer executive and think chatbot can be risky for them in terms of their data security. After analysing all the results, the conclusion is that chatbot is efficient and effective in terms of time saving and quick response, even customers have trust on it for their problem solution, have the capability of understanding problem and chatbot can be the future of customer service but still customer prefer human to interact related to their problem. A. Limitation 1) The responses obtained from the survey are subject to various types of biasness. 2) The respondents are discrete samples from few cities of different states and hence, the study doesn’t give us a true picture of the overall population. 3) The analytical tools used have their own respective limitations in interpretation of the data which may not give more precise outcomes. 4) Focus of this study uses of chatbot only in food service, no other business models. B. Future Scope This study was conducted only in Indian users and the chatbot service is available in India, as we can see from our data Indian people are not much aware about AI enabled chatbot and their application yet but in reference to this in future this study may be carried out in global level for a better picture of customer trust and satisfaction with the chatbots applications. C. Recommendations 1) As we can see customers still prefer human touch for their problem even chatbot provides many benefits, so companies should teach people about technology to users, also introduce a human touch to their customer service. 2) The companies should not rely only on chatbot for critical problems human executive should be there. 3) Chatbot can be useful and more usable when companies get enough data of the customer queries, and this can be done by with the help of machine learning concept to increase the efficiency and problem-solving capability of chatbot.
[1] Dr. Amisha Gupta, Himanshu Gupta, Vaibhav Rathore, Suyash Awasthi, Harshdeep Singh, Impact of Chatbots on Customer Satisfaction in Food Delivery Apps (www.ijsrd.com) [2] Chatbots: The definitive guide, by Artificial Solutions (www.artificial-solutions.com) [3] Libai, B., Bart, Y., Gensler, S., Hofacker, C., Kaplan, A., &Kötterheinrich, K. (2020). Brave new world? On AI and the management of customer relationships. Journal of Interactive Marketing forthcoming. [4] Wayne D. Hoyer, Mirja Kroschke, Bernd Schmitt, Karsten Kraume, Venkatesh, Shankar (2020), Transforming the Customer Experience Through New Technologies, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2020.04.001 [5] Ng, I. C. L., & Wakenshaw, S. Y. L. (2017). The internet-of-things: Review andresearch directions. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 34(1),3–21. [6] Xiao, B., &Benbasat, I. (2007). E-commerce productrecommendation agents: Use, characteristics, and impact. MIS Quarterly,31(1), 137–209. [7] Dale, R., 2016. The return of the chatbots. Nat. Lang. Eng. 22 (5), 811–817. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1351324916000243 [8] Backhaus K., Awan A. (2019) The Paradigm Shift in Customer Analysis: Marketing or IT-Driven?. In: Bergener K., Räckers M., Stein A. (eds) The Art of Structuring. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-06234-7_32 [9] Fletcher, G., & Griffiths, M. (2020).Digital transformation during a lockdown.International Journal of Information Management, (55), 102185.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102185. Published by Elsevier Ltd
Copyright © 2022 Dr. Vikas Saxena, Amardeep Gautam. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Paper Id : IJRASET42967
Publish Date : 2022-05-20
ISSN : 2321-9653
Publisher Name : IJRASET
DOI Link : Click Here