Is voice really persuasive? The influence of modality in virtual assistant interactions and two alternative explanations

Abstract

PurposeVirtual assistants are increasingly used for persuasive purposes, employing the different modalities of voice and text (or a combination of the two). In this study, the authors compare the persuasiveness of voice-and text-based virtual assistants. The authors argue for perceived human-likeness and cognitive load as underlying mechanisms that can explain why voice- and text-based assistants differ in their persuasive potential by suppressing the activation of consumers' persuasion knowledge.Design/methodology/approachA pre-registered online-experiment (n = 450) implemented a text-based and two voice-based (with and without interaction history displayed in text) virtual assistants.FindingsFindings show that, contrary to expectations, a text-based assistant is perceived as more human-like compared to a voice-based assistant (regardless of whether the interaction history is displayed), which in turn positively influences brand attitudes and purchase intention. The authors also find that voice as a communication modality can increase persuasion knowledge by being cognitively more demanding in comparison to text.Practical implicationsSimply using voice as a presumably human cue might not suffice to give virtual assistants a human-like appeal. For the development of virtual assistants, it might be beneficial to actively engage consumers to increase awareness of persuasion.Originality/valueThe current study adds to the emergent research stream considering virtual assistants in explicitly exploring modality differences between voice and text (and a combination of the two) and provides insights into the effects of persuasion coming from virtual assistants.