In a rapidly evolving landscape where major corporations such as Nike, Google, Coca-Cola, and McDonald's are increasingly utilising artificial intelligence (AI) in their advertising strategies, a recent study delves into consumer perceptions of AI-generated content. Conducted by Colleen Kirk, a professor of marketing and management at the New York Institute of Technology, and Julian Givi, a marketing researcher at West Virginia University, this research examines the emotional authenticity of AI-generated marketing communications.
Published in the Journal of Business Research, the study highlights a fundamental shift in how marketing content is created and received. While predictive AI has long been used to anticipate consumer behaviour, generative AI is now capable of producing original marketing content, including text, images, videos, and audio. An example cited is a recent AI-driven commercial by Toys "R" Us, which creatively integrated video representations of the company's founder as a youngster alongside the brand's mascot, Geoffrey the Giraffe.
Despite the heralding of AI-generated campaigns as innovative by many brands, there is a spectrum of responses from consumers, particularly concerning transparency and authenticity. Some companies choose not to disclose their use of AI, stirring ethical discrepancies and stimulating conversations about potential need for regulatory measures. Even brands that are upfront about employing AI face criticism; a case in point is Google’s "Dear Sydney" advertisement, which met with viewer disapproval when it was revealed that AI was used to assist a father in drafting a letter for his daughter to her Olympic idol.
The study’s authors, Kirk and Givi, set out to examine whether emotionally charged messages generated by AI would affect brand perception and consumer interaction willingness. Through a series of experiments, they tested scenarios where participants received messages, some believing they originated from AI and others from human sources. In cases where AI was perceived as the originator of heartfelt messages, participants reported feelings of moral disgust, leading to decreased brand loyalty and a lower likelihood of recommending the brand.
Key findings of the study indicated that factual communications generated by AI were less likely to provoke moral disgust compared to emotional communications. Additionally, communications signed by AI entities, such as "The Summit Apparel AI Chatbot," were viewed more favourably than those attributed to human company representatives. The study also indicates that consumers reacted more positively when they believed marketing messages were human-authored, suggesting that brands might benefit from emphasising the human aspect of their communications.
Furthermore, communications that were merely edited, rather than authored, by AI were less harshly judged on authenticity. However, human communicators faced a steeper authenticity penalty when accused of copying AI-generated emotional content.
As AI technology continues to permeate the marketing domain, the study suggests companies must judiciously navigate the complexities of disclosing AI's role in content creation, maintaining a focus on authenticity. This is increasingly pertinent as governments are likely to implement more rigorous AI disclosure regulations.
Colleen Kirk underscores the implications of their research, noting the growing consumer scepticism regarding the origin of marketing communications and emphasizing the need for marketers to remain attuned to consumer perceptions of authenticity in order to preserve and enhance brand reputation and consumer relationships.
Source: Noah Wire Services