Researchers examine how AI shopping could backfire on retailers

Retailers have good reason to be interested in AI. A shopping assistant that answers questions at any hour, compares products instantly and offers personalised recommendations sounds like a win for customers and businesses alike. 

But the technology can be impressive while the experience is disappointing, researchers from Macquarie Business School in Australia warn. 

“Consider a customer who asks an AI assistant whether a laptop is suitable for university. The tool responds confidently and immediately, but overlooks a crucial software requirement. Or a supermarket assistant proposes substitutions that ignore a dietary preference. These are hypothetical examples, but they illustrate how an AI interaction can appear efficient while failing the customer’s actual needs,” says Dr Syed Rahman, Senior Lecturer in the Department of Marketing.

“The stakes are higher as AI shifts from answering questions to taking action. A mistaken recommendation is inconvenient; a mistaken purchase or an unwanted disclosure of personal information could be more serious.” 

That gap between technological capability and customer confidence motivated the research, published in the Journal of Retailing.  

Across eight studies, the researchers developed and tested a new way of assessing how customers accept AI-enabled retail services. 

They found that acceptance has eight distinct dimensions: personalisation, accuracy, safety, speed, convenience, humanisation, friendliness and emotionality. In everyday terms, customers care whether AI provides a useful, reliable and manageable experience, and whether the interaction feels appropriate rather than awkward or impersonal. 

An AI tool might perform brilliantly on speed but poorly on accuracy. It might sound cheerful yet leave users questioning what happens to their personal data. And a very humanlike interaction is not necessarily the right solution for every customer or task. 

Factors that influence overall acceptance 

“Our analyses found that higher overall acceptance was associated with greater word of mouth, share of usage, willingness to pay and likelihood of adopting AI services,” comments Rahman. 

“The scale performed better than several established alternatives in the samples tested. This matters because retailers need to know more than whether a new tool is being clicked. They need to understand why customers do or do not accept it.

“Our research offers a 32-item measure for detailed diagnosis and an eight-item condensed version for quicker assessments. The point is not to burden shoppers with questionnaires. It is to give businesses evidence about where improvement is needed.” 

He emphasises that the eight dimensions do not establish a universal recipe. For example, priorities will vary between a grocery assistant and an AI tool helping with expensive purchases. 

A retailer also needs to recognise that customers notice different failures at different moments. A misleading product detail during browsing, a poorly handled complaint, or a privacy concern during checkout are not the same problem.  

Measuring those experiences separately gives managers a better chance of finding the underlying weakness before it becomes part of the brand’s reputation. 

“The shopping revolution will not succeed simply because retailers adopt AI quickly,” Rahman states. 

“It will succeed to the extent that customers find these services accurate, safe and worth returning to. Moving too fast without measuring that experience is where the backfire risk begins.” 

You can find out more about the research here.