More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/

research-article

Virtual assistants in the family home. Understanding parents’ motivations to use virtual assistants with their Child(dren)

Authors:

Jessica T. Piotrowski,

Johanna M.F. van OostenAuthors Info & Claims

Volume 139, Issue C

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.107526

Published: 01 February 2023 Publication History

Abstract

Virtual assistants (VA) like Siri, Alexa, or Google Assistant are becoming household names - especially for families with young children. Scientific inquiry studying this user population and their intention to use VAs at home, however, remains scarce. By bridging the Technology Acceptance Model, Uses and Gratifications theory, and the first proposition of the Differential Susceptibility to Media Effects Model, this study disentangles (1) different types of families with (2) different motivations for (3) different forms of VA-usage (i.e., parent only, child only, co-use). Cross-sectional survey data (N = 305) from Dutch parents with at least one child between 3 and 8 years and a Google Assistant-powered smart speaker in their home show that (1) families mostly differ along parents' digital literacy skills, frequency of VA-use, trust in technology, and preferred degree of child media-mediation. (2) Hedonic motivation is key for parents to (3) co-use the VA together with their child(ren). New pathways for the methodological and theoretical study of technology use in families are highlighted. Developers can best anchor VA-application among families in aspects of enjoyment while scholars and policy makers might wish to consider additional meaningful intervention criteria for the future study and guidance of family VA-use practices. (197 words).

Highlights

•

Families use virtual assistants in three ways: parent-/child-/co-usage.

•

Internet literacy, use frequency, trust, and media mediation classifies families.

•

Enjoyment motivates parents' intention for co-usage.

•

Unique family types do not show unique use-motivations.

•

Hedonic-utilitarian hypothesis connecting ease of use, enjoyment, and usefulness.

References

[1]

F. Abdullah, R. Ward, Developing a general extended technology acceptance model for E-learning (GETAMEL) by analysing commonly used external factors, Computers in Human Behavior 56 (2016) 238–256.

Digital Library

[2]

S. Aeschlimann, M. Bleiker, M. Wechner, A. Gampe, Communicative and social consequences of interactions with voice assistants, Computers in Human Behavior 112 (2020),.

[3]

R. Agarwal, J. Prasad, Are individual differences germane to the acceptance of new information technologies?, Decision Sciences 30 (2) (1999) 361–391,.

[4]

I. Ajzen, The theory of planned behavior, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 50 (2) (1991) 179–211,.

[5]

R.P. Bagozzi, The legacy of the technology acceptance model and a proposal for a paradigm shift, Journal of the AIS (8) (2007) 244. 2.

[6]

S. Baron, A. Patterson, K. Harris, Beyond technology acceptance: Understanding consumer practice, International Journal of Service Industry Management 17 (2) (2006) 111–135.

[7]

R. Barr, D.N. Linebarger (Eds.), Media exposure during infancy and early childhood, Springer International Publishing, 2017,.

[8]

BBC, June 30). Amazon launches “child-friendly” smart speaker in UK, BBC News, 2021.

[9]

D. Beirl, Y. Rogers, Using voice assistant skills in family life, Proceedings of CSCL 8 (2019).

[10]

F. Bentley, C. Luvogt, M. Silverman, R. Wirasinghe, B. White, D. Lottridge, Understanding the long-term use of smart speaker assistants, Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies 2 (3) (2018) 1–24.

Digital Library

[11]

I. Beyens, K. Beullens, Parent–child conflict about children's tablet use: The role of parental mediation, New Media & Society 19 (12) (2017) 2075–2093,.

[12]

I. Beyens, P.M. Valkenburg, J.T. Piotrowski, Developmental trajectories of parental mediation across early and middle childhood, Human Communication Research 45 (2) (2019) 226–250.

[13]

W. Black, B.J. Babin, Multivariate data analysis: Its approach, evolution, and impact, in: B.J. Babin, M. Sarstedt (Eds.), The great facilitator: Reflections on the contributions of joseph F. Hair, jr. To marketing and business research, Springer International Publishing, 2019, pp. 121–130,.

[14]

B.J. Bond, S.L. Calvert, A model and measure of US parents' perceptions of young children's parasocial relationships, Journal of Children and Media 8 (3) (2014) 286–304,.

[15]

A.J. Bowers, R. Sprott, Why tenth graders fail to finish high school: A dropout typology latent class Analysis, Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk 17 (3) (2012) 129–148,.

[16]

F.L. Broekman, J.T. Piotrowski, H.W.J. Beentjes, P.M. Valkenburg, A parental perspective on apps for young children, Computers in Human Behavior 63 (2016) 142–151,.

Digital Library

[17]

U. Bronfenbrenner, P.A. Morris, The ecology of developmental processes, Vol. 19, 1998.

[18]

S. Chaudron, M.E. Beutel, M. Černikova, V. Donoso Navarette, M. Dreier, B. Fletcher-Watson, A.-S. Heikkilä, V. Kontríková, R.-L. Korkeamäki, S. Livingstone, J. Marsh, G. Mascheroni, M. Micheli, D. Milesi, K.W. Müller, T. Myllylä-Nygård, M. Niska, O. Olkina, S. Ottovordemgentschenfelde, …., K. Wölfling, Young children (0–8) and digital technology: A qualitative exploratory study across seven countries, 2015, JRC 93239/EUR 27052.

[19]

C.M.K. Cheung, P.-Y. Chiu, M.K.O. Lee, Online social networks: Why do students use facebook?, Computers in Human Behavior 27 (4) (2011) 1337–1343,.

Digital Library

[20]

D.P. Cingel, M. Krcmar, Predicting media use in very young children: The role of demographics and parent attitudes, Communication Studies 64 (4) (2013) 374–394,.

[21]

T. Correa, Acquiring a new technology at home: A parent-child study about youths' influence on digital media adoption in a family, Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 60 (1) (2016) 123–139.

[22]

F.D. Davis, Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology, MIS Quarterly 13 (3) (1989) 319–340,.

Digital Library

[23]

R. Daws, Smart speaker usage increases substantially due to COVID-19 quarantines, Internet of Things News, 2020.

[24]

A.J.A.M. van Deursen, A. van der Zeeuw, P. de Boer, G. Jansen, T. van Rompay, Development and validation of the internet of things skills scale (IoTSS). Information, Communication & Society, 2021, pp. 1–17,.

[25]

van Deursen, A.J.A.M. van, E.J. Helsper, R. Eynon, Development and validation of the Internet Skills Scale (ISS), Information, Communication & Society 19 (6) (2016) 804–823,.

[26]

van Dijk, J. A. G. M. van, The deepening divide: Inequality in the information society, SAGE Publications, 2005.

[27]

R. Eynon, E. Helsper, Family dynamics and Internet use in Britain: What role do children play in adults' engagement with the Internet?, Information, Communication & Society 18 (2) (2015) 156–171,.

[28]

E. Ferreira, C. Ponte, T.S. Castro, ICT and gender: Parental mediation strategies, International Symposium on Computers in Education (SIIE) (2017) 1–6,. 2017.

[29]

T.D. Fletcher, QuantPsyc: Quantitative psychology tools. R package, 2012, version 1.5.

[30]

E. Foster, January 30). 53% of UK kids own phones by age seven , 2020.

[31]

R. Garg, S. Sengupta, He is just like me: A study of the long-term use of smart speakers by parents and children, Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies 4 (1) (2020) 1–24,.

Digital Library

[32]

L. van Gelder, Waarom een wetenschapper die promoveert op Google Home en Alexa zelf geen slim huis heeft. De Groene Amsterdammer, 2020.

[33]

Gerbner, G., Gross, L., Morgan, M., & Signorielli, N. (n.d.). Living with television: The dynamics of the CuItivation process. Vol. 24.

[34]

E. Goldenthal, J. Park, S.X. Liu, H. Mieczkowski, J.T. Hancock, Not all AI are equal: Exploring the accessibility of AI-mediated communication technology, Computers in Human Behavior 125 (2021),.

Digital Library

[35]

M. de Graaf, S.B. Allouch, J. van Dijk, Why would I use this in my home? A model of domestic social robot acceptance, Human-Computer Interaction 34 (2) (2019) 115–173.

[36]

S. Gulati, S. Sousa, D. Lamas, Design, development and evaluation of a human-computer trust scale, Behaviour & Information Technology 38 (10) (2019) 1004–1015.

[37]

H. Guner, C. Acarturk, The use and acceptance of ICT by senior citizens: A comparison of technology acceptance model (TAM) for elderly and young adults, Universal Access in the Information Society 19 (2) (2020) 311–330.

[38]

I. Hagen, ‘We can't just sit the whole day watching TV’: Negotiations concerning media use among youngsters and their parents, Young 15 (4) (2007) 369–393,.

[39]

M. Haug, P. Rössler, H. Gewald, HOW users perceive privacy and security risks concerning smart speakers, Vol. 16, 2020.

[40]

E.J. Helsper, A corresponding fields model for the links between social and digital exclusion, Communication Theory 22 (4) (2012) 403–426,.

[41]

van Deursen, A. J. A. M. van, E.J. Helsper, R. Eynon, Development and validation of the internet skills scale (ISS), Information, Communication & Society 19 (6) (2016) 804–823,.

[42]

D. Hooper, Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit, Academic Conferences Limited, 2008.

[43]

M.B. Hoy, Alexa, Siri, cortana, and more: An introduction to voice assistants, Medical Reference Services Quarterly 37 (1) (2018) 81–88.

[44]

L. Hu, P.M. Bentler, Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives, Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal 6 (1) (1999) 1–55,.

[45]

C. Ischen, T. Araujo, G. van Noort, H. Voorveld, E. Smit, I Am here to assist you today”: The role of entity, interactivity and experiential perceptions in chatbot persuasion, Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 64 (4) (2020) 615–639,.

[46]

E. Katz, J.G. Blumler, M. Gurevitch, Uses and gratifications research, Public Opinion Quarterly 37 (4) (1973) 509–523. JSTOR.

[47]

J. Kay (Ed.), Pervasive computing: 10th international conference, Pervasive 2012, Newcastle, UK, 2012, June 18 - 22, 2012 ; proceedings. Springer.

[48]

J. Kees, C. Berry, S. Burton, K. Sheehan, An analysis of data quality: Professional panels, student subject pools, and amazon's mechanical Turk, Journal of Advertising 46 (1) (2017) 141–155,.

[49]

H.C. Kelman, Compliance, identification, and internalization three processes of attitude change, Journal of Conflict Resolution 2 (1) (1958) 51–60,.

[50]

D.A. Kenny, Sem: Fit, 2020.

[51]

S. Kim, A. Choudhury, Exploring older adults' perception and use of smart speaker-based voice assistants: A longitudinal study, Computers in Human Behavior 124 (2021),.

Digital Library

[52]

W.R. King, J. He, A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model, Information & Management 43 (6) (2006) 740–755,.

Digital Library

[53]

P. Kline, A handbook of psychological testing, 2nd ed., Routledge, London, 1999.

[54]

R.B. Kline, Principles and practice of structural equation modeling, 4th ed., Guilford Publications, 2015.

[55]

P. Kowalczuk, Consumer acceptance of smart speakers: A mixed methods approach, The Journal of Research in Indian Medicine 12 (4) (2018) 418–431,.

[56]

Y.-H. Lee, Y.-C. Hsieh, Y.-H. Chen, An investigation of employees' use of e-learning systems applying the technology acceptance model, Behaviour & Information Technology 32 (2) (2013) 173–189.

[57]

K. Lee, K.Y. Lee, L. Sheehan, Hey Alexa! A magic spell of social glue?: Sharing a smart voice assistant speaker and its impact on users' perception of group harmony, Information Systems Frontiers 22 (3) (2020) 563–583,.

[58]

D.C. Li, Online social network acceptance: A social perspective, Internet Research 21 (5) (2011) 562–580,.

[59]

D.A. Linzer, J.B. Lewis, poLCA: An R package for polytomous variable latent class Analysis, Journal of Statistical Software 42 (10) (2011) 1–29. URL.

[60]

T. Lorenz, O. Kapella, Children's ICT use and its impact on family life. Literature review, 2020, p. 44.

[61]

S.B. Lovato, A.M. Piper, Young children and voice search: What we know from human-computer interaction research, Frontiers in Psychology 10 (2019).

[62]

D.H. McKnight, M. Carter, J.B. Thatcher, P.F. Clay, Trust in a specific technology: An investigation of its components and measures, ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems 2 (2) (2011) 1–25,.

Digital Library

[63]

G. McLean, K. Osei-Frimpong, Hey Alexa examine the variables influencing the use of artificial intelligent in-home voice assistants, Computers in Human Behavior 99 (2019) 28–37.

Digital Library

[64]

A. Meeus, S. Eggermont, K. Beullens, Constantly connected: The role of parental mediation styles and self-regulation in pre- and early adolescents' problematic mobile device use, Human Communication Research 45 (2) (2019) 119–147,.

[65]

J. Miles, M. Shevlin, Applying regression and correlation, SAGE Publications, 2000.

[66]

V.P.N. Miranda, P.R. dos Santos Amorim, R.R. Bastos, V.G.B. Souza, E.R. de Faria, S. do Carmo Castro Franceschini, S.E. Priore, Evaluation of lifestyle of female adolescents through latent class analysis approach, BMC Public Health 19 (1) (2019) 184,.

[67]

M.G. Morris, V. Venkatesh, Age differences in technology adoption decisions: Implications for a changing work force, Personnel Psychology 53 (2) (2000) 375–403,.

[68]

R.L. Nabi, M. Krcmar, It takes two: The effect of child characteristics on U.S. parents' motivations for allowing electronic media use, Journal of Children and Media 10 (3) (2016) 285–303,.

[69]

K. Noda, Google Home: Smart speaker as environmental control unit, Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology 13 (7) (2018) 674–682.

[70]

K. Nylund-Gibson, A.Y. Choi, Ten frequently asked questions about latent class analysis, Translational Issues in Psychological Science 4 (4) (2018) 440–461,.

[71]

K.L. Nylund, T. Asparouhov, B.O. Muthén, Deciding on the number of classes in latent class Analysis and growth mixture modeling: A Monte Carlo simulation study, Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal 14 (4) (2007) 535–569,.

[72]

K. O'Brien, A. Liggett, V. Ramirez-Zohfeld, P. Sunkara, L.A. Lindquist, Voice-controlled intelligent personal assistants to support aging in place, Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 68 (1) (2020) 176–179.

[73]

J.T. Piotrowski, P.M. Valkenburg, Finding orchids in a field of dandelions: Understanding children's differential susceptibility to media effects, American Behavioral Scientist 59 (14) (2015) 1776–1789.

[74]

L. Plowman, Researching young children's everyday uses of technology in the family home, Interacting with Computers 27 (1) (2015) 36–46,.

[75]

C.E. Porter, N. Donthu, Using the technology acceptance model to explain how attitudes determine Internet usage: The role of perceived access barriers and demographics, Journal of Business Research 59 (9) (2006) 999–1007,.

[76]

A. Pradhan, K. Mehta, L. Findlater, Accessibility came by accident”: Use of voice-controlled intelligent personal assistants by people with disabilities, Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (2018) 1–13.

[77]

J. Pridmore, A. Mols, Personal choices and situated data: Privacy negotiations and the acceptance of household Intelligent Personal Assistants, Big Data & Society 7 (1) (2020).

[78]

A. Purington, J.G. Taft, S. Sannon, N.N. Bazarova, S.H. Taylor, Alexa is my new BFF”: Social roles, user satisfaction, and personification of the Amazon echo, Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (2017) 2853–2859,.

Digital Library

[79]

S.P. Putnam, Promise of, Problems with, and Potential Refinement of the “Extremely Short Form of the CBQ”: A Comment on Sleddens, et al, Psychological Reports 111 (2) (2012) 618–620,. 2012.

[80]

W. Revelle, psych: Procedures for personality and psychological research, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, USA, 2020.

[81]

E.M. Rogers, Diffusion of innovations, 4th ed., The Free Press, 1995.

[82]

Y. Rosseel, lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling, Journal of Statistical Software 48 (2) (2012) 1–36.

[83]

C. Roth, H. Koenitz, Evaluating the user experience of interactive digital narrative, Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Multimedia Alternate Realities (2016) 31–36,.

Digital Library

[84]

A.J. Scheerder, A.J. van Deursen, J.A. van Dijk, Internet use in the home: Digital inequality from a domestication perspective, New Media & Society 21 (10) (2019) 2099–2118.

[85]

G. Schuitema, J. Anable, S. Skippon, N. Kinnear, The role of instrumental, hedonic and symbolic attributes in the intention to adopt electric vehicles, Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 48 (2013) 39–49,.

[86]

J.L. Sherry, Flow and media enjoyment, Communication Theory 14 (4) (2004) 328–347,.

[87]

R. Silverstone, Time, information and communication technologies and the household, Time & Society 2 (3) (1993) 283–311.

[88]

E.F.C. Sleddens, S.O. Hughes, T.M. O'Connor, A. Beltran, J.C. Baranowski, T.A. Nicklas, T. Baranowski, The children's behavior questionnaire very short scale: Psychometric properties and development of a one-item temperament scale, Psychological Reports 110 (1) (2012) 197–217,.

[89]

S.S. Sundar, A.M. Limperos, Uses and grats 2.0, Vol. 23, New Gratifications for New Media, 2013.

[90]

P.M. Valkenburg, J. Peter, The differential susceptibility to media effects model, Journal of Communication 63 (2) (2013) 221–243.

[91]

V. Venkatesh, H. Bala, Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions, Decision Sciences 39 (2) (2008) 273–315.

[92]

V. Venkatesh, F.D. Davis, A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies, Management Science 46 (2) (2000) 186–204.

[93]

V. Venkatesh, J.Y.L. Thong, X. Xu, Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology, MIS Quarterly 36 (1) (2012) 157–178. JSTOR.

[94]

S.K. Walker, H. Kim, Family educators' technology use and factors influencing technology acceptance attitudes, Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal 43 (4) (2015) 328–342.

[95]

Y.A. Wang, M. Rhemtulla, Power analysis for parameter estimation in structural equation modeling: A discussion and tutorial, Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science 4 (1) (2021),.

[96]

P. Weber, T. Ludwig, (Non-)Interacting with Conversational Agents: Perceptions and Motivations of Using Chatbots and Virtual Assistants (2020) 321–331,.

Digital Library

[97]

B.K. Wiederhold, Alexa, are you my mom?” The role of artificial intelligence in child development, Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking 21 (8) (2018) 471–472.

[98]

Y. Xu, D. Wang, P. Collins, H. Lee, M. Warschauer, Same benefits, different communication patterns: Comparing Children's reading with a conversational agent vs. a human partner, Computers & Education 161 (2021),.

Cited By

Wald RVan Oosten JPiotrowski JAraujo T(2024)Smart Speaker Data Donations in Families: The Project Rosie PerspectiveProceedings of the 23rd Annual ACM Interaction Design and Children Conference10.1145/3628516.3659374(680-685)Online publication date: 17-Jun-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3628516.3659374

Index Terms

Virtual assistants in the family home. Understanding parents’ motivations to use virtual assistants with their Child(dren)
1. Applied computing
2. Human-centered computing
  1. Human computer interaction (HCI)

Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

Recommendations

Parent and child problematic media use: The role of maternal postpartum depression and dysfunctional parent-child interactions in young children
Abstract
Problematic media use, or media use that interferes with daily functioning, is most often studied in adolescent or young adult age groups. Less research has examined problematic media use within the family system, among parents and ...
Highlights
- Problematic media use is seen in children as young as 3–4 years old and in their parents.
The effects of individual differences on e-learning users' behaviour in developing countries

We extended the TAM in the context of e-learning in developing countries (Lebanon).We examined if social influence affect the user perceptions towards using e-learning.Examined the moderating effect of gender, age and experience on the key factors.The ...
Understanding underrepresentation in IT through intersectionality
iConference '12: Proceedings of the 2012 iConference

Results of an investigation of the effect of intersectionality on perceptions of university students about IT careers are presented. This analysis deepens the discussion began at the 2011 iConference by presenting an examination of responses of African ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Computers in Human Behavior

Computers in Human Behavior Volume 139, Issue C

Feb 2023

740 pages

ISSN:0747-5632

Issue’s Table of Contents

The Authors.

Publisher

Elsevier Science Publishers B. V.

Netherlands

Publication History

Published: 01 February 2023

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

1
Total Citations
View Citations
0
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)0
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 12 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Wald RVan Oosten JPiotrowski JAraujo T(2024)Smart Speaker Data Donations in Families: The Project Rosie PerspectiveProceedings of the 23rd Annual ACM Interaction Design and Children Conference10.1145/3628516.3659374(680-685)Online publication date: 17-Jun-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3628516.3659374

View Options

View options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Issue’s Table of Contents