When chatbots cause trouble: how agent type and conversation style shape consumer responses to service failures

Purpose The purpose of this study is to investigate consumer response to service failure involving different types of service agents – specifically human agents, anthropomorphic chatbots and non-anthropomorphic chatbots – within the service sector. This study further identifies conversation style and service criticality as key moderating variables that shape consumer responses to chatbot-related service failure. Design/methodology/approach The hypothesised relationships were tested across three between-subjects experiments. Study 1 (n = 296) and Study 2 (n = 169) were conducted in restaurant resevrvation contexts, while Study 3 (n = 176) was in a healthcare setting, specifically concerning the scheduling of medical appointments. Findings Customers showed stronger brand avoidance when they encountered a service failure by a virtual agent than by a human agent. This effect was particularly pronounced for failure involving non-anthropomorphic chatbots, as compared to anthropomorphic ones. Furthermore, brand avoidance was exacerbated for high-critical services. Notably, customers interacting with anthropomorphic chatbots that use a socially oriented conversational style demonstrated lower levels of brand avoidance compared to those interacting with task-oriented anthropomorphic chatbots. Research limitations/implications Managers should prioritise the adoption of anthropomorphic chatbots over non-anthropomorphic ones to mitigate brand avoidance, as customers are more likely to avoid brands when less human-like chatbots are responsible for the failure. In addition, firms should carefully design chatbot interactions in service failure contexts, high in criticality, where reliance on automated agents may heighten consumer discomfort and lead to brand avoidance. Practical implications Organisations should favour anthropomorphic chatbot designs over non-anthropomorphic alternatives to mitigate brand avoidance, as customers are more likely to avoid brands when less human-like chatbots are responsible for the failure. In addition, in high-criticality service scenarios, firms should carefully design chatbot interactions in service failure contexts, as reliance on automated agents in such contexts may heighten consumer discomfort and erode brand trust. Social implications The findings suggest that service failures by chatbots can induce significant psychological distress in consumers. This underscores the need for caution when considering the complete replacement of human service agents with chatbots. Originality/value This research provides new insights by revealing that service criticality and conversation style serve as key boundary conditions in the relationship between chatbot failure and brand avoidance – a domain that has received limited scholarly attention. Drawing on stress-coping theory, this research also suggests that psychological distress is a novel mediating mechanism, highlighting its pivotal role in shaping consumers’ brand avoidance following chatbot service failures. This fresh perspective deepens our understanding of chatbot-related service failures in multiple contexts and offers nuanced insights into the mitigation of brand avoidance.