Search results

The surge of artificial intelligence (AI) applications and subsequent adoption by consumers and marketers has ignited substantial research exploring the benefits and opportunities of AI. Despite this, little attention has been given to its unintended negative consequences. In this paper, the authors examine both the practitioner and academic sides of ethical AI. In doing so, the authors conduct an extensive review of the AI literature to identify potential issues pertaining to three areas: individual consumers, societal and legal. The authors identify gaps and offer questions to drive future research.

The authors review recent academic literature on AI in marketing journals, and top ethical principles from three top technology developers (Google, IBM and Meta) in conjunction with media reports of negative AI incents. They also identify gaps and opportunities for future research based on this review.

The bibliographic review reveals a small number of academic papers in marketing that focus on ethical considerations for AI adoption. The authors highlight concerns for academic researchers, marketing practitioners and AI developers across three main areas and highlight important issues relating to interactive marketing.

This paper highlights the under-researched negative outcomes of AI adoption. Through an extensive literature review, coupled with current responsible AI principles adopted by major technology companies, this research provides a framework for examining the dark side of AI.

Do luxury consumers negatively evaluate digital interactions (website and social media) by international luxury brands? The topic has received much debate. The authors argue that luxury brand personality (modern vs. traditional), which encompasses a more stable form of brand identity in global markets, affects evaluations of digital interactions. They further investigate the role of self-brand connection in this process.

Three experiments on Prolific use a European sample and manipulate a single factor between subjects (modernity: less vs. more; traditionality: less vs. more) of French luxury brands and measure evaluations as the dependent variable. Two studies assesses self-brand connection (continuous) as a moderator (studies 2a, 2b). Study 2b rules out some alternative explanations, with culture (independent vs. collectivist) as an independent variable. A fourth study, using a North American sample on CloudResearch, assesses the effect of personality manipulation (more modernity vs. more traditionality) on consumer evaluations of an Italian brand, and assesses ubiquity perceptions as a mediator.

Consumers evaluate digital interactions of international luxury brands less favorably when luxury brand personality exhibits more (vs. less) modernity or less (vs. more) traditionality. Perceptions of ubiquity mediate these relationships. When self-brand connection is high, this effect is attenuated.

The research sheds light on the debate on whether luxury brands should create digital interactions in international markets, given that these global brands operate in multiple channels. Findings show that luxury brands can develop strategies based on aspects of their brand identity, a less malleable feature of brand identity within global markets. Additionally, the research contributes to the conversation about a global luxury market. In short, the findings offer evidence in favor of brand identity (personality) influencing the digital channel strategy a brand should undertake in international markets, first, followed by consumer needs.