| Category | Details |
|---|---|
| Description | The AI Instrumentality and Brand Credibility in Voice Assistant Retention—Model (Ghazali, Mutum, & Lun, 2024) was developed to explore user continuance behavior with AI voice assistants (AIVAs). This model expands the Expectation-Confirmation Model by integrating user technology-related traits, AI instrumentality attributes, and brand credibility. The questionnaire was adapted from established scales for the AIVA context and evaluated through structural equation modeling with a sample of past AIVA users. Reliability and validity assessments were conducted. |
| Author | Ghazali, Ezlika; Mutum, Dilip S.; Lun, Na Kai |
| ORCID | Ghazali, Ezlika: 0000-0001-7824-4433 Mutum, Dilip S.: 0000-0002-9857-1164 |
| Affiliation | University of Malaya, Faculty of Business and Economics; Monash University Malaysia, School of Business |
| [email protected] | |
| Correspondence Address | Dilip S. Mutum, Monash University Malaysia, School of Business, Subang Jaya, Malaysia, 47500 |
| Test Type | Original |
| Instrument Type | Inventory/Questionnaire |
| Construct | Artificial Intelligence Instrumentality; Brand Credibility; Voice Assistant Retention |
| Purpose | Evaluates whether brand expertise and trustworthiness contribute to post-use satisfaction and continued use intention of AIVAs. |
| Test Year | 2024 |
| Format | Responses are collected using a 7-point scale ranging from “1 = Strongly Disagree” to “7 = Strongly Agree,” assessing user experiences with AIVA brands. |
| Number of Items | 63 |
| Factors and Subscales | Constructs include: Innovativeness, Optimism, Insecurity, Discomfort, Confirmation, Satisfaction, Continuance Intention, Intelligence, Anthropomorphism, Info Accuracy, Info Completeness (Reliability), Info Up-to-datedness (Recency), System Flexibility, System Reliability, System Timeliness, Brand Trustworthiness, and Brand Expertise. |
| Reliability | Composite Reliability (CR) and Cronbach’s Alpha exceeded 0.7, indicating internal consistency reliability. |
| Validity | Convergent validity confirmed (AVE > 0.5 for all constructs). Discriminant validity established with most HTMT values below 0.75. |
| Factor Analysis | Structural Equation Modeling: Outer loadings exceeded 0.7, except for six removed items (INS1, INS4, DIS1, SYT1, INA2, BT2). Common method bias was assessed with a marker variable, showing minimal impact (R² difference: 0.489 to 0.493). |
| Test Methodology | Convergent Validity, Discriminant Validity, Internal Consistency, Measurement Model, Structural Equation Modeling. |
| Age Group | Adulthood (18+ years); Young Adulthood (18-29 years); Thirties (30-39 years) |
| Population Group | Human; Male; Female |
| Population Details | Location: Malaysia; Respondents: Consumers |
| Keywords | Anthropomorphism, Brand Expertise, Brand Trustworthiness, Confirmation, Continuance Intention, Discomfort, Info Accuracy, Info Completeness (Reliability), Info Up-to-Datedness (Recency), Innovativeness, Insecurity, Intelligence, Optimism, Satisfaction, System Flexibility, System Reliability, System Timeliness, Measurement Model |
| Index Terms | Brand Preferences, Consumer Attitudes, Consumer Behavior, Consumer Satisfaction, Anthropomorphism, Behavioral Intention, Consumer Measures, Technology Acceptance, Intelligent Personal Agents |
| Files | No file available for download. |
| Reference | Ghazali, E., Mutum, D. S., & Lun, N. K. (2024). Expectations and beyond: The nexus of AI instrumentality and brand credibility in voice assistant retention using extended expectation-confirmation model. Middle Western Psychological Research Journal, 23(2), 655–675. https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.2228. |
Cite this article
Mohammed looti (2026). AI Instrumentality and Brand Credibility in Voice Assistant Retention–Model. PSYCHOLOGICAL SCALES. Retrieved from https://scales.arabpsychology.com/s/ai-instrumentality-and-brand-credibility-in-voice-assistant-retention-model/
Mohammed looti. "AI Instrumentality and Brand Credibility in Voice Assistant Retention–Model." PSYCHOLOGICAL SCALES, 4 Apr. 2026, https://scales.arabpsychology.com/s/ai-instrumentality-and-brand-credibility-in-voice-assistant-retention-model/.
Mohammed looti. "AI Instrumentality and Brand Credibility in Voice Assistant Retention–Model." PSYCHOLOGICAL SCALES, 2026. https://scales.arabpsychology.com/s/ai-instrumentality-and-brand-credibility-in-voice-assistant-retention-model/.
Mohammed looti (2026) 'AI Instrumentality and Brand Credibility in Voice Assistant Retention–Model', PSYCHOLOGICAL SCALES. Available at: https://scales.arabpsychology.com/s/ai-instrumentality-and-brand-credibility-in-voice-assistant-retention-model/.
[1] Mohammed looti, "AI Instrumentality and Brand Credibility in Voice Assistant Retention–Model," PSYCHOLOGICAL SCALES, vol. X, no. Y, ص Z-Z, April, 2026.
Mohammed looti. AI Instrumentality and Brand Credibility in Voice Assistant Retention–Model. PSYCHOLOGICAL SCALES. 2026;vol(issue):pages.