Search results

This study investigated consumer perceptions of AI chatbots focusing on sentiment analysis across Twitter (X) and Reddit during ChatGPT3 through ChatGPT4 launches. It identifies user sentiments: positive, negative, or neutral and explores their impact on chatbot deployment in interactive marketing. The goal was to understand consumer engagement dynamics and provide insights for enhancing marketing strategies and consumer interactions with chatbots.

Using sentiment analysis, this research examined the nature and scope of discussions surrounding AI chatbots. This methodological approach allowed for a nuanced understanding of the predominant sentiments: positive, negative, or neutral, expressed by users providing insights into consumer engagement and interaction patterns.

The findings reveal a diverse range of consumer sentiments toward ChatGPT 3, reflecting varying degrees of acceptance and skepticism. These varied sentiments are crucial for organizations in shaping their interactive marketing strategies, particularly in how they deploy chatbots for consumer engagement and brand interaction.

Trust and positive sentiment toward ChatGPT, particularly on platforms like Twitter and Reddit, suggest it is becoming part of everyday life. However, concerns about its impact on human jobs and the lack of emotional intelligence persist. Users still weigh the benefits and drawbacks of ChatGPT, with negative and neutral sentiments reflecting these worries. For interactive marketers, this presents an opportunity to differentiate through human interaction in customer-facing roles. Addressing the risks and ethical concerns of AI, marketers can better engage consumers and refine strategies for future chatbot deployments, ensuring AI enhances rather than detracts from the customer experience.

This paper makes a unique contribution to the existing literature by demonstrating how consumer perceptions, rather than mere acceptance, directly influence the strategic use of AI chatbots in interactive marketing. By focusing on perceptions, this study offers deeper insights from social media sentiment analysis that can refine marketing campaigns and enhance consumer engagement with emerging technologies in the digital landscape.

Access to media is more available now than ever before, both physically and digitally. This study was used to investigate the underlying personality traits that influence the decision to purchase either physical or digital books, and extend theory on access to art and provide a unique lens through which marketers can sell digital media.

Study 1 is a field study in which data were collected from several comic book readers and collectors to look at the role that psychological ownership plays in influencing the likelihood of buying physical or digital comics. Specifically, study 1 includes consumers' need for uniqueness and tech savviness as potential influencers. Study 2 extends the findings of study into a new context and manipulates, rather than measures, the identity of the participants. Study 2 looks at the effects of turning a digital object into a non-fungible token (NFT).

This paper demonstrates that consumers who have a high consumer need for uniqueness (CNFU) are more likely to prefer physical media to digital media. Further, it is shown that preference for physical media leads, on average, to more purchases and that the consumer's psychological ownership mediates the effects of CNFU. In addition, this paper shows that higher degrees of tech savviness led to a preference for digital media. Finally, this paper shows that when consumers identify with a collector identity, turning a digital item into an NFT increases their preference for that object.

This work builds off recent research into physical and digital media and is one of the first to examine the specific personality types that prefer each.

This study explores the coping strategies employed by people of color in response to racial discrimination and examines how cultural norms inform these strategies.

In-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with 34 Black and Asian Americans about their experiences with racial discrimination.

Findings reveal that participants cope through humor, seeking social support on social media, from family and friends, and through avoidant coping strategies. Seeking social support from empathetic others, especially when they shared the same racial background as participants, contributes to feelings of comfort, sanity, and a sense of community. Group differences emerge in seeking family support with Black Americans more likely to seek parental support, likely because of racial socialization practices by their parents that prepared them for experiencing bias. Asian Americans preferred talking to siblings or cousins, citing a cultural gap between them and their parents.

The study underscores the importance of considering the quality of social support, not just its use, as a buffer against harms related to discrimination.

Racial discrimination is a routine experience for many people of color. This study demonstrates how the type of coping strategy matters for coping with the distress that often accompanies these experiences.

In contrast to monoracial-focused studies, this research demonstrates the convergence and divergence of coping strategies among different racial groups.

This chapter examines the concepts of race and racism, critically reviewing their historical and contemporary applications in everyday life as well as in academic and policy debates. Racism has been extensively researched, with various theories and conceptualisations developed across social science. However, there is a great deal of disagreement regarding its nature, contemporary significance and empirical validation. This chapter examines these and attempts to synthesise some of the common definitions of racism provided in the literature. It explores related concepts and underlying themes pertaining to expressions of race and racism. Furthermore, it unpacks current knowledge about racial issues and discusses recent advances in the conceptual understanding of various forms of racism. It also elucidates the social, political and analytical applications of racism as a concept and the significance of racism in contemporary societies. The chapter concludes by highlighting how racism is a dynamic phenomenon, continuously evolving with the social, political and technological transformations in contemporary societies.

This study aims to stimulate scholarly attention and practical application pertaining to individuals recognized as “Docs.” Through conducting a comprehensive analysis and acquiring a profound understanding of its many connotations, the objective is to shift attitudes and approaches concerning those who are seen to possess knowledge and value within society.

For this study, culturally relevant pedagogies were used as theoretical frameworks in addition to Sankofa and concept explication being used as methodologies.

The authors identified three themes: (1) honorary cultural practice-community nomination of “professahs” and “docs,” (2) (Black) robinhoods – cultural signifiers of distinction and relatability and (3) docs as catalysts – elevating community via consciousness, trust and mentorship as significant understandings of this distinction.

The study emphasizes the importance of “Docs” in both academic and social contexts. The role of “Docs” serves to alleviate potential conflicts of being a Black intellectual. This study further reveals the ways in which Docs align with, promote or possibly undermine established frameworks of thought. Finally, this study provides institutions with opportunities to consider strategies for the utilization, recognition and integration of individuals who are frequently overlooked or undervalued.

As Australians experience more fierce and frequent natural disasters, there are urgent calls for businesses to meaningfully respond to climate change. Australian financial and professional services employees occupy an ambiguous space as climate mitigation measures have different economic implications for their clients. The purpose of this paper is to investigate how Australian professionals experience climate change and respond to the issue within their workplace.

This mixed methods study applies a systems thinking framework to investigate: how do professionals’ experiences of the issue of climate change and the workplace influence their cognitions, emotions and behaviour? And in particular, what psychosocial antecedents precede voicing climate concern?

Firstly, a survey of professionals (N = 206) found social norms, perceived behavioural control and biospheric values, but not attitudes, significantly predicted prohibitive green voice. Middle managers were significantly likely to voice climate concern, whereas senior managers were significantly likely to express climate scepticism. Ten professionals were then interviewed to gain a contextualised understanding of these trends. Interpretive phenomenological analysis identified five interrelated themes: (1) active identity management, (2) understanding climate change is escalating, (3) workplace shapes climate change response, (4) frustration and alienation and (5) belief that corporations prioritise profit.

Findings are discussed in relation to how employees may both embody and adapt their organisations. These results have implications for understandings of workplace meaningfulness and organisational risk governance.

Controversy has long swirled over the claim that Donald Trump's base has deeply rooted authoritarian tendencies, but Trump himself seems to have few doubts. Asked whether his stated wish to be dictator “on day one” of second term in office would repel voters, Trump said “I think a lot of people like it.” It is one of his invariable talking points that 74 million voters supported him in 2020, and he remains the unrivaled leader of the Republican Party, even as his rhetoric escalates to levels that cautious observers now routinely call fascistic.

Is Trump right that many people “like” his talk of dictatorship? If so, what does that mean empirically? Part of the answer to these questions was apparent early, in the results of the 2016 American National Election Study (ANES), which included survey questions that we had proposed which we drew from the aptly-named “Right-Wing Authoritarianism” scale. Posed to voters in 2012–2013 and again in 2016, those questions elicited striking responses.

In this chapter, we revisit those responses. We begin by exploring Trump's escalating anti-democratic rhetoric in the light of themes drawn from Max Weber and Theodor W. Adorno. We follow this with the text of the 2017 conference paper in which we first reported that 75% of Trump's voters supported him enthusiastically, mainly because they shared his prejudices, not because they were hurting economically. They hoped to “get rid” of troublemakers and “crush evil.” That wish, as we show in our conclusion, remains central to Trump's appeal.

This chapter focuses on the conservative Heritage Foundation's “Project 2025” and especially its comprehensive Mandate for Leadership, which provides a detailed plan for fundamental policy and administrative changes to be instituted in a Trump second term. It advocates an unparalleled concentration of executive power, elimination of the independence of the civil service and Department of Justice from the office of the president, and institution of permanent dominance of Trumpian conservatism. The specific focus is on the Mandate's proposed antienvironmental policies, which are weaved throughout the document and are designed to roll back sweepingly previous climate-change and environmental protection policies. Stressing maximal usage, production, and export of fossil fuel, the Trumpian “energy dominance agenda” is in polar contradiction to climate science policy aimed at decarbonizing the economy and society and averting catastrophic climate change and a “Hothouse Earth.” The Mandate's postfactual discourse combined with its advocacy of an all-powerful president and conspiratorial vision of the “woke” left as public enemy has definite protofascist overtones.