The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/0959-6119.htm

Restaurants in
Customers’ intention to use Korea
robot-serviced restaurants in
Korea: relationship of
coolness and MCI factors
Seong Soo Cha Received 18 January 2020
Revised 5 April 2020
Department of Food Science and Service, Eulji University, Seongnam, 14 June 2020
Republic of Korea 7 July 2020
18 July 2020
Accepted 18 July 2020

Abstract
Purpose – This study aims to empirically test a theoretical model by defining customers’ intention to use
services of restaurant robots, which are rapidly developing in Korea. The proposed model incorporates three
stages: coolness, motivated consumer innovativeness (MCI) and the theory of planned behaviour.
Design/methodology/approach – A total of 420 questionnaires were issued. The results were analysed
to verify the reliability and validity of the measured variables. Structural equation modelling was used to test
the research hypotheses.
Findings – The results showed that hedonically motivated consumer innovativeness (hMCI) and socially
motivated consumer innovativeness (sMCI) have positive effects on attitude and are enhanced by
attractiveness, utility, subcultural appeal and originality. However, the relationship between MCI and attitude
differed among age groups.
Practical implications – The results revealed that sensory elements of robot services improve customer
attitudes towards the use of robots in restaurants. This is a key finding that restaurant marketers should
consider, because non-face-to-face services are becoming increasingly important in the current COVID-19
context.
Originality/value – This study analysed the relationship between coolness, MCI and the theory of planned
behaviour in the context of robot-serviced restaurants and how the relationship between MCIs and attitude
differed among the young and older customers. Practical implications are suggested.
Keywords Coolness, Motivated consumer innovativeness, Perceived value, Age group,
Service robot
Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction
The Korean delivery company, “People of Delivery”, launched a service wherein robots
deliver food in buildings. Customers order food through the delivery app and the delivery
staff arrives at the building and places the food in the robot’s food storage unit on the first
floor. Subsequently, the robot delivers the food to the customer. This service can be
extremely useful in buildings with restricted access to outsiders because of security reasons;
moreover, it can save time for the delivery staffs and customers (YTN, 2019). The hospitality
industry is a pioneer in integrating high-tech innovation into the service delivery process
(Kuo et al., 2017). In India, after the success of the robot-serviced restaurants in Chennai and
Coimbatore, another was opened in Bengaluru (The Economic Times, 2019). At SPICE, a International Journal of
restaurant that sells salads and rice bowls in Boston, a robot greets you first. Robots are Contemporary Hospitality
Management
lined up with seven cars – they can take orders and cook like a chef, scooping out © Emerald Publishing Limited
0959-6119
ingredients and pouring them into pots. In fact, a robot takes only 3 min to make a rice bowl. DOI 10.1108/IJCHM-01-2020-0046
IJCHM Thus, labour costs have been reduced and prices have decreased. These restaurants have
become a customers’ favourite, particularly during lunch hours (New York Magazine, 2018).
In the future, robot cooks may replace most humans and service robots may emerge as
replacements in various positions in the hospitality industry (Rodgers, 2008; Johnson, 2009;
Law et al., 2019; Jung et al., 2018; Lee et al., 2019; Jones, 1995).
Service robots are used in various sectors (Wirtz et al., 2018). Specifically, their increasing
presence in the restaurant industry is remarkable. The restaurant industry has automated
from the preparation of food to the service stage (Ivanov et al., 2017). The development in the
national policy (Yonhap News, 2019), economic motives (Osawa et al., 2017), social demands
(Salem et al., 2015) and technological utility may result in the growth of restaurants where
robots serve alongside humans. Ongoing research on service robots (Belanche et al., 2020; Lu
et al., 2019) spans several sectors including hospitality. Many studies focus on how robots
are efficient and economical in terms of technology or industry-specific usage, while few
have investigated the consumer behaviour perspective (Zalama et al., 2014). However,
recently, studies have considered robots from the consumer’s perspective (Tung and Au,
2018). Understanding customers’ responses to and motivations for interacting with robots is
crucial for companies and marketers who need to operate service robots.
When consumers meet a service robot, a common expression they use to describe their
experience is “Wow” (Tung and Au, 2018), akin to “cool”. “Coolness” implies strong interest
and expresses the consumer perception that the product or service is of high quality and
expected to creatively achieve user goals. Such perception is used to describe desirable
innovations (Sundar et al., 2014). Kim et al. (2015) noted the significance of “coolness” in
predicting a technology’s adoption. Consumers perceive a product as innovative through its
“coolness” (Sriramachandramurthy and Hodis, 2010). A service robot is equipped with an
autonomous control system and wheels, which enable easy movement around the
workspace. This innovation not only helps the service industry cope with labour issues but
also provides consumers with an image of innovative service (Kuo et al., 2017). Moreover,
interacting with these robots can motivate curiosity, because it offers a new experience.
User motivation is shaped by product innovation and is related to customers’ utilitarian
and hedonistic perceptions (Kim et al., 2015). Motivated consumer innovativeness (MCI) is
highly correlated with customer attitudes and willingness to accept new technologies.
Vandecasteele and Geuens (2010) investigated the impact of MCI on attitudes towards
technological environments. An individual’s response to external stimuli is determined by
his/her emotions through a multi-stage cognitive evaluation of stimuli (Breitsohl and
Garrod, 2016). The cognitive evaluation theory is used to describe reactions to complex
events (Cai et al., 2018). Therefore, the final decision about whether a customer will accept or
reject a device on the service interface can depend on the emotions arising from a complex,
multi-step evaluation process (Kuo and Wu, 2012). Thus, this study aims to examine how
coolness and MCI of a robot-serviced restaurant (cafe) influence customer attitude and
intention to use.

2. Theoretical background and Hypothesis

2.1 Service robot
Service robots support humans through social interaction (Ivanov et al., 2017). This creates a
competitive advantage for the service industry players that proactively adapt to the
changing environment by differentiating themselves through novel technologies (Teece,
2007). The hospitality and service industries are market leaders in embracing innovations to
transform the customer experience (Lu et al., 2019). From the customer’s perspective,
interacting with a service robot is different from using other technologies, such as
smartphones and wearable devices, because of its social and emotional potential (Young Restaurants in
et al., 2011). Korea
2.2 Motivated consumer innovativeness
Motivation comprises external and internal factors that can lead to an action towards
achieving a goal (Vandecasteele and Geuens, 2010). Consumer innovation also tends to
favour consumer use of new services and products (Foxall et al., 1998). Companies that
adopt service automation create a positive word-of-mouth because of their innovative, high-
tech images (Ivanov and Webster, 2017). In the context of adopting new technologies, MCI
has the following sub-items: functionally MCI (fMCI), hedonistically MCI (hMCI) and
socially MCI (sMCI).

2.3 Effect of coolness on motivated consumer innovativeness

Sundar et al.’s (2014) concept of “coolness” considers four components: utility,
attractiveness, subcultural appeal and originality. According to Kim and Park (2019), such
“coolness” of interactive technology devices influences user adoption. “Coolness” relates to
the strongest positive expression validating the novelty of a technology or product (Sundar
et al., 2014). In the hospitality industry, customers experience “coolness” upon their first
encounter with robot services (Tung and Au, 2018). Moreover, the key to marketing novel
robotic technologies is to deliver innovative services to consumers (Scherer et al., 2015).
Therefore, this study considers “coolness” as the first step of MCI, as exemplified in the use
of service robots in restaurants.
2.3.1 Utility. Robotic services make human work easier and are thus functionally more
convenient for the service industry (Ivanov et al., 2017). Furthermore, they decrease
operation costs and increase service efficiency (Kwak and Park, 2012). Thus, consumers’
acceptance of service robots is determined by how competently they can fulfil functional,
emotional and relational needs to achieve their roles (Wirtz et al., 2018). Therefore, to
investigate utility’s role as a determinant of MCI, the following hypotheses are proposed:

H1a. Utility of service robots positively induces fMCI of restaurants.

H1b. Utility of service robots negatively induces hMCI of restaurants.
H1c. Utility of service robots positively induces sMCI of restaurants.
2.3.2 Attractiveness. Service robots attract consumers interested in innovative technologies
(Ivanov and Webster, 2017), as interacting with them sparks excitement and joy (Tung and
Au, 2018). Robot services that enhance perceived service quality through interactivity come
across as attractive (Kuo et al., 2017). Furthermore, a robot’s attractiveness increases as
technology develops to render them more socially attractive (e.g. empathising with
customers) as well as aesthetically attractive (e.g. facial and physical features) (van Doorn
et al., 2017). Based on this theoretical background, this study suggests the following
hypotheses:

H2a. Attractiveness of service robots induces fMCI of restaurants.

H2b. Attractiveness of service robots induces hMCI of restaurants.
H2c. Attractiveness of service robots induces sMCI of restaurants.
2.3.3 Subcultural appeal. The subcultural appeal of information technology products is
closely related to social differentiation and scarcity, constituting a considerable factor of
IJCHM “coolness” (Sundar et al., 2014). Compared with general automated machines, service robots
are more mobile and require more levels of implementation to perform advanced social
functions (Salem et al., 2015). Their human-centred interactions create a perception of
functional superiority; as a “buddy”, they can interact and enjoy their time with humans
(Tung and Au, 2018). As food-serving robots in restaurants are at an early stage of market
diffusion, they can trigger subcultural factors causing users to perceive the “coolness” of the
device. Thus, this study presents the following hypotheses:

H3a. Subcultural appeal of service robots induces fMCI of restaurants.

H3b. Subcultural appeal of service robots induces hMCI of restaurants.
H3c. Subcultural appeal of service robots induces sMCI of restaurants.
2.3.4 Originality. The novelty of using new robotic technologies can draw consumer attention
(Ivanov et al., 2017); the element of surprise that users feel during their interactions with service
robots is novel. For hotel customers who are unfamiliar with service robots, their uniqueness
creates a futuristic ambience (Tung and Au, 2018). Li et al.’s (2015) study indicates that
consumers intend to adopt new products when their originality meets functional usability
levels. In addition, unique devices encourage users to socially adopt them at an early stage
(Voss et al., 2003). In the case of service robots, the recognition of originality renders a greater
awareness of their “coolness”. Therefore, this study suggests the following hypotheses:

H4a. Originality of service robots induces fMCI of restaurants.

H4b. Originality of service robots induces hMCI of restaurants.
H4c. Originality of service robots induces sMCI of restaurants.

2.4 Effect of motivated consumer innovativeness on attitude

Based on the theoretical and empirical background provided earlier, this research suggests
that MCI affects attitudes. Several studies have been conducted on consumer attitude
towards service robots in the hospitality industry (Ivanov and Webster, 2019). Stock and
Merkle (2018) proved that students exhibited positive attitude towards the innovative
service behaviour of robots. Furthermore, in hotel services, intrinsic motivation has been
associated with a readiness to use service robots (Lu et al., 2019). Vandecasteele and Geuens
(2010) investigated the impact of MCI on attitudes towards mobile environments and
confirmed MCI’s crucial role in forming attitudes. Further, pleasant design positively affects
user attitudes towards smart devices (Chen et al., 2013). Lien and Cao (2014) found that
psychological motivation, such as sociality, helped enhance attitudes towards adapting to
innovative technological environments. Therefore, the following hypotheses are proposed:

H5. fMCI positively influences attitude.

H6. hMCI positively influences attitude.
H7. sMCI positively influences attitude.

2.5 Effect of attitude on intention to use

In the tourism industry, personal attitudes towards service robots and willingness to use
them are strongly positive (Ivanov and Webster, 2019). Emotional attitude towards service
robots is a decisive factor in using robots. By using hotel self-service kiosks, Kim and Qu Restaurants in
(2014) confirmed attitude’s positive effect on intention to use. For example, if consumers Korea
show a positive attitude towards new technologies, their intention to use service robots will
increase. Based on this background, this study provides the following hypothesis:

H8. Attitude positively affects intention to use.

2.6 Effect of perceived value on intention to use

When customers interact with service robots in the hospitality industry, they feel the
perceived values of enjoyment and fun (Haidegger et al., 2013; Ivanov and Webster, 2017).
Consumers are more likely to receive predictable services from reliable service robots.
Robots are considered more candid and honest than humans; however, some consumers face
technical difficulties and thus perceive significant risks and anxieties associated with
unfamiliar devices (Lu et al., 2019). Therefore, this study considers perceived value of
enjoyment offered by restaurant service robots, with trust as a positive and risk as a
negative value. Given the above, this study suggests the following hypotheses:

H9a. Perceived enjoyment positively influences the intention to use robot services in
restaurants.
H9b. Perceived trust has a significant positive effect on the intention to use robot
services in restaurants.
H9c. Perceived risk has a significant negative effect on the intention to use robot
services in restaurants.

2.7 The moderating effect of age group

Age is a major factor in acceptance and use of social robots (Heerink, 2011). In general, older
adults have a more negative attitude towards service robots than younger people (Onorato,
2018). They are usually unwilling to talk to robot nurses and prefer video support from
human guardians (Song et al., 2016), while younger customers respond to service robots
with curiosity and actively interact with them (Salvini et al., 2010). They also positively
consider using service robots for accomplishing simple tasks in tourism (Ivanov et al., 2018).
As age is related to technology use and comfort, the relationship between age and attitudes
towards service robots must be examined. Age group moderates the relationship between
motivations and attitude in using technology (Elias et al., 2012). Thus, the following
hypothesis is proposed:

H10. MCI’s effect on attitude differs by age group.

This study proposes a model with underlying drivers (coolness, MCI, attitude and intention
to use) (Figure 1).

3. Methods
3.1 Measurement
Utility, attractiveness, subcultural appeal and originality of a robot-serviced restaurant were
measured by 16 items, with a 7-point (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree) Likert scale.
The functionally, hedonically and socially MCI of the robot-serviced restaurant was
measured by 12 items. Further, attitude and the intention to use the robot-serviced
IJCHM
Perceived Value

1st phase 2nd phase 3rd phase (Planned behavior)

MCI
Coolness (Motivated Consumer Attitude Intention to use
Innovativeness)

Moderating Effect

Figure 1.
Research conceptual Age Group
framework

restaurant were measured by eight items. Finally, the perceived value of the intention to use
robot-serviced restaurants was measured by 12 items (Appendix 1).

3.2 Sample and their demographic profiles

A pre-test was administered using 30 restaurant patrons in Korea. The survey targeted 30
customers who had used robot services in the past 6 months, in places such as robot cafés
and restaurants in Korea. A marketing consultancy and research company recruited the
survey participants and distributed the questionnaires. As the context of this study was
robot-serviced restaurants, respondents watched a video (3 min 45 s) and two snapshots
were provided to help them understand how a robot-serviced restaurant operates
(Appendix 2). The design focussed on evaluating and modifying the questionnaire to assess
the reliability and validity of the proposed scale. The data analysis results showed that the
Cronbach’s alpha for all components was greater than 0.8, indicating a decent level of
reliability (Nunnally, 1967). After a few expressions and items were modified from the pre-
test, the survey company conducted a main survey in Korea and collected the samples from
September to October 2019. Respondents completed the questionnaire after watching the
video and the snapshots related to robot-serviced restaurants. A total of 420 questionnaires
were collected; out of those, 415 questionnaires were used for the analysis. Table 1 presents
the demographic characteristics of the respondents.

4. Results
4.1 Measurement model assessment
First, the study evaluated the measurement model through confirmatory factor analysis
(CFA). The normality of the measurement items for each structure was confirmed
(Thompson, 2007). The result did not show any issues with the data set. Subsequently, the
internal consistency reliability, convergent validity and discriminant validity were assessed.
Indicating desired convergent validity, the values of average variance extracted (AVE) for
all variables were above 0.6, and the composite reliability (CR) was greater than the
suggested criteria (above 0.8) (Bagozzi and Yi, 1988). The factor loadings for all items were
significant and provided substantial evidence of strong internal consistency. Table 2 shows
the result of the CFA. The model’s overall measurement fit was tested. The fitness index
Demographic traits No. of sample (per) (%)
Restaurants in
Korea
Gender
Male 189 45.5
Female 226 54.5
Age
10s 9 2.2
20s 263 63.4
30s 45 10.8
Over 40s 98 23.6
Income per month (thousand US$)
<500 161 38.7
500–1,000 179 43.2
1,001–3,000 44 10.6
3,001–5,000 19 4.6
>5,000 12 2.9
Occupancy
Student 238 57.3
Professional 54 13.0
Office worker 70 16.8
Housewife 28 6.8
Own business 15 3.7
Misc. 10 2.4
Eating-out Expenditure per month (thousand US$)
<50 36 8.7
50–100 46 11.1 Table 1.
101–300 77 18.6 Characteristics of the
301–500 132 31.8 participants
>500 124 29.8 (N = 415)

was satisfactory [ x 2 = 2216.443, df = 1196, p < 0.001, the comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.94,
the Tucker-Lewis index (TLI) = 0.93, the incremental fit index (IFI) = 0.94 and the root mean
squared error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.04]. To verify the discriminant validity, the
square root of the AVE was used; it was higher than the non-diagonal correlation in the
related row and column ranging from 0.78 to 0.91 (Hair et al., 2016), suggesting decent
discriminant validity, as shown in Table 3. The second-order factor analysis was assessed to
understand the value facets of the composite perceived value. Figure 2 presents the results
of the second-order CFA model for perceived value. The x 2 of the measurement model was
significant (p < 0.001). The second-order CFA model fit was satisfactory ( x 2 = 119.493, df =
51, p < 0.001, CFI = 0.99, TLI = 0.98, IFI = 0.99, and RMSEA = 0.05), as shown in Figure 2.

4.2 Structural model assessment

Subsequently, the model was examined using structural equation modelling (SEM). The
fitness index was satisfactory for the study model. The x 2 statistic was 3287.428 (df = 1248,
p < 0.001). The CFI and IFI were 0.89 and 0.89, respectively, and the RMSEA was 0.06,
indicating evidence for the desired fitted structural model (Hu and Bentler, 1999). H1a–H4c
explored the relationship between variables of “coolness” and MCI, which posited that
utility, attractiveness, subcultural appeal and originality should influence fMCI, hMCI and
sMCI. Except for H1b, H2a, H2c, H3b and H4b, the rest of the hypotheses were supported.
IJCHM Variables Items Standardized factor loadings AVE CR

Utility Util1 0.84 0.64 0.88

Util2 0.84
Util3 0.78
Util4 0.72
Attractiveness Attr1 0.92 0.71 0.91
Attr2 0.97
Attr3 0.76
Attr4 0.68
Subcultural Subc1 0.79 0.75 0.92
appeal Subc2 0.91
Subc3 0.94
Subc4 0.80
Originality Orig1 0.72 0.64 0.88
Orig2 0.85
Orig3 0.85
Orig4 0.77
Functionally fMC1 0.85 0.76 0.93
MCI fMC2 0.86
fMC3 0.92
fMC4 0.85
Hedonically hMC1 0.93 0.80 0.94
MCI hMC2 0.90
hMC3 0.82
hMC4 0.91
Socially sMC1 0.75 0.61 0.86
MCI sMC2 0.46
sMC3 0.90
sMC4 0.93
Attitude Atti1 0.86 0.71 0.91
Atti2 0.90
Atti3 0.84
Atti4 0.75
Intention to use Inte1 0.83 0.72 0.91
Inte2 0.92
Inte3 0.89
Inte4 0.76
Perceived PerE1 0.89 0.81 0.94
enjoyment PerE2 0.86
PerE3 0.89
PerE4 0.94
Perceived trust PerT1 0.93 0.83 0.95
PerT2 0.89
PerT3 0.89
PerT4 0.93
Perceived PerR1 0.84 0.68 0.89
risk PerR2 0.89
PerR3 0.83
PerR4 0.72
Table 2.
Results of CFA Notes: x 2 = 1880.785 (p < 0.001, df =1014); CFI = 0.95; IFI = 0.95; TLI= 0.94; RMSEA = 0.04 (p < 0.001)
Variables Util Attr Subc Orig fMCI PerT hMCI Atti Inte sMCI PerR PerE
Restaurants in
Korea
Util 0.799 – – – – – – – – – – –
Attr 0.122 0.840 – – – – – – – – – –
Subc 0.245 0.557 0.865 – – – – – – – – –
Orig 0.478 0.258 0.203 0.801 – – – – – – – –
fMCI 0.617 0.340 0.487 0.479 0.871 – – – – – – –
PerT 0.066 0.204 0.109 0.148 0.151 0.911 – – – – – –
hMCI 0.086 0.131 0.055 0.125 0.137 0.837 0.892 – – – – –
Atti 0.079 0.212 0.258 0.081 0.196 0.423 0.468 0.840 – – – –
Inte 0.036 0.246 0.292 0.045 0.174 0.522 0.492 0.624 0.851 – – –
sMCI 0.381 0.344 0.455 0.383 0.540 0.161 0.103 0.219 0.275 0.780 – –
PerR 0.132 0.144 0.285
0.057 0.173 0.185 0.171 0.285 0.345 0.236 0.824 –
PerE 0.042 0.266 0.358 0.039 0.218 0.186 0.228 0.347 0.455 0.329 0.589 0.897 Table 3.
Notes: The numbers along the diagonal are the square root of AVE, Util = Utility; Attr = Attractiveness; Correlation analysis
Subc = Subcultural appeal; Orig = Originality; Atti = Attitude; Inte = Intention to use; PerE = Perceived for discriminant
enjoyment; PerT = Perceived trust; PerR = Perceived risk validity

Perceived
enjoyment

1.067 (t = 6.911)***

Perceived 0.381 (t = 4.101)*** Perceived

trust Value

0.867 (t = 6.605)***
Perceived
risk

Figure 2.
Notes: χ2 = 119.493 (df = 51, p < 0.001); CFI = 0.99; Second-order CFA of
TLI = 0.98; IFI = 0.99; RFI = 0.96; NFI = 0.97; perceived value
model
RMSEA = 0.05; ***p < 0.001

Utility was found to be positively related to fMCI ( b = 0.527, p < 0.001) and sMCI ( b =
0.300, p < 0.001), supporting H1a and H1c. Attractiveness was positively related to hMCI
( b = 0.197, p < 0.05), supporting H2b. Subcultural appeal was positively related to fMCI
( b = 0.257, p < 0.001) and sMCI ( b = 0.324, p < 0.001), supporting H3a and H3c. Originality
was also positively related to fMCI ( b = 0.215, p < 0.001) and sMCI ( b = 0.274, p < 0.001),
supporting H4a and H4c. Attitude was significantly influenced by hMCI ( b = 0.432, p <
0.001) and sMCI ( b = 0.183, p < 0.01), supporting H6 and H7. However, H5 was rejected
( b = 0.08, p > 0.05). In addition, attitude positively affected the intention to use robot-
serviced restaurants ( b = 0.313, p < 0.001), supporting H8. H9a–H9c studied the
IJCHM relationship between perceived value and intention to use, positing that perceived
enjoyment, perceived trust and perceived risk should affect intention to use. Intention to use
was significantly influenced by perceived enjoyment ( b = 0.181, p < 0.001) and perceived
trust ( b = 0.196, p < 0.001), supporting H9a and H9b. However, H9c was not supported.
Thus, H9c was rejected. The results are shown in Table 4 and Figure 3.

4.3 Verification of the moderating effect of age group

To test the moderating role of age groups and to identify differences among them, the multi-
groups in SEM were used (Byrne, 2001). To examine the effect of MCI on attitude towards
robot-serviced restaurants, first, the total sample (n = 415) was divided into two: younger or
older than 30 (Singla and Hiray, 2019) and the paths were compared. Previous research on
the use of new technologies selected young groups in their twenties (Deng et al., 2010) as
samples. This study’s analysis results revealed that age group was a significant moderator
between hMCI and attitude, as shown in Table 5. The older group was more influenced by
hMCI in terms of attitude towards robot-serviced restaurants, while the younger group was
more influenced by fMCI and sMCI; however, the paths were not statistically significant.
This implies that the older group is more sensitive to the influence of hMCI on attitude than
the younger group. The findings are presented in Table 5.

5. Discussion and conclusions

5.1 Conclusions
Automation will replace human labour in almost every category of the service industry (Kuo
et al., 2017). Several researchers have considered the efficiency and applicability of robot
services on a technical level (Berezina et al., 2019). However, few have attempted to study
robot-serviced restaurants from the perspective of more fundamental psychological
motivations, attitudes and perceived values. This study investigated the effects of

Hypothesis Path Standardised estimate t -value Results

H1a Utility ! fMCI 0.527 8.329*** Support

H1b Utility ! hMCI 0.085 0.737 Reject
H1c Utility ! sMCI 0.300 3.763*** Support
H2a Attractiveness ! fMCI 0.067 1.407 Reject
H2b Attractiveness ! hMCI 0.197 1.990* Support
H2c Attractiveness ! sMCI 0.111 1.649 Reject
H3a Subcultural appeal ! fMCI 0.257 6.069*** Support
H3b Subcultural appeal ! hMCI
0.050
0.596 Reject
H3c Subcultural appeal ! sMCI 0.324 5.545*** Support
H4a Originality ! fMCI 0.215 3.904*** Support
H4b Originality ! hMCI 0.134 1.205 Reject
H4c Originality ! sMCI 0.274 3.568*** Support
H5 fMCI ! Attitude 0.087 1.118 Reject
H6 hMCI ! Attitude 0.432 9.034*** Support
H7 sMCI ! Attitude 0.183 2.820** Support
H8 Attitude ! Intention to use 0.313 9.126*** Support
H9a Perceived enjoyment ! Intention to use 0.181 6.051*** Support
H9b Perceived trust ! Intention to use 0.196 7.315*** Support
Table 4. H9c Perceived risk ! Intention to use 0.043 1.174 Reject
Results of hypothesis
testing Notes: *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001
 2nd phase
Restaurants in
1st phase
Coolness Motivated Consumer Korea
Innovativeness

0.527(t = 8.329)***
Utility fMCI

Perceived
0.300(t

enjoyment
0.1
= 3.76

83
(t =6
3)***

.05
Attractive- 1)*
0.19 **
ness 7(t =
1.99
0)**
*
9)**

*
Intention to
6.06

hMCI Attitude
use
7(t =

0.313 (t = 9.126)***
0.25

Subcultural 0.432 (t( = 9.034)***

**
)***

Appeal 5)*
0.3

7.31
24(

= 2.820

=
4)***

(t
t=

6
0.19
5.5
= 3.90

45)

0.183 (t
***

Perceived Perceived
0.215(t

trust risk
Originality sMCI
Figure 3.
0.274(t = 3.568)***
SEM result of the
research model

Path coefficient
Path Young Older (D x 2, Ddf = 1) Moderating effect

fMCI ! Attitude 0.129 0.012 0.374 Not significant

hMCI ! Attitude 0.357 0.566 4.355 Significant
sMCI ! Attitude 0.250 0.070 1.361 Not significant Table 5.
Comparison of young
Notes: *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001 and older groups

“coolness” and MCI on the theory of planned behaviour. This research developed and tested
an integrated model that examined the antecedents and consequences of “coolness” and MCI
to investigate the paths of maintaining attitudes towards and intention to use such services.
Previous studies on service robots have not investigated, using a three-stage approach and
SEM, the correlation between “coolness” and MCI, which influences attitudes towards and
the intention to visit such restaurants.

5.2 Theoretical implications

This study expands previous research by comprehensively analysing the factors of a robot-
serviced restaurant. First, it proposed a specific model that integrates coolness, MCI factors
and the theory of planned behaviour. Second, it analysed the effect of “coolness” on MCI.
IJCHM Specifically, utility significantly affected fMCI and sMCI. Thus, the utility of a robot-
serviced food restaurant would have a significant influence on the practical and social
motivation of consumers – similar in results to the utility of devices affecting utilitarian
motivation of customers (Kim and Park, 2019). Attractiveness had a significant effect on
only hMCI, indicating that the attractiveness of appearance also affected hMCI (Pebrianti,
2016). Subcultural appeal was found to affect fMCI. In contrast to attractiveness, subcultural
factors had a significant influence only on fMCI and sMCI (Sundar et al., 2014). Originality
also affected fMCI and sMCI, as did subcultural appeal; however, it did not affect hMCI –
supporting Loureiro and Lopes (2012) who proved that a cool brand creates its unique trend
and always looks for fresh ideas to open the mind to new experiences. Thus, “coolness” is
assumed to be highly connected with originality, because consumers are constantly looking
for singularity to express their social identity.
Third, hMCI and sMCI had a statistically significant effect on attitude while fMCI did
not. This proves that hMCI and sMCI are more important than fMCI in shaping consumer
attitudes towards robot-serviced restaurants. Liu and Mattila (2019) suggested that, beyond
the pragmatic benefits, integrating new technologies into the service sector can add a rich
flavour to guest experiences. The value of robots and service automation can be enhanced
by integrating fun with technology acceptance models while providing services and joy to
customers (Ivanov and Webster, 2017). Meanwhile, in the case of banking services, the
practical value influences intention to use whereas pleasure value (fashionableness value)
does not (Prodanova et al., 2019). The analysis results show that the restaurant service
robots are not so attractive, because the essence of food-serving robots is to minimise labour
and operating costs and to achieve more efficient operations in restaurants. However, this
study reveals that customer attitudes are directly related to usage intentions, which are
strongly influenced by hMCI.
Moreover, hMCI has a statistically significant influence on only attractiveness. The
findings show that restaurant service robots are currently not very attractive to consumers;
however, they are being used on the basis of their usability or other utility. Thus, increasing
attractiveness to some extent – not to the level of the uncanny valley effect from Mori
(1970) – will have a greater impact on attitudes that directly affect usage intention. Robot
design for the hospitality industry has been examined mostly in the context of restaurants
and hotels (Ivanov et al., 2019). However, there are two conflicting studies in this regard.
Kiesler and Goetz (2002) have shown that human-like appearance is more likely to cause
positive perceptions and attitudes (van Doorn et al., 2017). Lee and Šabanovic (2014) stated
that Asians have a more positive disposition about robots with human appearances and
expressive faces, whereas anthropomorphism has a negative impact on consumers who
wanted to use robots in restaurants (Lu et al., 2019). Therefore, an appropriate robot design
is required for restaurants. Although the design may not necessarily resemble a human
figure, it seems clear that the image of attractive service robots will motivate customers’
intention to use.
Fourth, the analyses revealed that positive consumer attitude significantly affects
intention to use, supporting previous research (Ajzen, 1991). Choi et al. (2020) found that
avatars had a positive effect on their intended use and explained the psychological
mechanisms of how avatars affect intention to use. Fifth, the analyses results confirmed
perceived value’s influence on the intention to use robot-serviced restaurants. Perceived
enjoyment and perceived trust displayed a statistically significant effect on intention to use.
Consumers feel that service robots in restaurants are enjoyable and that they have increased
intention to use them when they deem the robots to be reliable and are not concerned about
the risk of missed or dropped food (Yang et al., 2016).
 Sixth, regarding the effect of MCI on consumer attitudes, the analysis on the moderating Restaurants in
effects of age group showed that the older group (above 30) was more affected by hMCI than Korea
the younger group (below 30). In general, younger people may have more pleasure-oriented
motivations and older adults more function-oriented motivations; however, the research
results counter this assumption. This is not because young people prefer to be more
functional while older adults are pleasure-oriented; in fact, older adults are interested in
intuitive and aesthetic characteristics of devices (Zhou et al., 2014). Rather, more
sophisticated robot services are required depending on the target age group (Tesfom and
Birch, 2011).
Seventh, this study proposed a multidimensional, three-step, complex research model,
whereas previous research works on service robots have mostly studied single-level impact
relationships. Consumers’ decision-making processes involve forming attitudes through a
multi-step process in line with the complex nature of human emotions. Thus, this study has
proved unique insights that reveal the hidden rational explanation for the significant
relationship of “coolness” and MCI in developing positive intention to use robot-serviced
restaurants. To stay ahead of the fierce competition, restaurant marketers are constantly
introducing new and specialised menus and services, after segmenting and targeting
customers. Those that specialise in menus and services for customers will have to develop
and design the appearance of service robots according to consumer needs.

5.3 Practical implications

Recently, restaurant owners have been suffering from higher labour costs because of the
minimum wage hike in Korea and the USA. A key reason for the closure of restaurants in
Korea is the rising labour cost (Korea Joongang Daily, 2020). The most significant financial
benefit of using service robots is reduced labour costs. Service robots can be operated
24  7, and unlike human employees, employers can set their working times and
environments (Ivanov et al., 2017). Thus, robot-serviced restaurants could become
commonplace in the future (Berezina et al., 2019). Considering these current events, this
study presents crucial practical implications and provides strategic guidelines for restaurant
operators or companies developing service robots for restaurants as follows.
First, thus far, companies have focussed on the efficiency, economics and technology of
robot services as basic characteristics of automation in the hospitality industry. Indeed, they
have been thinking about how to replace human work faster and more accurately. However,
currently, the emotional aspect of service robots has become more appealing, as emphasised
in robots’ interactions with customers rather than the technical approach (Tung and Au,
2018). Functionality is no longer sufficient for customers. They need sensuous and
innovative features that encourage them to use and meet robots again (Kuo et al., 2017). This
study shows that service robots in the hospitality industry, unlike robots used in
manufacturing, require customer interaction that depends on whether consumers consider
service robots as “cool”. “Coolness” of robot services springs from the ingenuity of replacing
human functions, which is still quite uncommon in the service sector. However, robot
services in restaurants should consider sanitary and design aspects along with emotional
motivation aspects.
Second, previous studies have shown that social impact is important in the adoption of a
technology (Venkatesh et al., 2012). In the same vein, sMCI influences the intention to use
service robots. Currently, service robots cannot interact with customers like humans do;
however, the evolution of robotics will eventually reach a level where human emotions can
be stimulated. The interaction between service robots and customers has become a
significant challenge for businesses that run restaurants. Emotional dimension factors, such
IJCHM as the exterior, voice, melody and light of the restaurant service robot, can stimulate
consumers’ hedonic feelings. Making light jokes for an emotional interaction with customers
or praising them for their choice of menu can also enhance the usefulness of services robots.
Third, this study is about a specific type of service robot that carries food inside a
restaurant. Incidentally, robots that serve in restaurants and carry food for customers are
completely different from those that carry products, issue tickets or clean floors. The
feelings and emotions of consumers who are served by robots can vary according to how a
restaurant’s employees serve food. As shown in this study, in a restaurant setting, social and
pleasure interactions between service robots and customers are vital. Therefore, restaurants
that operate service robots should recognise this vital element in the interactions between
customers and service robots and make efforts to maximise the positive impact of service
robots.
Yet, with time, customer needs change and robot services will have to accordingly evolve
(Makridakis, 2017). Moreover, the recent Covid-19 incidents have increased customer
demand to refrain from face-to-face services. Thus, service robots in restaurants and other
hospitality industries are expected to expand further. It is politically necessary to act, such
as deregulation by the government to create or use robot services in the future, and to
reorganise laws and systems, (e.g. by loans and tax reductions) when building facilities to
promote the introduction of robot services. Lastly, this study empirically analysed the
relationship between customer perceptions, motivational innovation and attitudes and
intention to use service robots. It provides significant strategic direction and broadens the
horizon of research in this field.

5.4 Limitations and future research

First, there may be a bias, because the collected data were self-reported through an on/offline
survey with the same questionnaire. Therefore, Harmon’s single factor test was performed,
as proposed by Podsakoff and Organ (1986). If the common method bias (CMB) is severe, the
factor analysis of all variables focusses on one factor, even if one or more factors with an
eigenvalue of 1 or more are derived. Twelve factors were derived through post-tests and the
explanatory power was only 25.52%, indicating no CMB. However, future research should
try to overcome these limitations by using more diverse data collection methods (Kuo et al.,
2017).
Second, the study did not consider the purpose of the restaurant visits (family vs
business), which can affect perceived value. Third, the survey did not specify restaurant
types; respondents’ answers may vary depending on restaurant type such as fine dining or
casual dining. Fourth, although the survey company conducted the survey, most
respondents answered the questionnaire after watching videos and photos rather than
receiving and evaluating an actual robot service. If food-service robots become more
common in the future, surveys should be conducted on experienced users. Fifth, to
investigate the moderating effect of age group, the sample was divided into two groups:
young and older adults. However, moderating variables must be expanded to include other
demographic factors (Wu et al., 2017). Sixth, the final decision by the customer to accept or
refuse the use of a technical device involves a complex, multi-step evaluation process (Kuo
and Wu, 2012). Therefore, because of the many constructs and the three-step research model,
the cause–effect relationships were slightly difficult to explain. Future research must
consider these in advance and expand the results of this research to clearly understand
customer intention to use robot services in restaurants.
References Restaurants in
Ajzen, I. (1991), “The theory of planned behaviour”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Korea
Processes, Vol. 50 No. 2, pp. 179-211.
Bagozzi, R.P. and Yi, Y. (1988), “On the evaluation of structural equation models”, Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 74-94.
Belanche, D., Casalo, L.V., Flavian, C. and Schepers, J. (2020), “Service robot implementation: a
theoretical framework and research agenda”, The Service Industries Journal, Vol. 40 Nos 3/4,
pp. 203-225.
Berezina, K., Ciftci, O. and Cobanoglu, C. (2019), “Robots, artificial intelligence, and service automation
in restaurants”, Robots, Artificial Intelligence, and Service Automation in Travel, Tourism and
Hospitality, Emerald Publishing Limited, pp. 185-219.
Breitsohl, J. and Garrod, B. (2016), “Assessing tourists’ cognitive, emotional and behavioural reactions
to an unethical destination incident”, Tourism Management, Vol. 54, pp. 209-220.
Byrne, B.M. (2001), “Structural equation modelling with AMOS, EQS, and LISREL: comparative
approaches to testing for the factorial validity of a measuring instrument”, International Journal
of Testing, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 55-86.
Cai, R.R., Lu, L. and Gursoy, D. (2018), “Effect of disruptive customer behaviours on others’
overall service experience: an appraisal theory perspective”, Tourism Management,
Vol. 69, pp. 330-344.
Cao, T.K., Dang, P.L. and Nguyen, H.A. (2016), “Predicting consumer intention to use mobile payment
services: empirical evidence from Vietnam”, International Journal of Marketing Studies, Vol. 8
No. 1, pp. 117-124.
Chen, M.Y., Lughofer, E.D. and Hsiao, K.L. (2013), “Android smartphone adoption and intention to pay
for mobile internet”, Library Hi Tech, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 216-235.
Choi, Y., Mehraliyev, F. and Kim, S.S. (2020), “Role of virtual avatars in digitalized hotel service”,
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 977-997.
Deng, Z., Lu, Y., Wei, K.K. and Zhang, J. (2010), “Understanding customer satisfaction and loyalty: an
empirical study of mobile instant messages in China”, International Journal of Information
Management, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 289-300.
Elias, S.M., Smith, W.L. and Barney, C.E. (2012), “Age as a moderator of attitude towards technology in
the workplace: work motivation and overall job satisfaction”, Behaviour and Information
Technology, Vol. 31 No. 5, pp. 453-467.
Foxall, G.R., Goldsmith, R.E. and Brown, S. (1998), Consumer Psychology for Marketing, Cengage
Learning EMEA, Vol. 1.
Haidegger, T., Barreto, M., Gonçalves, P., Habib, M.K., Ragavan, S.K.V., Li, H., Prestes, E. (2013),
“Applied ontologies and standards for service robots”, Robotics and Autonomous Systems,
Vol. 61 No. 11, pp. 1215-1223.
Hair, J.F., Jr, Hult, G.T.M., Ringle, C. and Sarstedt, M. (2016), A Primer on Partial Least Squares
Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), Sage publications.
Heerink, M. (2011), “Exploring the influence of age, gender, education and computer experience on
robot acceptance by older adults”, 2011 6th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-
Robot Interaction (HRI), IEEE, pp. 147-148.
Hu, L.T. and Bentler, P.M. (1999), “Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis:
conventional criteria versus new alternatives”, Structural Equation Modeling: A
Multidisciplinary Journal, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 1-55.
Ivanov, S.H. and Webster, C. (2017), “Adoption of robots, artificial intelligence and service automation
by travel, tourism and hospitality companies – a cost-benefit analysis”, Artificial Intelligence and
Service Automation by Travel, Tourism and Hospitality Companies – A Cost-Benefit Analysis.
IJCHM Ivanov, S. and Webster, C. (2019), “Perceived appropriateness and intention to use service robots in
tourism”, In Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism 2019, Springer, Cham,
pp. 237-248.
Ivanov, S.H., Webster, C. and Berezina, K. (2017), “Adoption of robots and service automation by
tourism and hospitality companies”, Revista Turismo and Desenvolvimento, Vol. 27 No. 28,
pp. 1501-1517.
Ivanov, S., Webster, C. and Garenko, A. (2018), “Young Russian adults’ attitudes towards the potential
use of robots in hotels”, Technology in Society, Vol. 55, pp. 24-32.
Ivanov, S., Gretzel, U., Berezina, K., Sigala, M. and Webster, C. (2019), “Progress on robotics in
hospitality and tourism: a review of the literature”, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism
Technology, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 489-521.
Johnson, K. (2009), “Corporate sperm count and boiled frogs: seeds of ideas to kindle innovation in
students”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 21 No. 2,
pp. 179-190.
Jones, P. (1995), “Developing new products and services in flight catering”, International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 7 Nos 2/3, pp. 24-28.
Jung, T.H., Lee, H., Chung, N. and Tom Dieck, M.C. (2018), “Cross-cultural differences in adopting
mobile augmented reality at cultural heritage tourism sites”, International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 1621-1645.
Kiesler, S. and Goetz, J. (2002), “Mental models of robotic assistants”, CHI’02 extended abstracts on
Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 576-577.
Kim, J. and Park, E. (2019), “Beyond coolness: Predicting the technology adoption of interactive
wearable devices”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 49, pp. 114-119.
Kim, M. and Qu, H. (2014), “Travellers’ behavioural intention toward hotel self-service kiosks
usage”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 26 No. 2,
pp. 225-245.
Kim, K.J., Shin, D.H. and Park, E. (2015), “Can coolness predict technology adoption? Effects of
perceived coolness on user acceptance of smartphones with curved screens”, Cyberpsychology,
Behavior, and Social Networking, Vol. 18 No. 9, pp. 528-533.
Korea Joongang Daily (2020), “Killing the self-employed to save the part-timers, minimum wage rises
have helped some and destroyed businesses”, available at: http://koreajoongangdaily.joins.com/
news/article/article.aspx?aid=3072250 (accessed 6 January 2020).
Kuo, Y.F. and Wu, C.M. (2012), “Satisfaction and post-purchase intentions with service recovery of
online shopping websites: perspectives on perceived justice and emotions”, International Journal
of Information Management, Vol. 32 No. 2, pp. 127-138.
Kuo, C.M., Chen, L.C. and Tseng, C.Y. (2017), “Investigating an innovative service with hospitality
robots”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 29 No. 5,
pp. 1305-1321.
Kwak, H.J. and Park, G.T. (2012), “Study on the mobility of service robots”, International Journal of
Engineering and Technology Innovation, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 97-112.
Law, R., Leung, D. and Chan, I.C.C. (2019), “Progression and development of information and
communication technology research in hospitality and tourism”, International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 32 No. 2, pp. 511-534.
Lee, H.R. and Šabanovic, S. (2014), “Culturally variable preferences for robot design and use in South
Korea, Turkey, and the United States”, In 2014 9th ACM/IEEE International Conference on
Human-Robot Interaction (HRI), IEEE, pp. 17-24.
Lee, M., Lee, S.A. and Koh, Y. (2019), “Multisensory experience for enhancing hotel guest experience”,
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 31 No. 11, pp. 4313-4337.
Li, G., Zhang, R. and Wang, C. (2015), “The role of product originality, usefulness and motivated Restaurants in
consumer innovativeness in new product adoption intentions”, Journal of Product Innovation
Management, Vol. 32 No. 2, pp. 214-223.
Korea
Liébana-Cabanillas, F., Marinkovic, V. and Kalinic, Z. (2017), “A SEM-neural network approach for
predicting antecedents of m-commerce acceptance”, International Journal of Information
Management, Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 14-24.
Lien, C.H. and Cao, Y. (2014), “Examining WeChat users’ motivations, trust, attitudes, and positive
word-of-mouth: evidence from China”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 41, pp. 104-111.
Liu, S.Q. and Mattila, A.S. (2019), “Apple pay: coolness and embarrassment in the service encounter”,
International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 78, pp. 268-275.
Loureiro, S.M.C. and Lopes, R. (2012), “Brand credibility and self-brand connection as drivers to cool
brands”, Global Marketing Conference at Seoul, pp. 1551-1569.
Lu, L., Cai, R. and Gursoy, D. (2019), “Developing and validating a service robot integration willingness
scale”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 80, pp. 36-51.
Makridakis, S. (2017), “The forthcoming artificial intelligence (AI) revolution: its impact on society and
firms”, Futures, Vol. 90, pp. 46-60.
Mori, M. (1970), “The uncanny valley”, Energy, Vol. 7 No. 4, pp. 33-35.
New York Magazine (2018), “In Boston, these robots are now serving up $8 salads and bowls”,
available at: www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfMZfxgbuCw (accessed 3 October 2019).
Nunnally, J.C. (1967), McGraw-Hill Series in Psychology. Psychometric Theory, McGraw-Hill.
Onorato, D.A. (2018), “Robots, unions, and aging: determinants of robot adoption evidence from OECD
countries”, Atlantic Economic Journal, Vol. 46 No. 4, pp. 473-474.
Osawa, H., Ema, A., Hattori, H., Akiya, N., Kanzaki, N., Kubo, A., Koyama, T. and Ichise, R. (2017),
“What is real risk and benefit on work with robots? From the analysis of a robot hotel”,
Proceedings of the Companion of the 2017 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot
Interaction, pp. 241-242.
Pebrianti, W.E.N.N.Y. (2016), “Web attractiveness, hedonic shopping value and online buying
decision”, Pertanika International Journal of Economic and Management (IJEM), Vol. 10,
pp. 123-134.
Podsakoff, P.M. and Organ, D.W. (1986), “Self-reports in organizational research: problems and
prospects”, Journal of Management, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 531-544.
Prodanova, J., Ciunova-Shuleska, A. and Palamidovska-Sterjadovska, N. (2019), “Enriching m-banking
perceived value to achieve reuse intention”, Marketing Intelligence and Planning, Vol. 37 No. 6,
pp. 617-630.
Rodgers, S. (2008), “Technological innovation supporting different food production philosophies in the
food service sectors”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 20
No. 1, pp. 19-34.
Salem, M., Lakatos, G., Amirabdollahian, F. and Dautenhahn, K. (2015), “Would you trust a (faulty)
robot? Effects of error, task type and personality on human-robot cooperation and trust”, 2015
10th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI), IEEE, pp. 1-8.
Salvini, P., Ciaravella, G., Yu, W., Ferri, G., Manzi, A., Mazzolai, B., Laschi, C., Oh, S.R. and Dario, P.
(2010), “How safe are service robots in urban environments? Bullying a robot”, 19th
International Symposium in Robot and Human Interactive Communication, IEEE, pp. 1-7.
Scherer, A., Wünderlich, N.V. and Wangenheim, F.V. (2015), “The value of self-service: long-term
effects of technology-based self-service usage on customer retention”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 39
No. 1, pp. 177-200.
Singla, H.K. and Hiray, A. (2019), “Evaluating the impact of hedonism on investment choices in India”,
Managerial Finance, Vol. 45 No. 12, pp. 1526-1541.
IJCHM Song, A., Wu, C., Ni, D., Li, H. and Qin, H. (2016), “One-therapist to three-patient telerehabilitation robot
system for the upper limb after stroke”, International Journal of Social Robotics, Vol. 8 No. 2,
pp. 319-329.
Sriramachandramurthy, R. and Hodis, M. (2010), “Why is apple cool? An examination of brand
coolness and its marketing consequences”, Proceedings from the American Marketing
Association Summer Academic Conference. American Marketing Association, Chicago, Vol. 21,
pp. 147-148.
Stock, R.M. and Merkle, M. (2018), “Can humanoid service robots perform better than service
employees? A comparison of innovative behavior cues”, In Proceedings of the 51st HI
International Conference on System Sciences, pp. 1056-1065.
Sundar, S.S., Tamul, D.J. and Wu, M. (2014), “Capturing ‘cool’: measures for assessing coolness of
technological products”, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, Vol. 72 No. 2,
pp. 169-180.
Teece, D.J. (2007), “Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable)
enterprise performance”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 28 No. 13, pp. 1319-1350.
Tesfom, G. and Birch, N.J. (2011), “Do switching barriers in the retail banking industry influence bank
customers in different age groups differently?”, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 25 No. 5,
pp. 371-380.
The Economic Times (2019), “Robot restaurant comes to Bengaluru”, available at: https://
economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/services/hotels-/-restaurants/robot-restaurant-comes-to-
bengaluru/robots-serve-food/slideshow/70732623.cms (accessed 19 August 2019).
Thompson, B. (2007), “Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: understanding concepts and
applications”, Washington, DC, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 245-248.
Tung, V.W.S. and Au, N. (2018), “Exploring customer experiences with robotics in hospitality”,
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 30 No. 7, pp. 2680-2697.
Van Doorn, J., Mende, M., Noble, S.M., Hulland, J., Ostrom, A.L., Grewal, D. and Petersen, J.A. (2017),
“Domo arigato Mr Roboto: emergence of automated social presence in organizational frontlines
and customers’ service experiences”, Journal of Service Research, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 43-58.
Vandecasteele, B. and Geuens, M. (2010), “Motivated consumer innovativeness: concept, measurement,
and validation”, International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 308-318.
Venkatesh, V., Thong, J.Y. and Xu, X. (2012), “Consumer acceptance and use of information technology:
extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 36 No. 1,
pp. 157-178.
Voss, K.E., Spangenberg, E.R. and Grohmann, B. (2003), “Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian
dimensions of consumer attitude”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 310-320.
Wirtz, J., Patterson, P.G., Kunz, W.H., Gruber, T., Lu, V.N., Paluch, S. and Martins, A. (2018), “Brave
new world: service robots in the frontline”, Journal of Service Management, Vol. 29 No. 5,
pp. 907-931.
Wu, W.Y., Quyen, P.T.P. and Rivas, A.A.A. (2017), “How e-servicescapes affect customer online
shopping intention: the moderating effects of gender and online purchasing experience”,
Information Systems and e-Business Management, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 689-715.
Yang, H., Yu, J., Zo, H. and Choi, M. (2016), “User acceptance of wearable devices: an extended
perspective of perceived value”, Telematics and Informatics, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 256-269.
Yonhap News (2019), “Moon declares S. Korea’s AI-gov’t vision, with’ AI national strategy’ in the
making”, available at: https://en.yna.co.kr/view/AEN20191028002251315 (accessed 28 October
2019).
Young, J.E., Sung, J., Voida, A., Sharlin, E., Igarashi, T., Christensen, H.I. and Grinter, R.E. (2011),
“Evaluating human-robot interaction”, International Journal of Social Robotics, Vol. 3 No. 1,
pp. 53-67.
YTN (2019), “People of delivery’ launches pilot service for indoor delivery robot”, available at: www. Restaurants in
ytn.co.kr/_ln/0102_201910090010319087 (accessed 9 October 2019).
Korea
Zalama, E., García-Bermejo, J.G., Marcos, S., Domínguez, S., Feliz, R., Pinillos, R. and Lopez, J.
(2014), “Sacarino, a service robot in a hotel environment”, In ROBOT2013: First Iberian
Robotics Conference, Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, Springer, Cham,
Vol. 253, pp. 3-14.
Zhou, J., Rau, P.L.P. and Salvendy, G. (2014), “Age-related difference in the use of mobile phones”,
Universal Access in the Information Society, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 401-413.
IJCHM Appendix 1

Constructs Items Measures References

Utility Util1 The restaurant service robot is useful Sundar et al. (2014)
Util2 I think the purpose of the restaurant service robot is to
help people
Util3 The restaurant service robot would help customers get
things done
Util4 The restaurant service robot helps efficient service
Attractiveness Attr1 The restaurant service robot is attractive Kim et al. (2015)
Attr2 The restaurant service robot is hot
Attr3 The restaurant service robot is stylish
Attr4 The restaurant service robot is cutting edge
Subcultural Subc1 The restaurant service robot makes people who use it Sundar et al. (2014)
appeal different from others
Subc2 People who use the restaurant service robot are unique
Subc3 People who use the restaurant service robot are
considered leaders rather than followers
Subc4 Customers using the restaurant service robot look great
Originality Orig1 The restaurant service robot is original Kim et al. (2015), Voss
Orig2 The restaurant service robot is unique et al. (2003)
Orig3 The restaurant service robot stands apart from similar
device
Orig4 The robot service restaurant is the origin of the future
restaurant
Functionally fMCI1 The restaurant service robot seems to be easy to use Voss et al. (2003),
MCI fMCI2 The restaurant service robot seems to be efficient Vandecasteele and
fMCI3 The restaurant service robot seems to be convenient Geuens (2010)
fMCI4 The restaurant service robot is likely to shorten delivery
times
Hedonically hMCI1 The restaurant service robot seems to make life pleasant Vandecasteele and
MCI hMCI2 I think it gives me a good feeling to use the restaurant Geuens (2010)
service robot
hMCI3 The discovery of novelties of the restaurant robot service
makes me playful and cheerful
hMCI4 The technological newness of the restaurant service robot
makes me happier
Socially MCI sMCI1 The restaurant service robot could impress others Vandecasteele and
sMCI2 Using the restaurant service robot can show I am an early Geuens (2010)
adopter
sMCI3 Using the restaurant service robot could distinguish me
from others
sMCI4 I love to use innovations of the restaurant service robot
which my friends do not use
Table A1.
Survey items (continued)
 Restaurants in
Constructs Items Measures References
Korea
Attitude Atti1 It is good idea to use the restaurant service robot Kim and Qu (2014)
Atti2 I have a generally favourable attitude toward the
restaurant service robot
Atti3 In general, I have a positive attitude about the restaurant
service robot
Atti4 I have a good feeling about the restaurant service robot
Intention to Inte1 Given the opportunity, I would use the restaurant service Kim and Qu (2014)
use robot
Inte2 I am likely to use the restaurant service robot in the near
future
Inte3 I will use the service robot when ordering food in the
restaurant
Inte4 I am open to using the restaurant service robot in the near
future
Perceived PerE1 I would have fun interacting with the restaurant service Cao et al. (2016)
enjoyment robot
PerE2 Using the restaurant service robot would provide me with
a lot of fun
PerE3 I would enjoy using the restaurant service robot
PerE4 It would be fun to order using the restaurant service robot
Perceived PerT1 In general, I trust in the restaurant service robot Liébana-Cabanillas
trust PerT2 I think that the restaurant service robot will keep the et al. (2017)
commitments that it makes
PerT3 The restaurant service robot is trustworthy
PerT4 I would describe the restaurant service robot as reliable
Perceived risk PerR1 There is a high potential for lost time and money if I order Wu et al. (2017)
using the restaurant service robot
PerR2 There is significant risk in ordering food using the
restaurant service robot
PerR3 I think that making an order with the restaurant service
robot is risky
PerR4 The restaurant service robot seems to carry food wrong Table A1.
IJCHM Appendix 2. Service robot video and snapshots

Plate A1.
Robot restaurant
video retrieved from
www.youtube.com/
watch?v=
GAUt5Q8taB4

Corresponding author
Seong Soo Cha can be contacted at: [email protected]

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: [email protected]