ArticleBMC psychology2025
The effects of response time on older and young adults' interaction experience with Chatbot.
Article in BMC psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Drivers and Outcomes of Engagement in Non-Formal Special Interest Groups Among Japanese Emergency Physicians: An Activity Theory Analysis.AEM education and training · 2026Article
- Article
- A Generative AI Framework for Cognitive Intervention in Older Adults: An Integrated Engineering Design and Clinical Protocol.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChatbots, such as Siri, Alexa, and ChatGPT, are increasingly integrated into various domains, including customer service and virtual companionship, transforming human-computer interactions. However, there remains limited understanding of how response time-a critical social cue-affects user experience across different age groups, particularly in virtual companionship contexts. This gap is especially relevant in aging societies where older adults' emotional and relational needs require tailored technological solutions.
methodsA 2 × 2 between-subjects experiment was conducted with 160 Taiwanese participants from two age groups: young adults (18-23 years old) and older adults (56-81 years old). Participants interacted with chatbots under two conditions: instant responses (approximately 3 s) and delayed responses (10-60 s). User experience was measured using social presence (SP), service encounter satisfaction (SAT), and intention of use (IOU) through validated questionnaires. Two-way ANOVA was employed to analyze the main and interaction effects of response time and age group.
resultsThe findings revealed a significant interaction effect between response time and age group. While younger adults preferred instant responses, older adults showed a preference for delayed responses. Specifically: (1) Instant responses led to higher satisfaction and engagement for younger adults, who value efficiency and immediacy. (2) Delayed responses facilitated cognitive comfort and enhanced relational value for older adults, emphasizing the importance of conversational pacing.
conclusionsThis study highlights the critical role of response time in chatbot design, revealing how age-specific preferences influence user satisfaction in virtual companionship scenarios. Findings underscore the need for adaptive chatbot designs that align with cognitive and emotional needs across age groups. Broader implications emphasize the importance of balancing digitally assisted companionship with the risks of dehumanization. Future research should explore long-term interaction effects and cultural differences to enhance chatbot inclusivity and effectiveness.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.