Alexa users trust the Amazon device because they see it as human rather than a machine, study finds

A study found that Alexa users trust the voice assistant because they see it as a secretary rather than a machine.

Researchers from Oxford and Stanford University found that they ignored concerns about privacy and surveillance because they saw the Amazon device as a companion.

When discussing it positively, users refer to Alexa as “she” and “it” – but when talking about the device in the context of the tech giant, they use “it” instead.

Professor Ekaterina Hertog from Oxford said: “This inconsistent use of pronouns likely reflects users trying to separate Alexa from Amazon, deeming Alexa ‘trustworthy enough’ while continuing to distrust the parent company.”

Published in the journal Convergence, the paper aims to investigate why more than 200 million Alexa owners trust the technology in their homes “despite the public’s persistent distrust of Amazon.”

Concerns have been raised about the amount of data collected by Amazon’s smart speakers to create detailed user profiles.

In addition to potentially being used for targeted advertising and sold to third parties, critics have warned that the devices are also a prime target for hackers.

However, the study found that users use three strategies to manage fears and doubts about AI-enabled machines that are rapidly becoming smarter.

First, users view Alexa as having a separate identity from Amazon, and see the device, pictured, as itself a “human-like female secretary.”

This has enabled a “feeling of security around technology” to be built.

Second, they only accepted personal data issues with a feeling of “digital resignation.”

Third, Alexa users said they set boundaries by not having it in rooms they explicitly wanted to keep private, or by turning it off during sensitive conversations.

“While people are more comfortable with the idea of ​​‘listening to Alexa,’ this may lead to an unwillingness to take substantive steps to protect privacy at the individual and individual level,” said co-author Elizabeth Fetterolf, a doctoral student at Stanford University. Imagine what kind of collective resistance to the extreme human and environmental toll associated with producing the device.