AI streamers are increasingly being deployed as service agents in livestream shopping. Although prior research has examined various AI streamer characteristics, existing explanations have tended to focus on social, relational, or affective evaluations and have not systematically explained how different characteristics are associated with purchase intention through a technology-oriented evaluation or why these relationships vary across consumers. Using the Stimulus–Organism–Response (S–O–R) framework as its overarching structure, this study draws on the cue logic of anthropomorphism theory to select four consumer-perceivable characteristics and organizes them into two categories: attractiveness and vitality as form-related characteristics, and professionalism and responsiveness as behavior-related characteristics. Drawing further on innovation diffusion theory, consumer innovativeness is specified as a boundary condition. Survey data from 405 Chinese consumers with experience of AI streamer-led livestream shopping were used to examine these relationships, together with the mediating role of perceived novelty and the moderating role of consumer innovativeness. The results showed that all four characteristics were positively associated with purchase intention both directly and indirectly through perceived novelty. Consumer innovativeness strengthened the direct relationships of vitality and responsiveness with purchase intention and the indirect relationships of attractiveness, vitality, and responsiveness with purchase intention through perceived novelty, but did not significantly moderate relationships involving professionalism. These findings highlight perceived novelty as a technology-oriented evaluative mechanism linking AI streamer characteristics to purchase intention and reveal the characteristic- and pathway-dependent boundary role of consumer innovativeness, offering practical implications for differentiated AI streamer design and consumer targeting.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Han et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: