The Market Acceptance Mechanism of AI Psychological Screening Products: A Process Tracking Based on the "Xinqing AI" Brand
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54097/keqe9x20Keywords:
AI psychological screening; market acceptance; privacy risk; trust; user stickiness.Abstract
With the rapid development of digital healthcare, AI psychological screening products have gradually become an important means of mental health services due to their efficiency and convenience. However, their promotion faces two major obstacles: privacy concerns and lack of trust. Taking the representative domestic brand "Xinqing AI" as a case study, this paper examines its development process of "rapid growth—negative public opinion—growth stagnation" through data analysis, aiming to address three key issues: the factors influencing users' acceptance of such products, the relationship between privacy risks and trust, and strategies to overcome market promotion challenges. The study finds that users' privacy concerns mainly manifest in worries about data collection and storage security, as well as resistance to being labeled with mental health issues. Meanwhile, insufficient trust stems from opaque medical collaborations, lack of professional certification, non-transparent algorithm mechanisms, and absence of third-party validation. These two factors together form a vicious cycle of "privacy concerns → distrust of products → refusal to use products," resulting in extremely low product retention and payment rates. Therefore, this paper proposes addressing the issue from both "formal trust" and "emotional trust" perspectives: enhancing users' privacy autonomy, improving transparency and security guarantees, and optimizing service connectivity to meet differentiated needs. This study constructs an influence model of "privacy risk perception—technical trust—usage satisfaction—continuance intention," providing insights for theoretical research and practical application of AI psychological screening products.
Downloads
References
[1] Bhattacherjee A. Understanding information systems continuance: An expectation-confirmation model. MIS Quarterly, 2001, 25(3): 351-370.
[2] Culnan M J, Armstrong P K. An empirical investigation of information privacy concerns: Implications for personalization. MIS Quarterly, 1999, 23(1): 103-120.
[3] Gefen D, Straub D W. The relative importance of perceived ease of use and usefulness in e-commerce: A response to Bhattacherjee (2001). MIS Quarterly, 2004, 27(4): 389-400.
[4] Hoffman T P, Novak T P, Schlosser A E. Marketing in hypermedia computer-mediated environments: Conceptual foundations. Journal of Marketing, 2001, 60(3): 50-68.
[5] LaRose R, Eastin M S. A social cognitive theory of Internet use and gratification: Toward a theory of media attendance in an online environment. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 2004, 48(3): 358-377.
[6] Malhotra N K, Kim S S, Agarwal J. Information privacy concerns, procedural fairness, and impersonal trust: An empirical investigation. Information Systems Research, 2004, 15(1): 37-59.
[7] Mayer R C, Davis J H, Schoorman F D. An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 1995, 20(3): 709-734.
[8] McKnight D H, Chervany N L. What trust means in e-commerce customer relationships: An interdisciplinary conceptual typology. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 2001, 6(2): 35-59.
[9] Oliver R L. Satisfaction: A behavioral perspective on the consumer. McGraw-Hill, 1997.
[10] Ribeiro M T, Singh S, Guestrin C. Why should I trust you?: Explaining the predictions of any classifier. Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, 2016: 1135-1144.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Highlights in Business, Economics and Management
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
