PurposeThe digital revolution has changed consumer–service provider interaction, spawning a new generation of FinTech. This paper analyzes consumers' reactions to artificial intelligence (AI) (vs human) decisions.Design/methodology/approachThe authors tested their predictions by conducting two experimental studies with FinTech consumers (n = 503).FindingsThe results reveal that consumers' responses to AI (vs human) credit decisions depend on the type of credit product. For personal loans, the rejection by an AI provider triggers higher levels of satisfaction compared to a credit analyst. This effect is explained via the perceived role congruity. In addition, the findings reveal that consumers’ rejection sensitivity determines how they perceive financial services role congruity.Originality/valueTo the best of the authors' knowledge, this research is the first to jointly examine AI (vs human) credit decisions in FinTech and role congruity, extending prior research in the field.

Despite the recent developments in AI, ethical questions arise when consumers contemplate how their data is being treated. This paper develops a conceptual model building on the theory of acceptance, risk, trust, and attitudes towards AI to understand the drivers that lead consumers to accept AI, considering consumers' ethical concerns. The model was empirically tested with 200 consumers of AI marketing services. The findings reveal that perceived risk significantly impacts attitudes toward AI, ethical concerns, and perceived trust and suggest a significant association between perceived risk, ethical concerns, and social norms. This research provides important theoretical and managerial implications for the ethical aspects of AI in marketing by highlighting the ethical and moral questions surrounding AI's acceptance. Doi: 10.28991/ESJ-2023-07-02-01 Full Text: PDF