HKU Jockey Club Enterprise Sustainability Global Research Institute
World-Class Hub for Sustainability
Sungwoo Choi | Sara Kim
Consumer Perception of Employees with Disabilities Who Use Robots
Nov 21, 2025
Key Takeaways
- Research Question: How do consumers perceive frontline service employees with physical disabilities when those employees are assisted by robotic technologies, and how does the service-delivery mode (in-person vs. telepresence) influence these perceptions?
- Data and Method: Three experiments examined consumer evaluations of 487 employees with visible physical disabilities across museum, lab, and restaurant contexts. Conditions included in-person service, telepresence robots, and in-person service with wearable assistive robots.
- Main Findings:
- Consumers consistently rated telepresent employees less favorably due to mechanistic dehumanization, perceiving them as machine-like and emotionally distant.
- In-person use of wearable robotic devices restored consumer evaluations to levels comparable to non-disabled employees, indicating physical presence mitigates negative perceptions.
- Physical separation inherent in telepresence creates psychological distance, fostering perceptions of employees as machine-like, which diminishes empathy and satisfaction.
- Implications: Firms should prioritize wearable robotic technologies over telepresence systems to enhance inclusion while maintaining positive consumer experiences.
Source Publication:
Choi, S., & Kim, S. (2025). Consumer perception of employees with disabilities using robots. Annals of Tourism Research, 112, 103945.
Background and Research Question
In service industries, employees with physical disabilities often encounter barriers to participation despite increasing corporate focus on inclusion and ESG principles. Robotic technologies offer potential solutions, yet little is known about how consumers perceive employees who deliver service via such technologies.
This study investigates whether the mode of robotic assistance—telepresence versus in-person wearable robotics—shapes consumer evaluations. Drawing on construal-level theory and dehumanization literature, the authors hypothesize that telepresence increases psychological distance, triggering mechanistic dehumanization, whereas in-person service preserves human connection and empathy.
Data and Methodology
The study employed three complementary experiments to examine consumer perceptions of employees with visible physical disabilities across service contexts, service-delivery modes, and assistive technologies.
- Study 1 (N = 203) used a scenario-based design to assess consumer choice and evaluation of museum guides. Participants were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: an in-person guide using a wheelchair, a telepresent guide using a robot, or a non-disabled guide (control). Likelihood of choosing the guide and perceived mechanistic dehumanization were measured to test the core hypothesis.
- Study 2 (N = 85) involved a lab-based behavioral interaction with a research assistant with a mobility disability. Participants experienced either in-person assistance via an electric wheelchair or remote assistance via a Temi telepresence robot. Measures included satisfaction, perceived helpfulness, and both mechanistic and animalistic dehumanization, allowing examination of real-time consumer responses and validation of Study 1 findings.
- Study 3 (N = 199) used online scenarios to explore the boundary condition of wearable robotic assistance. Participants evaluated a restaurant server with an arm amputation across three conditions: in-person, telepresence, and in-person with a wearable robotic arm. Consumer service evaluations and perceived ethicality were measured to confirm negative perceptions were driven by physical separation rather than the use of robotic technology itself.
Across all studies, mechanistic dehumanization—the perception of employees as machine-like—was the hypothesized mediator. Animalistic dehumanization and ethical perception were measured as alternative explanations, but neither accounted for the observed differences in consumer evaluations.
Findings and Discussion
The experiments consistently demonstrated telepresence diminishes consumer evaluations. Across contexts, participants rated telepresent employees lower on service satisfaction, willingness to engage, and warmth. In Study 1, participants were less likely to choose museum guides using telepresence robots than wheelchair-bound in-person guides or non-disabled controls. Study 2 replicated these findings in live interactions, with telepresent assistants receiving lower satisfaction ratings and higher mechanistic dehumanization, while animalistic dehumanization remained non-significant.
Crucially, Study 3 revealed the boundary condition: when employees used wearable robotic devices in person, service evaluations were equivalent to those of non-disabled in-person employees. This finding demonstrates the negative perception associated with telepresence stems from the physical and psychological separation it creates rather than from robotic technology itself. The studies indicate a generalizable mechanism: telepresence amplifies psychological distance, reducing empathy and fostering perceptions of employees as machine-like, whereas wearable robotics maintain physical presence and preserve positive consumer perceptions.
These results highlight a critical tension in using technology to enhance inclusion. Although telepresence can overcome mobility limitations, it risks undermining social and psychological connection, which is essential for consumer-facing roles. By contrast, wearable robotic technologies enable employees to participate fully in person, achieving inclusion without compromising the quality of consumer interactions.
Implications
These findings have clear relevance for firms seeking to enhance inclusion in customer-facing roles. Simply providing telepresence access for employees with disabilities may inadvertently reduce consumer engagement by creating psychological distance and fostering mechanistic dehumanization. By contrast, wearable robotic technologies allow employees to perform in-person service, preserving the social and emotional cues essential for positive consumer evaluations.
By enabling employees to be physically present, firms not only remove mobility barriers but also signal a genuine commitment to inclusion, reinforcing brand trust and enhancing customer experience. Integrating wearable robotics into frontline roles demonstrates technological innovation can support workforce inclusion without compromising human connection, highlighting a nuanced strategy for organizations striving to align social responsibility with service quality.