10.3934 Dsfe.2022011

DSFE, 2 (3): 209–236.
DOI: 10.3934/DSFE.2022011
Received: 07 June 2022
Revised: 09 July 2022
Accepted: 16 July 2022
Published: 29 July 2022
http://www.aimspress.com/journal/dsfe
Review
Text-Based Chatbot in Financial Sector: A Systematic Literature Review
Hana Demma Wube*, Sintayehu Zekarias Esubalew, Firesew Fayiso Weldesellasie and Taye
Girma Debelee
Ethiopian Artificial Intelligence Institute, Addis Ababa 40782, Ethiopia
* Correspondence: Email: [email protected] author; Tel: +251940267335.
Abstract: Text-based chatbots are implemented in the financial sector to enhance the relationship
between the customer and services provided by the sector, and also to address external challenges and
customer requirements. The chatbot technology in the financial sector serves to examine customers’
frequently asked questions and the representation of the process using machine learning. In light of
this, this study presents a comprehensive systematic literature review of articles focused on text-based
chatbots in the financial sector. It describes the understanding of chatbots in the financial sector in
terms of implementation, adoption intention, attitude toward use and acceptance; it also describes how
people experience chatbots, specifically in terms of perception, expectation and trust, as well as how
they are engaging and emotionally motivated; management of the security and privacy vulnerabilities
of the chatbots; and identifies the potential strategies that can hinder the efficient, successful evolution
of chatbots in the financial sector. Finally, the main findings regarding the use of text chatbots in the
financial sector are presented; additionally, the open issues in current research are highlighted and a
number of research opportunities that can be pursued in the future are suggested.
Keywords: text-based chatbot; systematic literature review; financial sector; human-computer

interaction
JEL Codes: G20, O30
1. Introduction
In an earlier era, people interacted with the computer by using a command line or graphical user
interface. But, as technology continues to advance in line with the latest trends and requirements, this
Data Science in Finance and Economics Volume 2, Issue 3, 209–236.

210
type of interaction is also modernizing, which has given rise to tremendous advances such as artificial
intelligence (AI), machine learning and natural language processing. Currently, among the various
types of communication, speech and text forms are the main forms of communication between people
and computers, and they take place through web-based information applications that play a vital role
in communication between people. Given this evolving technology, a chatbot is an advanced
technology that has been designed to answer user queries (Mondal, 2018).
Chatbot applications can provide a variety of effective interpersonal interactions and the ability
to learn through interactive methods and easy-to-use interfaces; they can even be used as a personal
consultation tool (Muniasamy and Alasiry, 2020; Poncette et al., 2020; Yamada et al., 2015). The most
significant advantage of a chatbot is that it can reach a wide audience through a messaging system and
automated custom messages (Ahmad et al., 2018). In addition, as the popularity of mobile technology
grows, the absence of time and place restrictions, as well as the expansion of interactive teaching
methods, open up the space for the use of chatbots (Zhou et al., 2020).
In this sense, chatbots are increasingly being used in the financial sector, which generates a huge
amount of data, such as customer data, financial product logs and transaction data that can be used to
support decision-making, along with external data via social media data and data from websites due to
the routine actions and the limited number of repetitive tasks, which can increase speed and reduce
cost. Finacle Connect lists the top 10 technologies for the financial industries, including blockchain
for banking, the creation of cloud-based business technologies and the use of AI (Al Nasseri et al., 2015).
Research on chatbots in the financial sector is mainly focused on the study of specific
conversational and technical aspects (e.g., chatbot–user interaction and algorithms for learning and
development of chatbots) (Ciechanowski et al., 2017; Go et al., 2019), security aspects related to
chatbot deployment (Lai et al., 2018), customers’ conversation determining factors related to deploying
chatbots (e.g., acceptance, customer satisfaction, trust) (Chung et al., 2020; van den Broeck et al.,
2019), customers’ and company perceptions (Araujo, 2018), thoughts and experiences of managers in
the field of chatbots (Jang et al., 2021), customer engagement and support (Thompson, 2018),
psychological factors (e.g., affective, behavioral and cognitive user experience) (Rodríguez et al., 2019)
and emotional factors (Huang et al., 2021).
As per our literature review, the research gap regarding chatbot technology appears to be more in
the form of a profound understanding of the conversation determining factors and technical challenges,
in addition to a detailed description of the influential factors for effective implementation. Therefore,
this article is intended to systematically review literature related to chatbots in the financial sector, to
categorically highlight the main determinants of conversational and technical issues that have been
addressed to date, as well as contained in the indexed database, in order contribute to the existing
literature and help the financial sector to obtain a profound understanding of chatbots. Moreover, in
addition to providing a reliable and up-to-date overview, it is also intended to serve as a one-stop
repository for financial sectors and researchers interested in using chatbots, as well as provide insight
into future research directions.
The remaining sections of the paper structured as follows: Section 2 presents published articles
related to the proposed work; Section 3 presents the methodology for conducting the systematic
literature review; Section 4 presents the synthesis of the data obtained from the current reviewed
articles; Section 5 provides a summary and discussion of the results of the current study; Section 6
presents the conclusions and suggested topics for further research.

211
2. Related work
This study was designed to review literature related to text-based chatbots in the broad field of
the financial sector. We have focused on 1) whether and why people accept chatbot technology, 2) how
trust, engagement and satisfaction may impact user experience and 3) the influence of safety and
security on the development of chatbots; this was achieved by conducting a systematic literature
review from a conversational and technical perspective. In this case, the literature review can help to
meet the aforementioned needs by synthesizing existing knowledge discoveries and identifying key
areas for further research. Further, the literature review can provide a useful summary of current
knowledge in the area of research and allows us to identify potential knowledge gaps that may indicate
potential research directions (Aznoli and Navimipour, 2017). Some of the recent publications related
to our proposed study, with their contributions and limitations, are presented in Table 1.
Table 1. Overview of related works.

Author Contribution Limitation
• Identifies the business implications of using • Only journal articles were included
chatbots and discussed development, both inside in the study, while conference
Miklosik et al. the firm (internal environment) and regarding proceedings were omitted.
(2021) various external stakeholders, such as customers.
• Identifies topics and applications that require
further research.
• Provides a comprehensive overview of the
methods used in the field of chatbot research in the
business context.
• Provides a comprehensive overview of over 30 • The various impacts of AI on
years of experience in AI development and marketing are not discussed.
Vlačić et al. marketing without any time limit or topic.
(2021) • A more objective review of the development of AI
and marketing were performed.
• Provides an intersection of AI and financial • The review focuses on AI in
Hentzen et al. services marketing in multiple ways. customer-facing financial services.
(2021) • Identifies the gaps in the literature and sets a
comprehensive agenda for future research.
Bavaresco et al. • Explores the role of chatbots over the last decade in • The study only included search
(2020) business industry domains. strings containing business terms.
• Describes the main resolved problems regarding • The factors affecting the chatbot are
Milian et al. chatbots in the areas of financial technology not included in the review.
(2019) activity by mapping and categorizing selected
articles related to the aforementioned topic.
Although some of these works have reviewed the chatbot implementations and determining
factors in enterprise and business contexts no study has explored the literature to evaluate how the
determining factors are considered for chatbots applied in financial sector domains. Therefore, this
article covers identifying, describing and synthesizing topics concerning chatbots in the financial sector
and provides profound information that can be used as a guideline for researchers and financial institutions.
3. Methodology
A comprehensive systematic methodological review of the literature on the topic has been carried
out on the basis of a two-step approach. Each step consists of several actions. In the first step, relevant

212
keywords, synonyms and search strings were identified to search for relevant articles on the topic; then,
relevant databases of journal articles were identified. Then, we collected research articles on chatbots
from the selected databases. These activities were focused on gathering information about the topic.
The next step involved article screening and analysis of the retrieved articles by categorizing the
articles into subcategories based on five aspects of chatbots: understanding chatbot technology in the
financial sector, experience with chatbots, emotional experience and expressions, the security of
chatbots and chatbot development. A detailed description of the adopted methodology is shown in
Figure 1. In the following sections, the detail descriptions of some of the steps are given.
Information gathering
• Specific search query
Relevant data sources
• Inclusion / exclusion criteria
Search
Collection of articles found for all
specified search queries
Article Selection
Definition of the final sample using
inclusion/exclusion criteria
Article filtering and reviewing

Analyze selected documents
Presentation and discussion
Figure 1. Schematic diagram of the steps followed during the literature review.
3.1. Step one: Information gathering
Searching strings and database identification. We used five electronic databases to identify
relevant articles on text-based chatbots related to the financial sector. These were Science Direct,
SpringerLink, Google Scholar, IEEEX plore and MDPI. The articles were collected from October to
January of 2022 and limited to full-text, peer-reviewed journal articles and/or articles from
international conference main proceedings written in English. These databases provide a good
assortment of peer-reviewed articles in many fields. In addition, the methodology for collecting
information is described as follows. Two keywords were obtained by decomposing the research
questions to “chatbot” and “financial sector”. It is important to mention that the first part of the query

213
relates to the notion of chatbots and included synonyms that could point to text-based conversational
agents. The second part refers, instead, to the aspects of the financial sector; particularly, they combine
general and more specific terms that may capture a wide range of topics that may be relevant for
exploring the financial sector with text-based chatbots. The list of search terms was compiled after
several iterations and refinements; it is presented as follows. Synonyms were created for “chatbot” that
correspond to the following terms: “chat bot”, “chatterbot” and “virtual assistant”. Also, the following
terms were used for the keyword “financial sector”: “financial services”, “financial technology”,
“banking”, “insurance” and “e-commerce”. In addition, the keyword “security” was added to include
the security aspects. Search strings were generated by using logical operators as follows: “OR” for
synonyms and “AND” to combine keywords. Algorithm 1, which was used for article searching with
search strings, is presented below. In this regard, the inclusion and exclusion criteria presented in
Algorithm 1 were applied to refine the paper search.
ALGORITHM 1: SEARCH STRATEGYAND ARTICLE SELECTION FROM DIFFERENT DATABASES

1: Procedure Title (Text-Based Chatbot in Financial Sector)
2: Search Database ← Google Scholar, IEEE, Science Direct, SpringerLink, MDPI
3: Search year ←2016–2021
4: i←1
5: N←5
6: while i ≤ N do
7: keyword ← chatbot, financial sector
8: if Google scholar ε search database AND year ε search year then
9: Search (allintitle: chatbot “financial sector” OR banking OR “financial technology” OR “financial
10: services” OR insurance OR “e-commerce” OR “security”)
11: else if IEEE ε search database AND year ε search year then
12: Search (((“chatbot”) AND (“financial sector” OR banking OR “financial technology” OR “financial
13: services” OR insurance OR “e commerce” OR “security”)))
14:
15: else if Science direct ε search database AND year ε search year then
16: Search (chatbot) AND (‘financial sector’ OR banking OR ‘financial technology’ OR ‘financial
17: services’ OR insurance OR banking OR ‘e commerce’ OR ‘security’)
18: else if SpringerLink or MDPI ε search database AND year ε search year then
19: Search (“chatbot”) financial sector OR “Banking” OR “Insurance” OR “ e commerce” OR
20: “security”.
21: end if
22: end while
23: if Number of Paper > 0 then
24: Refine paper
25: Apply Inclusion Criteria ← IC1, IC2, IC3, IC4, IC5, IC6
26: Apply Exclusion Criteria ← EC1, EC2, EC3, EC4
27: end if
3.2. Step two: Article selection
After the search keywords were identified, the initial search resulted in a total of 283 papers being
retrieved via the aforementioned technique: 62 via Google Scholar, 64 via IEEEXplore, 24 via Science
Direct, 110 via SpringerLink and 23 via MDPI. It is important to mention that we have limited the
retrieved articles to a publishing time between 2016 and 2021 to keep the number of articles to a
manageable number for the synthesis of data. After the first round of screening, article titles and
abstracts were further checked based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria presented in Table 2. At
this stage, 283 articles were included. The titles and abstracts of the 283 articles were screened against
the eligibility criteria for inclusion in the review. Then, the full texts of the articles that were considered
214
to be eligible were further evaluated to determine inclusion. At this phase, we identified 48 articles to
be included in our collection; three additional papers were found by examining the reference lists of
the articles included in our study. In the final step, we collected 51 articles to be included in the review.
Further, the detailed article selection procedure is presented in Figure 2.
Table 2. Inclusion and exclusion criteria for paper selection.

Inclusion criteria (IC) Exclusion criteria (EC)
IC1: The papers focus on the financial sector and are related EC1: Papers that did focus on text-based chatbots in the
to banking, insurance and e-commerce. financial sector.
IC2: The papers focus on chatbots that are exclusively text- EC2: Publications not peer-reviewed or correspond to
based. the abstract of a full book, an editorial or a letter.
IC3: The study should be published in recognized EC3: Papers published in the additional proceedings of
international journals or international conference conferences (such as MSc and PhD papers, posters,
proceedings with a potential research review. seminar reports and late-breaking result papers).
IC4: The studies should be written in English. EC4: Studies that were published earlier than 2016.
IC5: Published between 2016 and 2021.
IC6: Journals in which the papers were published must be
either Scopus or Web of Science indexed.
Google Scholar MDPI Science Direct Springer Link

IEEE Xplore (N = 64)
(N = 62) (N = 23) (N = 24) (N = 110)
Title and abstract screen (N = 283)
Full text check Identify articles through

(N = 48) snowballing (N = 3)
Final Articles included in the

review (N = 51)
Figure 2. Block diagram of database searches and paper screening procedure method.
4. Synthesis of data
In this section, the following main categories of text-based chatbots in the financial sector are
outlined to raise the discussion points based on the final dataset of 51 articles in the literature review,
which are as follows: 1) understanding chatbot technology in the financial sector, 2) interaction with
chatbots, 3) emotional experience and expressions, 4) security in chatbots and 5) chatbot development.

215
The data from our findings following the literature review have been synthesized in such a way that
summaries of articles related to the topic and the sub-topics that make up the topic are presented in a
table; additionally, the main findings underlying the topic are discussed.
4.1. Understanding chatbot technology in the financial sector
Of all of the 51 articles, 19 articles contributed to these themes. Also, four sub-themes were
identified within the current theme and related to the notion of understanding chatbot technology,
particularly in terms of implementation, adoption intention, attitude toward using chatbots and
acceptance. Each of the sub-themes is described in detail in the following subsections.
4.1.1. Implementation
Text-based chatbots are used in various financial sectors, such as banking, insurance and e-
commerce services, to improve the existing quality of customer service, user satisfaction, human
productivity and workload, etc. In our collection, articles related to implementation are presented in
Table 3. Suhel et al. (2020) revealed that implementing chatbots in banking and financial sectors can
increase the quality of user service, productivity and proportion of satisfied users, as well as reduce
human workload. Also, Illescas-Manzano et al. (2021) reported that implementing chatbots can help
clients living in remote areas receive proper service and bring modernity, efficiency and intimacy.
Gondaliya et al. (2020) studied the various factors influencing risks, including the type of service and
its pricing plans, infrastructure, quality level and number of users prior to chatbot implementation.
Allal-Chérif et al. (2021 pointed out that chatbots can solve complex customer problems that were
previously unsolvable. Hwang and Kim (2021) reported that chatbot services for existing products
have a positive impact on banks’ net income. Stoeckli et al. (2020) presented a new perspective on
how to balance emerging digital technologies, such as chatbots, with traditional systems, the
relationship between agility and flexibility and control and stability, exploration with use and
flexibility with discipline. Nayak et al. (2021) showed that health insurers are pursuing new
technological opportunities to improve innovative products, backed by a strong knowledge base.
Chatbots can help with process automation, decision-making, information gathering vendor integration,
performance monitoring, resource management, contracting and administration. In conclusion, this
study highlights the key benefits of implementing chatbots in the financial sector, such as improved
decision-making, customer service, productivity, efficiency, resource management, etc. Moreover,
important influential factors have been identified that can serve as a guideline for the future
implementation of chatbots. Further, detailed descriptions of the articles included in the current theme
are presented in Table 3.

216
Table 3. Articles related to chatbot implementation.

Author Method Approach Result Limitation
Suhel et al. Case studies • Ontology-based dialog • Implementation of chatbots can enhance the quality • Limited number of tests
(2020) handling in the area of of user services and reduce human workload. considered in the study.
banking and finance.
Illescas- Survey • Leads generated approach • Chatbot implementation will help link brands and • Chatbot application deployment
Manzano et offer value proposition. platform privacy restriction.
al. • Chatbot implementation leads to immediate response
(2021 customer query.
• Lead achievement increased by 25%.
Gondaliya Privacy data protections • Risk evaluation • Performs attacks on the third-party infrastructure, so -
et al. layers checklist framework, survey of the chatbot can be monitored by the proposed SLA.
(2020) service-level agreements
(SLAs) for real chatbot
providers
Allal- Qualitative survey based on • Synertrade automated • It was found that chatbot technologies can simplify • Most firms were not included in
Chérif et al. multiple case studies international purchasing buyers’ needs. the study since most of the firms
(2021 system adopted AI for their purchasing
• Silex matching system because they lack relevant
• SAPAriba decision support experience.
• Jaggaer supplier relations
management
Hwang and Quantitative survey based • Automatic response service • The percentage of products sold through the ARS was • The data were developed through
Kim on empirical analysis of (ARS) analysis of covariance less than 5% of the bank’s total sales. Of these, sales trial and error at the time of initial
(2021) personal data (ANCOVA) via the chatbot were insignificant, i.e., less than 10%; settlement. The stability of the
hence, it may be unreasonable to closely associate sample was poor.
them with bank profits.
Stoeckli et Qualitative study to • Explorative approach, using • The results revealed 14 lower-level affordances and 14 • The study cannot guarantee and
al. inductively derive rich Q-methodology study constraints of chatbots within enterprises. provide verified theory.
(2020) contextual insights of • Small number of datasets used in
affordances and constraints the study.
Nayak et al. Qualitative method using • Inductive approach was • It was found that the operational costs of insurers can • The model was developed based
(2021) interviews and modified used, where expert opinions be optimized with better technological proficiencies on the market forces and industry
Delphi technique in were the basis for developing and also facilitate the exploration of customer structure only in India.
sequential combination thematic patterns perceptions.

217
4.1.2. Adoption intention
Table 4. Articles related to chatbot adoption intention.

Authors Method Approach Result Limitation
Abdulquadri Theoretical • Search-access-test (S- • The study found that most • The study was only
et al. model to A-T) model Nigerian banks adopted performed for emerging
(2021) investigate chatbots linked with the markets and
chatbot adoption WhatsApp platform. communities of
Nigeria.
Jang et al. Semi-structured • Core–periphery • The technological level of • The study only
(2021) interviews with analysis of social chatbots was found to be considers the financial
managers. representations. insufficient for meeting sectors present in South
customer expectations. The Korea.
managers did not have specific • The study was
and sufficient knowledge conducted with a limited
about chatbot services, and number of participants.
their organizational capability • The study only
was found to be insufficient. includes the manager
perspective, ignoring
customer intention.
Kumar et al.Managerial • Managers’ concerns • It was revealed that the • The study only
(2021) interviews, and questions about the adoption of new-age focuses on a limited
existing literature implications of new- technologies requires number of new-age
and popular press age technology intermediaries to identify ways technologies.
discussions response analysis. to leverage their advantage.
Adam et al. Randomized • Empirical examination • The study demonstrated • The study was
(2021 online experiment that humans acknowledge performed in an
conversational software agents experimental setting with
as a source of persuasive a simplified version of an
messages. instant messaging
application.
Quah &Quantitative and • Quantitative study • 6% of participants did not • Limitation of
Chua (2019) qualitative and empirical analysis use chatbots; 40% did not have published works
interviews and access to the technology to use regarding chatbots in the
qualitative user the chatbot; 76% of the banking sector due to
tests interviewees were not satisfied non-disclosure policy.
with the bank chatbot
technology; 24% of the
interviewees were satisfied
with the bank chatbot.
Følstad &Collaborative • Design science • It has been pointed out that • The case study was
Taylor research, research approach chatbots can predict the intent performed with a small
(2021) innovative project reflected in user messages and sample of customer-
framework respond to them for most user service chatbots within a
development and requests. specific time and place.
case study
Rodríguez etQualitative • Sequential exploratory • Relative advantages and • The study did not
al. (2019) and quantitative design insurance sector infrastructure cover the deeper socio-
survey were identified as the most psychological factors that
important ambivalent positive influence the perception
and negative socio-technical of financial,
factors for the adoption and psychological and
diffusion of chatbot privacy risks associated
technology. with the use of chatbots.

218
Adoption intention refers to the adoption process of text-based chatbots in the financial sector,
driven by factors such as the surrounding conditions, leading to positive outcomes. Regarding our
collection, the articles related to adoption intention are shown in Table 4. Abdulquadri et al. (2021)
reported that chatbots in the Nigerian banking system were branded with female gender identification
and are less responsive beyond their pre-defined purposes. It was also reported that the chatbots work
in the English language, and that there are no chatbots working in the local language. Jang et al. (2021)
suggested the three main barriers to chatbot adoption in the Korean financial sector: organizational
factors, management factors and technological factors. Kumar et al. (2021) discussed the outcome of
the adoption of AI technologies such as chatbots from the manager’s perspective in terms of customers,
developers, firms and regulators. Adam et al. (2021 reported that, while cost and time savings
opportunities have led to the widespread adoption of chatbots, they still often fall short of customer
expectations, which could lead to users being less likely to fulfill requests made by the chatbot.
Rodríguez et al. (2019) revealed that “relative advantage” and “Information systems infrastructure”
are the most important ambivalent socio-technical factors for adoption and dissemination. Regarding
chatbot technology in Germany, Følstad and Taylor (2021) discussed how chatbots can predict and
respond to the intentions reflected in user messages for most user queries. Quah and Chua (2019)
provided a gauge of the user adoption of chatbots and discussed whether a chatbot can provide better
value-added services than bank employees in the Singapore banking sector. To summarize, the articles
included in our collection emphasize that the adoption intention for a chatbot is highly dependent on
language, value-added, managerial, organizational and technological factors; a summary of the
literature is presented in Table 4.
4.1.3. Attitude toward using chatbots
The attitude toward using a chatbot can be seen as a user's willingness to use and interact with
chatbots in the financial sector. Regarding our collection, the articles related to attitudes toward using
a chatbot are depicted in Table 5. Kasilingam (2020) revealed that parameters such as perceived ease
of use, perceived enjoyment, perceived usefulness, price consciousness, personal innovativeness and
perceived risk significantly influences the attitude toward chatbots. Additionally, trust, attitude and
personal innovativeness directly influence the intention to use. Sowa et al. (2021) reported on an
increasingly positive attitude toward chatbots in intellectual work, but also significant fears associated
with full automation, including among the younger and tech-savvy generation. Alt et al. (2021)
reported that perceived compatibility and perceived usefulness are the determining factors for
predicting customer intentions to use a banking chatbot. In summary, this study pointed out that the
perceived ease of use, perceived enjoyment, perceived usefulness, price consciousness, personal
innovativeness, perceived risk, trust, personal innovativeness, automation and perceived compatibility
are the determining factors of the attitude toward using chatbots.

219
Table 5. Articles related to the attitude toward using chatbots.

Quantitative • Response analysis • The study demonstrated that • Absence of empirical
survey using partial least more than 72% of the variance validation for developed
Kasilingam squares (PLS) associated with adoption; markets due to cultural
(2020) structural equation variables can differ over time and economic variation.
modeling. as people begin to adopt and
use the technology.
Qualitative • Study of preferences • It was demonstrated that • Small number of
methods using 10-item Likert 62% of respondents were participants were
(scenario-based scale. satisfied with the considered.
Sowa et al. design combined performance of chatbots. • The characteristics of
(2021) with semi- the participant groups
structured were not specified.
interviews) and
online experiment
Quantitative • Hypotheses testing using • Perceived usefulness, ease • The study sample is
survey PLS-structural equation of use and compatibility not representative,
modeling (PLS-SEM). were found to have a which leads to non-
significant positive effect on generalizable
Alt et al.
customer intention to use findings.
(2021)
the banking chatbot. • The research was not
limited to a specific
banking chatbot
application.
4.1.4. Acceptance
Table 6. Articles related to chatbot acceptance.

Thusi andSurvey using • Innovative multi- • It was suggested that • The study followed a convenience
Maduku questionnaire perspective millennials will have a sampling technique.
(2020) framework positive intention to adopt • The study used a single cross-
(UTAUT2). mobile banking apps if they sectional research design.
believe that the technology
benefits their banking activity.
Brachten Online survey • Decomposed theory • It was found that trusting • The user intention of employee
et al. via the service of planned behavior; relationship with the chatbot insights is not provided.
(2021) online Smart 3.2.8 was used technology coincides with the • The results are demonstrated using
consumer as PLS software with simplified usage and a small dataset.
panel (via a bootstrapping maximal acceptance. • The study was only conducted
Prolific). technique. using native English-speaking
participants.
This sub-theme focuses on acceptability, which refers to the perceived judgment and attitude
toward technology that will be implemented in the future (Distler et al., 2018). Basically, a study of
acceptability is often related to a study of the motivation of users to use a particular technology artifact
in order to accept the technology or maintain its use over time; this is because people must be motivated
(Fessl et al., 2011). Thusi and Maduku (2020) reported that customer support helplines are the
determinants of chatbot acceptance in mobile banking. Brachten et al. (2021) indicated that the intrinsic
motivation of employees has a strong positive impact on acceptance, while extrinsic influences have
less impact. In conclusion, the customer support helpline and awareness play important roles in the
acceptance of chatbots in the financial sector. A summary of the literature is presented in Table 6.

220
4.2. Interaction with chatbots
The results for this theme reflect the research on user perceptions related to using chatbots, as
well as user satisfaction, trust and the quality of the user experience. This theme has three sub-themes
related to perception, expectation, satisfaction, trust and engagement.
4.2.1. Perception, expectation and satisfaction
Table 7. Articles related to chatbot perception, expectation and satisfaction.

Brüggemeier &Experimentation • Bespoke data collection • It was revealed that the • The participants did
Lalone using custom interface to generate conversational privacy has a not have a real stake
(2022) framework running speaking chatbots. positive influence on user in their interaction
on Mechanical Turk. perception of privacy and data.
security. • The study only
covers the English
language.
Chung et al. Survey using a• Hypotheses testing • It was showed that online • In the study, live feed
(2020) questionnaire using structural service agents provide for participant
equation modeling. convenience and quality interaction was not
communication that considered.
positively affect customer
perceptions of marketing
efforts.
Kushwaha et al. Live-channel • Diffusion of • Suggested that customers are • The study was
(2020 customer experience innovation theory, trust likely to enjoy interacting conducted using only
organization commitment theory, with chatbots and have a English tweets from
information systems better customer experience. Twitter social media
success model. data.
Eren Survey of customer • PLS-SEM, SPSS 21 • Customer expectations and • The study conducted
(2021) experience and data and Smart PLS confirmation of customer with a small number
analysis programs expectations have no direct of participants of
impact on customer Turkey’s entire
satisfaction, but customer population.
expectations positively
affect perceived
performance.
In our collection, four papers were examined with the aim of understanding and investigating user
perceptions, expectations and satisfaction when interacting with a chatbot. In general, the reviewed
articles attempted to identify the factors that can influence user perception and satisfaction, as well as
the relationship between user expectations and resulting level of satisfaction. The articles related to the
current sub-theme are shown in Table 7. Brüggemeier and Lalone (2022) reported that the privacy of
conversations has a positive effect on users’ perceptions of privacy and security. Chung et al. (2020)
pointed out that customer satisfaction with luxury brand e-service retailers requires perceptions of
having received quality communication. It was also pointed out that chatbots can improve customer
satisfaction, communication between the company and customer and shopping experiences. Kushwaha
et al. (2021) reported that customer satisfaction is significantly influenced by factors such as
information system success (customer satisfaction and service quality), trust (transparency, privacy
and trust), innovation (predictability and innovation), system characteristics (time distortion, visual
appearance and engagement rate), customer design (challenge, skill and ability) and perceived risk

221
(sensory appeal and brand credibility). Eren (2021) confirmed that customer expectations,
confirmation of customer expectations, perceived trust, perceived performance and corporate
reputation are determining factors for customer satisfaction. It was also found that perceptions of
chatbot usage has a positive effect on customer satisfaction, and that productivity efficiency plays a
crucial role in customer satisfaction. In summary, this study highlights that user expectations influence
the actual perception of chatbots during interaction, which can affect overall user satisfaction. Further,
user privacy, performance and trust appear to be the significant factors affecting customer satisfaction,
and user expectations are focused on the shortcomings of the chatbot technology.
4.2.2. Trust
Table 8. Articles related to chatbot trust.

Toader et al. Conceptual model,• Social information• The study indicated that the• A limited sample of
(2020) research hypothesis processing theory, media influence of trust should be respondents was taken,
development and equation theory, CASA considered when developing resulting in non-
experimental Study paradigm and a chatbots that can provide generalized customer
quantitative survey customers with a compelling, segments in the online
using Amazon’s error-free experience. environment.
Mechanical Turk
Hildebrand Online survey via the• Analysis of variance to• Participants in the conversational• Specific pre-designed
and Bergner service Prolific. manage dependent robo-advisory interface were personality traits related
(2021) variable and robo- found to be associated with to a brand or firm were
advisor condition. significantly greater levels of not used.
effective trust as compared to the
non-conversational robo-advisory
interface.
Lee et al. Qualitative study• Usability testing data• It was demonstrated that the• Comparison of
(2021) (interviews, focus with descriptive Brokerbot could be used as a developed Brokerbot to
group, observations) statistics. mediator between user trust and other available bots is not
cryptocurrency. presented.
Rodríguez Qualitative quantitative• PLS-SEM • It was found that trust has a• The study used a small
Cardona etstudy, including semi- significant positive influence on data size and was limited
al. structured expert the intention to use. to inexperienced
(2019) interviews and a web- individuals to evaluate the
based cross-sectional relationship between trust
survey. and intention to use.
Nordheim etQuantitative and• Quantitative analysis• It was revealed that 28.1% of the• The sample only covered
al. qualitative study using linear regression participant responses strongly individuals who already
(2019) on an IBM SPSS suggested that the correctness felt comfortable with
statistics 25 platform; a and relevance of the chatbots’ interacting and sharing
thematic analysis using answers were important for trust. information online.
the free-text data. • Further, the factors related to
trust of chatbots were explored.
Nguyen etQuantitative survey• Structural equation• It revealed that system quality is• A limited number of
al. and data analysis modeling the strongest predictor of trust. chatbot users selected for
(2021) a convenient sampling
technique; results were
not generalized.
Trust can be viewed as a cognitive assessment (Mayer and Davis, 1999) that depends on
subjective moods and satisfaction of the psychological needs for security (Frison et al., 2019).

222
Regarding our collection, the articles related to trust are depicted in Table 8. Hildebrand and Bergner
(2021) pointed out that increased effective trust not only influences the perception of the firm (in terms
of generating goodwill or a more positive adaptation experience). Toader et al. (2020) studied the
impact of social presence and chatbot errors on digital marketing trust. In addition, the perceptions of
social presence and competence have been demonstrated to play a critical role in the development of
strong trusting feelings. Lee et al. (2021) reported that cryptocurrency chatbots pose challenges for
users and developers. Rodríguez et al. (2019) reported that trust has a significant positive impact on
users’ willingness to interact with a chatbot system. It was also reported that privacy concerns have a
significant negative impact on the credibility of insurance chatbots. Nordheim et al. (2019) reported
that perceived experience, responsiveness, user-related factors, such as inclination, and environment-
related factors, such as brand perception, are important for user trust in customer-service chatbots.
Nguyen et al. (2021) indicated that information quality, system quality, service quality and
confirmation of expectations had significant effects on three drivers of continuance intention in
different ways. From this, it can be concluded that trust is an important factor in the willingness of
users to interact with a chatbot system to serve customers in the financial sector.
4.2.3. Engagement
Engagement refers to the quality of the user experience, which describes the phenomena
associated with technology (Attfield et al., 2011). Moreover, engagement is seen as an affective,
behavioral, and cognitive association between a computer and user (Goethe et al., 2019; Lukoff, 2018);
engagement seems to indicate subjective experiences in the form of absorption, engagement and
pleasure (Boyle et al., 2012; Liu et al., 2017). Engaging applications are supposed to keep users’
attention over the long term by encouraging them to spend time with the applications (Debeauvais,
2016; Doherty et al., 2018). Regarding our collection, the articles related to engagement with chatbots
in the financial sector are presented in Table 9. Bajdor (2021) pointed out that experience and time
experience in online shopping requires both the satisfaction levels and ratings. Lo Presti et al. (2021)
found that digital assistants can change the context of online shopping by increasing the perception of
hedonic values. It was also found that decision-making time can be shortened by increasing the
utilitarian perception of the value of utilitarian and hedonic products. Cheng and Jiang (2021 showed
that chatbot marketing efforts have a significant direct impact on the quality of communication with
chatbot agents and indirectly affect customer–brand relationships and customer feedback. Hsu et al.
(2021) demonstrated a methodology to understand the complexity of customer feedback and provided
insight into e-commerce managerial services for chatbots. Zhang and Watson (2020) identified
emergent trends for each of the five macro factors in the marketing ecosystem. Li et al. (2019)
developed a model that is more efficient than the existing Ubuntu Dialogue, e-commerce and Douban
Conversation Corpuses. Finally, it can be concluded that analyzing customer engagement across
multiple channels can help the financial sector to provide some personalized offerings.

223
Table 9. Articles related to engagement.

Bajdor Quantitative survey • Data encoding using• It was indicated that the• In the study, specific
(2021) Excel spreadsheet and perception of online shopping products concerning
Statistical 13 software depends on the feedback the experience acquired
for statistical analysis. received from the shopping and the assessments
experience. and attitudes of e-
commerce customers
were not considered.
Lo Presti et al. Online shopping• A mono-factorial• The study showed that• The choice of cruise
(2021) laboratory experimental design interaction with chatbots can sector may not be fully
experiment using website and facilitate the purchase consistent with the
chatbot interaction. intention process. target used for the
• It was also shown that chatbots study.
can stimulate the buying• The study does not
process, irrespective of the include participation of
familiarity with the brand. consumers belonging
to other age groups.
• The research was only
conducted in a single
country.
Cheng & Jiang Quantitative survey • Data analysis using• Chatbot marketing efforts we• The study focused only
(2021 structural equation found to have significant direct on the USA market;
modeling on an Mplus effects on the quality of this study did not
7.4 platform. communication with chatbot compare chatbot
agents and indirectly affect marketing efforts
customer–brand relationships between industries.
and customer response.
Hsu et al. Qualitative and• Five-point Likert scale• It has been reported that• The paper does not
(2021) quantitative survey, ANOVA test and post- factors such as the perceived discuss emerging
conceptual model hoc test. failure of the self-service concepts related to the
and hypothesis technology service, the proposed topic.
testing. execution of co-creation
activities in the process and the
interdependent effect caused
by a combination of factors
lead to customers choosing to
continue using the self-service
technology.
Zhang & Watson Marketing strategy• Holistic and structured• Provides insight into obtaining• The sole determined
(2020) formulation perspective in the view an accurate prediction of the success through the
of outside-in marketing. changing preferences of technological trends
consumers and formulated cannot be predicted by
appropriate strategies to the proposed research.
engage with new technological
trends.
Li et al. Banking institution• Conversation analysis• The study identified specific• The analysis of the text
(2019) chatbot conversation based on the natural use factors that are more likely to entered did not
analysis of a task-oriented cause users to stop using a distinguish between the
banking chatbot. chatbot, the most common of text that users typed
which is the chatbot’s inability themselves and the
to understand additional words predefined answer
from users in messages they buttons that they could
have previously sent. press.

224
4.3. Emotional experience and expressions
Here, we discuss the articles related to emotions, as shown in Table 10, which are a fundamental
aspect of human-machine interaction; particularly, any interface that ignores the user’s emotional state
or does not display the corresponding emotions can be perceived as cold, socially incompetent,
unreliable and incompetent (Brave, 2007). In our collection, three articles highlight the importance of
emotion in human interaction with a chatbot. For instance, Go and Sundar (2019) presented the
influence of psychological, attitudinal and behavioral outcomes associated with agents of online e-
commerce online chatbots; they noted that the influence of message interactivity and agent
performance would be different. Rajaobelina et al. (2021) studied the influence of customer service
and support, accessibility, perceived security/privacy and design on the emotions experienced by
banking customers when using chatbots. Huang et al. (2021) reported that cognitive and emotional
aspects influence the growth of users’ positive attitudes toward chatbots in financial technology, which,
in turn, positively influences the intention to continue working overtime. In summary, it can be
concluded that positive emotions that arise during a conversation with a chatbot can be an indicator of
the success of interaction; negative emotions that lead to miscommunication must be eliminated.
Table 10. Articles related to emotional experience and expressions.

Go & Sundar Subjective online• Identification of cues• It was revealed that participants• The study was
(2019) experiment and assessment using 7- with high message interactivity conducted online, with
point Likert scale. showed greater social presence, each participant
perceived similarity, completing the study in
contingency and dialogue than his or her own preferred
those with low message environment, thus
interactivity. introducing noise.
Rajaobelina et al. Quantitative • Items measured using a• It was found that the negative• This research examined
(2021) survey using a 7-point Likert scale and and positive emotions the impact of emotions
web-based panel theoretical framework experienced when using the on positive word of
testing using structural live chat service impact mouth; others might
equation modeling. positive word of mouth. wish to consider the
addition of the impact
on negative word of
mouth.
Huang et al. Quantitative • Latent growth curve• It was reported that cognitive• In the study, emotion-
(2021) survey modeling for surveying and emotional factors can affect and cognition-based
Taiwanese users of customer attitudes and the factors in different
financial technology predictive power for regions/countries were
chatbots. continuance intention. not considered.
4.4. Security of chatbots
This theme deals with the articles presented in Table 11, which were related to security patterns,
as well as those custom strategies that could potentially fix the security and privacy vulnerabilities of
chatbots in the financial sector. Lai et al. (2018) analyzed e-commerce security strategies and integrated
AI security principles to plan a chatbot security control procedure (CSCP); they reported that a bank
chatbot with a CSCP can reduce security risk and, in particular, protect customer data security and
personal privacy data. Bhuiyan et al. (2020) integrated chatbots into blockchain technology to improve

225
the security concerns of financial chatbots. Specifically, proof-of-concept development, performance

evaluation and analyses of various security and privacy issues were performed using a blockchain-
enabled chatbot. Ye and Li (2020) studied the security and privacy vulnerabilities of an existing
conversational system and suggested that a developer should conduct a security analysis before
deploying a chatbot to avoid significant damage. Ng et al. (2021) reported that the social-emotional
characteristics of chatbots in the financial sector may indicate inconsistency between privacy and trust.
To summarize, it can be concluded that the appropriate precaution and analysis regarding the security
and privacy vulnerabilities of a chatbot in the financial sector should be performed before deployment.
Table 11. Articles related to the security of chatbots.

Lai et al. (2018) Designing and• E-commerce security• Developed security precautions• The study does not
planning of strategies and AI based on e-commerce security indicate whether the
chatbot security security principles. strategies and AI security developed security
control principles to perform strategies can be applied
procedures continuous monitoring to other financial sectors
activities to effectively identify such as insurance.
security deficiencies.
Bhuiyan et al. Development of a• Formulation of a set of• The study provided a proof-of-• A proof of concept does
(2020) chatbot using requirements based on concept prototype and not facilitate the
blockchain rigorous threat models described its protocol flow to transactions between
technology for financial chatbots. show applicability. multiple banks; the
• Performance evaluation and study utilized a small
security and privacy issues dataset to train the
were studied. chatbot with only
limited query language.
Ye and Li Survey of existing• Communication, • Study analyzed possible• The study discovered
(2020) dialogue system response generation and security and privacy security attacks with
vulnerabilities database module of vulnerabilities in the chatbot limited modules of the
chatbot architecture. architecture and found that the chatbot architecture.
chatbot community has not yet
developed comprehensive
standards for securing chatbots.
Ng et al. Between-subject • Vignette-style • It was observed that social• The study did not use
(2021) online experiment methodology as an presence has a negative effect real chatbot prototypes
induction protocol. on privacy concerns. and socio-emotional
cues integrated with
financial solutions.
4.5. Chatbot development
Chatbot development in the financial sector refers to a set of activities devoted to the process of
designing, creating and deploying chatbots that can improve efficiency and potentially solve specific
problems in the sector. The articles related to chatbot development that were included in our collection
are presented in Table 12. Li et al. (2021) explored efficient deep-context modeling to study the various
strategies related to response selection for retrieval-based chatbots for e-commerce; they also provided
an in-depth comparison. Ciechanowski et al. (2017) pointed out that honesty, transparency,
predictability, benevolence and control need to be considered for chatbot development in business or
commercial environments. Weerabahu et al. (2019) proposed a chatbot system for the Sri Lankan
banking sector that has the ability to retrieve questions, identify meaning, display knowledge bases

226
and answer customer queries. Nuruzzaman and Hussain (2020) proposed a dialogue-based chatbot
called IntelliBot that uses several strategies to generate a response. Banu and Patil (2020) developed a
fast, accurate, secure and high-performance chatbot for web applications that responds to a user request
within seconds and authenticates the user. Virkar et al. (2019) introduced an approach designed to
improve the efficiency of a chatbot or artificial conversational entity that can be used in various
commercial and banking sectors. Khan (2020) developed an e-commerce sales chatbot that provides
customer support and increases sales by offerig cheaper and more satisfying customer service. Khan
& Rabbani (2020) proposed an interactive AI-based chatbot for the Islamic finance and banking sector;
it allows users to communicate with a robot. Tran and Luong (2020) employed a deep neural network
to study the useful features of the intent implied by user utterances, consequently extracting useful
contexts. In conclusion, chatbot development has been approached from different perspectives to fill
research gaps related to efficiency, customization, ease of use and customer satisfaction.
Table 12. Articles related to chatbot development.

Li et al. Deep context modeling• BERT as the context• Proposed a multi-turn• Topic flow modeling
(2021) framework for multi-turn encoder; dataset response selection system with and an investigation of
response selection via the comparison experiment better performance than the logical consistency across
application of various using previous works. existing promising models. multi-turn conversations
strategies and comprehensive were not performed.
comparisons
Ciechano Quantitative survey using• Condor Tribe finder• It was found that most chatbot• In the study, only
wski et al. questionnaires and objective- system based on a and user interactions are of the journalist and
(2017) based psychophysiology machine learning journalist personality type politician personality
measures classification engine. rather than indicative of types were considered.
deceitful language.
Weerabah Question extraction,• Pre-processing • Proposed an online assistant to• The proposed system
u et al. meaning identification, techniques, bag-of- clarify customer queries, did not give the correct
(2019) knowledge base mapping, words classification focusing on question answer and
answer generation, module, pattern- extraction and meaning misinterpreted the
quantitative survey and matching template- identification, knowledge base question.
model experiment based system and mapping and answer
verification. generation to simplify
traditional banking using
chatbots.
Nuruzzam Deep learning techniques• Seq2seq, word2vec,• Developed IntelliBot, which• The handling of
an &such as recurrent neural term frequency-inverse can generate intelligent coherent texts in
Hussain networks, deep neural document frequency, responses and have decent generative tasks was
(2020) networks and convolutional end-to-end attention conversations with users on not explored.
neural networks mechanism for model both general and specific
training. insurance-related issues.
Banu andChatbot architecture• Microsoft Azure bot• Development of a secure• The developed chatbot
Patil development and advanced service chatbot with an accurate and does not work for voice
(2020) language understanding precise response to user speech.
intelligent service training requests within a few seconds
for an enterprise application.
Virkar etNatural language processing• Tokenization, parts-of-• The proposed model can• There is some
al. and natural language speech tagging, word generate a more accurate variability in the
(2019) generation techniques reinstatement, sentence similarity score for calculating results.
semantic similarity and semantic similarity for a given
sentence encoder sentence (as compared to the
architecture. word embedding score).
Continued on next page

227
Khan Natural language• Web-based natural• The developed system can• The study used a
(2020) understanding language training, improve customer limited number of
micro service-based relationships, which can lead datasets.
text classification, to more sales and make
entities extraction and customer service cheaper and
request to specific more satisfying.
controller framework.
Khan &Natural language processing• IBM Watson• Developed a chatbot for• The developed bot
Rabbani technique framework Islamic financial institutions cannot solve numerical
(2020) that can understand complex issues related to
sentence structure and respond Islamic financial
to direct and non-ambiguous institutions.
responses to the users.
Tran &Identification of the intent• Convolutional neural• When detecting intent, their• The study was carried
Luon g implied by Vietnamese networks and bi-Long system achieved the best out only to extract
(2020) language user utterances and short-term memory for statistical (F-measure) score of deeper semantic
parsing of the content to detecting intent; using 82.32%. Further, when features.
extract useful contexts by Keras libraries to extracting context, the
performing experimentation extract context. proposed method yielded
promising F-measures ranging
from 78% to 91% depending
on the types of context.
5. Discussion
The present article highlights the characteristics of empirical studies on chatbots in the context of
the financial sector. From acceptability and user interaction to engagement, satisfaction, customer
service, security, customer and company perception, trust and implementation of a chatbot that, these
factors allow the financial sector to transform their activity and operations. However, the financial
sector faces several challenges that can obstruct the successful adoption and implementation of chatbot
technologies. These range from potential employee skill, user know-how about chatbots, adaptability,
privacy breach concerns, restrictive implementation costs and intention to use. Interestingly, most of
the peer-reviewed articles in our collection were published quite recently, i.e., since 2016. This shows
that chatbots have been supporting the financial sector for the past few years, and it signals a growing
interest in this technology in academia. Regarding our collection, the reviewed articles quantified user
interactions with chatbots through surveys and experimental research based on specific hypotheses.
The review also reveals a lack of research focused solely on chatbot development, which can be useful
for gaining in-depth information on chatbots. Further, based our findings, we hereafter emphasize an
overview of research characteristics such as the publication sources, research design, study domains,
publication year and paper indexing; we also summarize the context or types of chatbots used in the
financial sector; finally, we recommend future research directions.
5.1. Research characteristics
5.1.1. Publication sources
In this section, we present the publication sources for selected article datasets in the current
analysis. The publication sources for the reviewed papers were Google Scholar, IEEE Xplore, Science
Direct, SpringerLink and MDPI. The distribution of the articles in each publication source is shown in

228
Table 13. According to the review, a total of 35% (N=18) of papers were published in Science Direct.
It can be concluded that Science Direct is the most common source of the articles reviewed.
Table 13. Summary of selected article database sources.

Database Search results Duplicate articles Relevant articles
Google scholar 62 - 6
IEEE Xplore 49 1 10
Science Direct - 2 18
SpringerLink - 2 11
MDPI - 2 6
Total - 9 51
5.1.2. Research design
This section presents the research design methodologies used by the chatbots in the financial
sector. Table 14 presents a closer view of the research designs used in these financial sector chatbots.
Among them, there were 23 (45%) using survey methods (qualitative and quantitative), followed by
10 (19.6%) using mixed methods, nine (17.6%) using experimental methods and nine (17.6%)
performing a case study. It can be seen that most of the researchers used a survey research method to
study the issues related to financial sector chatbots and answered the research questions through the
collection and analysis of quantitative data. In addition, we note that, even though various chatbots
have been developed, this technology is not mature and there are still gaps in the application and study
of chatbots in the financial sectors.
Table 14. Research design methodologies.

Research method Number of papers
Survey (qualitative or quantitative) 23
Experiment 9
Case study 9
Mixed 10
Total 51
5.1.3. Publication year
This section discusses the distribution of the selected articles used in the current study by year of
publication, as presented in Figure 2. It can be observed in the figure that the selected articles fall
within the range of 2018 to 2021 in all of the databases, indicating that financial chatbot studies are
trending. It can also be seen that the majority of reviewed articles from Science Direct were published
in 2021 (N=9), followed by MDPI (N=5) and SpringerLink (N=4).

229
Figure 3. Distribution of selected articles by year of publication.
5.1.4. Study application domains
In this section, the most frequent application domains of chatbots in the financial sector are
presented and discussed. The classification of selected articles by the application domains are
presented in Figure 3. From the figure, it can be seen that 19 (37.25%) of the 51 articles were devoted
to research that can be applied in the general financial sector, followed by e-commerce, banking, and
insurance. The higher percentage of e-commerce applications compared to insurance and banking is
due to the widespread adoption of online commerce platforms in recent years.
Figure 4. Classification of the selected articles by application domain of chatbots in the

financial sector.

230
5.1.5. Paper indexing
Articles included in the current analysis were indexed in both Web of Science and Scopus,
showing that our systematic literature review covers the most influential and accessible articles from
the scientific community and the financial sector.
5.2. Overview of the context of the reviewed articles
This section presents and highlights the general context of the articles reviewed in our collection,
considering the identified five main themes. In general, the reviewed articles in our collection highlight
theoretical research questions and provide theoretical knowledge about how people interact with
chatbots in the financial sector. A significant number of articles cover theoretical perspectives that have
been developed as general theories for chatbot integration into financial technology. This review shows
that there is significant interest in evaluating a chatbot’s design in terms of its user experience. However,
this also suggests that there is a limited amount of research related to the design and development of
chatbots in the literature, and that there are relatively few articles that seriously address these issues.
In particular, there is a lack of studies related to the speech interface domain e.g., Abdulquadri et al.
(2021). The lack of development design research shows that there is still no clear understanding of
what pressing design problems need to be addressed for chatbots in the financial sector. In doing so,
the financial sector must find design research methods that work better with chatbots, which is a
technology that relies heavily on written text and therefore requires consideration of different
languages. It is not enough to discuss a chatbot in the financial sector in terms of its usefulness,
effectiveness and ability to satisfy, attract and engage people. There may be times that improving the
user experience might not be worthwhile, or when encouraging chatbot sympathy might be
questionable. Thus, a systematic literature review provides a broader understanding of various
conversational and technical aspects of chatbots in the financial sector, which suggests the usefulness
and implementation of chatbots. We argue that this area offers many unexplored but fruitful areas for
further research. We invite researchers to use the proposed research topics as a guide for developing
and empirically testing assumptions and hypotheses, while others may wish to consider developing a theory.
5.3. Limitation
In general, the articles included in this study focused primarily on the conversational aspects of
chatbot usage in the financial sector. Further research could be done to include articles on technical
aspects. Moreover, only journal articles and conference proceedings were considered in the current
analysis. Future reviews can be done by including research published in posters, workshops and
supplementary materials. Finally, the current research only includes chatbot communication via written
language. Future reviews may compare the current findings in greater depth with those of other reviews
with speech interfaces.
6. Conclusions
In this study, a literature review of relevant works focused on the subject was carried out and the
current state-of-the-art technology was highlighted in terms of their implementation, adoption

231
intention, attitudes toward using chatbots, acceptance, perception, expectation, satisfaction, trust,
engagement, emotional experience and expressions, security and chatbot development. Further, the
study indicates the limitations, current challenges and several lines of future research that could be
interesting to explore for the financial sector. Finally, some important findings from the literature
review are presented below:
• The current study highlights the key benefits of implementing chatbots in the financial sector,
such as improved decision-making, customer service, productivity, efficiency, resource
management and more. Significant influential factors have also been identified when
implementing a chatbot.
• The study also highlights that user expectation influences the actual perception of chatbots
during interaction, which can affect overall user satisfaction. The users privacy, performance
and trust appear to be the significant factors affecting customer satisfaction; additionally, user
expectations are focused on the shortcomings of the chatbot technology.
• It was shown that chatbot adoption intention is highly dependent on language, value-added,
managerial, organizational and technological factors.
• It was pointed out that the perceived ease of use, perceived enjoyment, perceived usefulness,
price consciousness, personal innovativeness, perceived risk, trust, personal innovativeness,
automation and perceived compatibility are the determining factors for attitude toward using chatbot.
• It was revealed that analyzing customer engagement across multiple channels can help the
financial sector to provide some personalized offerings.
• It was also noted that the security and privacy vulnerabilities of chatbots in the financial sector
should be considered and analyzed before deployment.
7. Future works
The current work briefly discussed topics related to text-based chatbots in the financial sector,
such as the understanding of chatbots, their implementation, their adoption intention, attitude toward
use, acceptance, trust, engagement and security and privacy vulnerabilities, based on existing literature.
In the future, the described topics related to text-based chatbots can be studied empirically in detail to
determine the extent to which they influence the implementation and development of chatbots in the
financial sector.
Conflict of interest
All authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding this study.
References
Abdulquadri A, Mogaji E, Kieu TA, et al. (2021) Digital transformation in financial services provision:
a Nigerian perspective to the adoption of chatbot. J Enterp Communities 15: 258–281.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JEC-06-2020-0126
Adam M, Wessel M, Benlian A (2021) AI-based chatbots in customer service and their effects on user
compliance. Electron Mark 31: 427–445. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-020-00414-7

232
Ahmad NA, Che MH, Zainal A, et al. (2018) Review of chatbots design techniques. Int J Comput Appl
181:7–10. https://doi.org/ 10.5120/ijca2018917606
Al Nasseri A, Tucker A, de Cesare S (2015) Quantifying Stock Twits semantic terms’ trading behavior
in financial markets: An effective application of decision tree algorithms. Expert Syst Appl 42:
9192–9210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2015.08.008
Allal-Chérif O, Simón-Moya V, Ballester ACC (2021) Intelligent purchasing: How artificial
intelligence can redefine the purchasing function. J Bus Res 124: 69–76,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.11.050
Alt MA, Vizeli I, Săplăcan Z (2021) Banking with a Chatbot – A Study on Technology Acceptance.
Stud U Babes-Bol Oecon 66: 13–35. https://doi.org/10.2478/subboec-2021-0002
Araujo T (2018) Living up to the chatbot hype: The influence of anthropomorphic design cues and
communicative agency framing on conversational agent and company perceptions. Comput
Human Behav 85: 183–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.03.051
Attfield S, Kazai G, Lalmas M, et al. (2011) Towards a science of user engagement. Expert WSDM
Workshop on User Modelling for Web Applications: 9–12.
Aznoli F, Navimipour NJ (2017) Cloud services recommendation: Reviewing the recent advances and
suggesting the future research directions. J Netw Comput Appl 77: 73–86.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnca.2016.10.009
Bajdor P (2021) Simulations of the relationship between the experience level of e-commerce customers
and the adopted variables - Implications for management in the area of online shopping. Procedia
Comput Sci 192: 2576–2585. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2021.09.027
Banu S, Patil SD (2020) An Intelligent Web App Chatbot. International Conference on Smart
Technologies in Computing, Electrical and Electronics 309–315.
https://doi.org/10.1109/icstcee49637.2020.9276948
Bavaresco R, Silveira D, Reis E, et al. (2020) Conversational agents in business: A systematic literature
review and future research directions. Comput Sci Rev 36.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosrev.2020.100239
Bhuiyan MSI, Razzak A, Ferdous MS, et al. (2020) BONIK: A Blockchain Empowered Chatbot for
Financial Transactions. IEEE 19th International Conference on Trust, Security and Privacy in
Computing and Communications 1079–1088. https://doi.org/
10.1109/trustcom50675.2020.00143
Boyle EA, Connolly TM, Hainey T, et al. (2012) Engagement in digital entertainment games: A
systematic review. Comput Hum Behav 28: 771–780. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.11.020
Brachten F, Kissmer T, Stieglitz S (2021) The acceptance of chatbots in an enterprise context – A
survey study. Int J Inf Manage 60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102375
Brave S, Nass C (2007) Emotion in human-computer interaction. Human-computer interaction
handbook 103–118, CRC Press, 103–118.
Brüggemeier B, Lalone P (2022) Perceptions and reactions to conversational privacy initiated by a
conversational user interface. Comput Speech Lang 71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csl.2021.101269
Cheng Y, Jiang H (2021) Customer–brand relationship in the era of artificial intelligence:
understanding the role of chatbot marketing efforts. J Prod Brand Manage 31: 252–264
https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBM-05-2020-2907
Chung M, Ko E, Joung H, et al. (2020) Chatbot e-service and customer satisfaction regarding luxury
brands. J Bus Res 117: 587–595. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.10.004

233
Ciechanowski L, Przegalinska A, Wegner K (2017) The necessity of new paradigms in measuring

human-chatbot interaction. International Conference on Applied Human Factors and
Ergonomics 205–214. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60747-4_19
Debeauvais T (2016) Challenge and retention in games. University of California, Irvine.
Distler V, Lallemand C, Bellet T (2018) Acceptability and acceptance of autonomous mobility on
demand: The impact of an immersive experience. Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on
Human Factors in Computing Systems 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3174186
Doherty K, Doherty G (2018) Engagement in HCI: conception, theory and measurement. ACM Comput
Surv 51: 1–39. https://doi.org/10.1145/3234149
Eren BA (2021) Determinants of customer satisfaction in chatbot use: evidence from a banking
application in Turkey. Int J Bank Mark: 39: 294–311. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJBM-02-2020-
0056
Fessl A, Rivera-Pelayo V, Müller L, et al. (2011) Motivation and user acceptance of using physiological
data to support individual reflection. 2nd International Workshop on Motivation and Affective
Aspects in Technology Enhanced Learning.
Følstad A, Taylor C (2021) Investigating the user experience of customer service chatbot interaction:
a framework for qualitative analysis of chatbot dialogues. Qual User Exper 6: 1–17.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s41233-021-00046-5
Frison AK, Wintersberger P, Riener A, et al. (2019) In UX we trust investigation of aesthetics and
usability of driver-vehicle interfaces and their impact on the perception of automated driving.
Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems-Proceedings,
https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300374
Go E, Sundar SS (2019) Humanizing chatbots: The effects of visual, identity and conversational cues
on humanness perceptions. Comput Hum Behav 97: 304–316.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.01.020
Goethe O, Niksirat KS, Hirskyj-Douglas I, et al. (2019) From UX to engagement: connecting theory
and practice, addressing ethics and diversity. Expert Syst Appl 91–99. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-
3-030-23560-4_7
Gondaliya K, Butakov S, Zavarsky P (2020) SLA as a mechanism to manage risks related to chatbot
services. IEEE Intl Conference on High Performance and Smart Computing, HPSC and 2020
IEEE Intl Conference on Intelligent Data and Security IDS 2020. 235–240.
https://doi.org/10.1109/BigDataSecurity-HPSC-IDS49724.2020.00050
Hentzen JK, Hoffmann A, Dolan R, et al. (2021) Artificial intelligence in customer-facing financial
services: aystematic literature review and agenda for future research. Int J Bank Mark
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJBM-09-2021-0417
Hildebrand C, Bergner A (2021) Conversational robo advisors as surrogates of trust: onboarding
experience, firm perception, and consumer financial decision making. J Acad Mark Sci 49: 659–
676. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-020-00753-z
Hsu PF, Nguyen TK, Huang JY (2021) Value co-creation and co-destruction in self-service technology:
A customer’s perspective Electron Commer Res Appl 46
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2021.101029
Huang SYB, Lee CJ, Lee SC (2021) Toward a Unified Theory of Customer Continuance Model for
Financial Technology Chatbots. Sensors 21. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21175687

234
Hwang S, Kim J (2021) Toward a chatbot for financial sustainability. Sustainability 13: 3173.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su13063173
Illescas-Manzano MD, López NV, González NA, et al. (2021) Implementation of chatbot in online
commerce, and open innovation. J Open Innovation: Technol Mark Complexity 7: 125.
https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc7020125
Jang M, Jung Y, Kim S (2021) Investigating managers’ understanding of chatbots in the Korean
financial industry. Comput Hum Behav 120: 106747. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106747
Kasilingam DL (2020) Understanding the attitude and intention to use smartphone chatbots for
shopping. Technology in Society Technology in Society 62.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101280
Khan MM (2020) Development of an e-commerce Sales Chatbot. International Conference on Smart
Communities: Improving Quality of Life Using ICT, IoT and AI 173–176.
https://doi.org/10.1109/HONET50430.2020.9322667
Khan S, Rabbani MR (2020) Chatbot as Islamic Finance Expert (CaIFE) When Finance Meets
Artificial Intelligence. Proceedings of the 2020 4th International Symposium on Computer
Science and Intelligent Control 2020: 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1145/3440084.3441213
Kumar V, Ramachandran D, Kumar B (2021) Influence of new-age technologies on marketing: A
research agenda. Expert Syst Appl 125: 864–877. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.01.007
Kushwaha AK, Kumar P, Kar AK (2021) What impacts customer experience for B2B enterprises on
using AI-enabled chatbots? Insights from Big data analytics. Ind Market Manag 98: 207–221.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2021.08.011
Lai ST, Leu FY, Lin JW (2018) A banking chatbot security control procedure for protecting user data
security and privacy. International Conference on Broadband and Wireless Computing,
Communication and Applications 561–571. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/978-3-030-02613-4_50
Lee M, Frank L, IJsselsteijn W, et al. (2021) A Cryptocurrency Chatbot in the Social-technical Gap of
Trust. Comput Supp Coop Work 30: 79–117. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10606-021-09392-6
Li CH, Chen K, Chang YJ (2019) When there is no progress with a task-oriented chatbot: A
conversation analysis. Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Human-Computer
Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services. https://doi.org/10.1145/3338286.3344407
Li L, Li C, Ji D (2021) Deep context modeling for multi-turn response selection in dialogue systems.
Information Processing and Management 58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2020.102415.
Liu D, Santhanam R, Webster (2017) Toward Meaningful Engagement: a framework for design and
research of Gamified information systems. MIS Quarterly 41: 1011–1034
https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2017/41.4.01
Lo Presti L, Maggiore G, Marino V (2021) The role of the chatbot on customer purchase intention:
towards digital relational sales. Italian J Market 2021: 165–188, https://doi.org/10.1007/s43039-
021-00029-6
Lukoff K, Yu C, Kientz J, et al. (2018) What makes smartphone use meaningful or meaningless?
Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies 2: 1–26.
https://doi.org/10.1145/3191754
Mayer RC, Davis JH (1999) The effect of the performance appraisal system on trust for management:
A field quasi-experiment. J Appl Psychol 84: 123–136.

235
Miklosik A, Evans N, Qureshi AMA (2021) The Use of Chatbots in Digital Business Transformation:
A Systematic Literature Review. IEEE Access 9: 106530–106539.
https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3100885
Milian EZ, Spinola MM, Carvalho MM (2019) Fintechs: A literature review and research agenda.
Electron Commer Res Appl 34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2019.100833
Mondal A, Dey M, Das D, er al. (2018) An automated conversation system for the educational domain.
International Joint Symposium on Artificial Intelligence and Natural Language Processing
(ISAI-NLP) 2018: 1–5. https://doi.org/ 10.1109/iSAI-NLP.2018.8692927
Muniasamy A, Alasiry A (2020) Deep Learning: The Impact on Future eLearning. Int J Emerg Technol
15: 188–199. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v15i01.11435
Nayak B, Bhattacharyya SS, Krishnamoorthy B (2021) Explicating the role of emerging technologies
and firm capabilities towards attainment of competitive advantage in health insurance service
firms. Technol Forecast Soc Change 170: 120892. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120892
Ng M, Kovila PLC, Ehsan T, et al. (2021) Simulating the effects of social presence on trust, privacy
concerns & usage intentions in automated bots for finance. 2020 IEEE European Symposium on
Security and Privacy Workshops 2021: 190–199.
https://doi.org/10.1109/EuroSPW51379.2020.00034
Nguyen D, M Chiu, YTH, et al. (2021) Determinants of continuance intention towards banks’ chatbot
services in vietnam: A necessity for sustainable development. Sustainability 13: 7625
https://doi.org/10.3390/su13147625
Nordheim CB, Følstad A, Bjørkli CA (2019) An Initial Model of Trust in Chatbots for Customer
Service-Findings from a Questionnaire Study. Interact Comput 31: 317–335.
https://doi.org/10.1093/iwc/iwz022
Nuruzzaman M, Hussain (2020) IntelliBot: A Dialogue-based chatbot for the insurance industry.
Knowl-Based Syst 196: 105810. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2020.105810
Poncette AS, Rojas PD, Hofferbert J, et al. (2020) Hackathons as stepping stones in health care
innovation: case study with systematic recommendations. J Med Internet Res 22: e17004.
https://doi.org/10.2196/17004
Quah JTS, Chua YW (2019) Chatbot assisted marketing in financial service industry. Lecture Notes in
Computer Science,11515 LNCS :107–114. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-23554-3_8
Rajaobelina L, Brun I, Kilani N, et al. (2021) Examining emotions linked to live chat services: The
role of e-service quality and impact on word of mouth. J Financ Serv Market 2021: 1–8.
https://doi.org/10.1057/s41264-021-00119-8
Rodríguez Cardona D, Werth O, Schönborn S, et al. (2019) A mixed methods analysis of the adoption
and diffusion of Chatbot Technology in the German insurance sector. Twenty-fifth Americas
Conference on Information Systems, Cancun.
Sowa K, Przegalinska A, Ciechanowski L (2021) Cobots in knowledge work: Human–AI collaboration
in managerial professions. J Bus Res 125: 135–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.11.038
Stoeckli E, Dremel C, Uebernickel F, et al. (2020) How affordances of chatbots cross the chasm
between social and traditional enterprise systems. Electron Mark 30: 369–403.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-019-00359-6

236
Suhel SF, Shukla VK, Vyas S, et al. (2020) Conversation to Automation in Banking through Chatbot
Using Artificial Machine Intelligence Language. IEEE 8th International Conference on Reliability,
Infocom Technologies and Optimization (Trends and Future Directions)2020: 611–618.
https://doi.org/10.1109/ICRITO48877.2020.9197825
Thompson C (2018) Assessing chatbot interaction as a means of driving customer engagement.
Bachelor’s Thesis.
Thusi P, Maduku DK (2020) South African millennials’ acceptance and use of retail mobile banking
apps: An integrated perspective. Comput Hum Behav 111.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106405
Toader DC, Boca G, Toader R, et al. (2020) The effect of social presence and chatbot errors on trust.
Sustainability 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/SU12010256
Tran OT, Luong TC (2020) Understanding what the users say in chatbots: A case study for the
Vietnamese language. Eng Appl Artif Intell 87: 103322.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engappai.2019.103322
van den Broeck E, Zarouali B, Poels K (2019) Chatbot advertising effectiveness: When does the
message get through? Comput Hum Behav 98: 150–157.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.04.009
Vikar M, Honmane V, Rao S (2019) Humanizing the Chatbot with Semantics based Natural Language
Generation. Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Computing and Control
Systems 891–894. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCS45141.2019.9065723
Vlačić, Božidar, Leonardo Corbo, et al. (2021) The evolving role of artificial intelligence in marketing:
A review and research agenda. J Busi Res 128: 187–203.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.01.055
Weerabahu D, Gamage A, Dulakshi C, et al. (2019) Digital Assistant for Supporting Bank Customer
Service. International Conference of the Sri Lanka Association for Artificial Intelligence 177–186.
Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/978-981-13-9129-3_13
Yamada M, Goda Y, Matsukawa H (2015) A computer-supported collaborative learning design for
quality interaction. IEEE Multimedia 23: 48–59. https://doi.org/10.1109/MMUL.2015.95
Ye W, Li Q (2020) Chatbot Security and Privacy in the Age of Personal Assistants. 2020 IEEE/ACM
Symposium on Edge Computing (SEC)2020:388–393. https://doi.org/
10.1109/SEC50012.2020.00057
Zhang JZ, Watson IV GF (2020) Marketing ecosystem: An outside-in view for sustainable advantage.
Ind Market Manag 88: 287–304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2020.04.023
Zhou L, Gao J, Li D, et al. (2020) The design and implementation of xiaoice, an empathetic social
chatbot. Comput Linguist 46: 53–93. https://doi.org/10.1162/coli_a_00368
© 2022 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access

article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)

10.3934 Dsfe.2022011

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

10.3934 Dsfe.2022011

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

10.3934 Dsfe.2022011

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DSFE, 2 (3): 209–236.

Text-Based Chatbot in Financial Sector: A Systematic Literature Review

Ethiopian Artificial Intelligence Institute, Addis Ababa 40782, Ethiopia

* Correspondence: Email: [email protected] author; Tel: +251940267335.

Keywords: text-based chatbot; systematic literature review; financial sector; human-computer

JEL Codes: G20, O30

Data Science in Finance and Economics Volume 2, Issue 3, 209–236.

Data Science in Finance and Economics Volume 2, Issue 3, 209–236.

Table 1. Overview of related works.

Data Science in Finance and Economics Volume 2, Issue 3, 209–236.

Article filtering and reviewing

Presentation and discussion

3.1. Step one: Information gathering

Data Science in Finance and Economics Volume 2, Issue 3, 209–236.

ALGORITHM 1: SEARCH STRATEGYAND ARTICLE SELECTION FROM DIFFERENT DATABASES

3.2. Step two: Article selection

Table 2. Inclusion and exclusion criteria for paper selection.

Google Scholar MDPI Science Direct Springer Link

Title and abstract screen (N = 283)

Full text check Identify articles through

Final Articles included in the

Data Science in Finance and Economics Volume 2, Issue 3, 209–236.

4.1. Understanding chatbot technology in the financial sector

Data Science in Finance and Economics Volume 2, Issue 3, 209–236.

Table 3. Articles related to chatbot implementation.

Data Science in Finance and Economics Volume 2, Issue 3, 209–236.

4.1.2. Adoption intention

Table 4. Articles related to chatbot adoption intention.

Data Science in Finance and Economics Volume 2, Issue 3, 209–236.

4.1.3. Attitude toward using chatbots

Data Science in Finance and Economics Volume 2, Issue 3, 209–236.

Table 5. Articles related to the attitude toward using chatbots.

Table 6. Articles related to chatbot acceptance.

Data Science in Finance and Economics Volume 2, Issue 3, 209–236.

4.2. Interaction with chatbots

4.2.1. Perception, expectation and satisfaction

Table 7. Articles related to chatbot perception, expectation and satisfaction.

Data Science in Finance and Economics Volume 2, Issue 3, 209–236.

Table 8. Articles related to chatbot trust.

Data Science in Finance and Economics Volume 2, Issue 3, 209–236.

Data Science in Finance and Economics Volume 2, Issue 3, 209–236.

Table 9. Articles related to engagement.

Data Science in Finance and Economics Volume 2, Issue 3, 209–236.

4.3. Emotional experience and expressions

Table 10. Articles related to emotional experience and expressions.

4.4. Security of chatbots

Data Science in Finance and Economics Volume 2, Issue 3, 209–236.

the security concerns of financial chatbots. Specifically, proof-of-concept development, performance

Table 11. Articles related to the security of chatbots.

4.5. Chatbot development

Data Science in Finance and Economics Volume 2, Issue 3, 209–236.

Table 12. Articles related to chatbot development.

Data Science in Finance and Economics Volume 2, Issue 3, 209–236.

5.1. Research characteristics

5.1.1. Publication sources

Data Science in Finance and Economics Volume 2, Issue 3, 209–236.

Table 13. Summary of selected article database sources.

5.1.2. Research design

Table 14. Research design methodologies.