LLM technologies and information search
Open accessAbstract
With the booming of LLM technologies (e.g., ChatGPT), people’s goals and behaviors in information search have been reshaped significantly. This paper attempts to conceptually discuss how LLM technologies might revolutionize these important aspects in information search and provides a comprehensive analysis of the technological advancements and capabilities of ChatGPT , highlighting its potential to disrupt traditional search engines like Google. In addition, this paper contrasts ChatGPT’s conversational approach with Google’s link-based search model, offering a detailed examination of the implications for online search advertising and user behavior and explaining why Google is concerned about ChatGPT as well as its potential reactions.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Unlike traditional search engines, which offer a list of links, chatbot-based search offers a natural language interface that can handle complex queries and return detailed, context-aware responses.
“Unlike traditional search engines, which offer a list of links, chatbot-based search offers a natural language interface that can handle complex queries and return detailed, context-aware responses [3].”
From Consumer Responses to Generative AI Chatbots Versus Search Engines for Product Evaluation (2025) · cites this paper as [3]
When consumers access a search engine for product research, they search in stages: formulate a query, receive a list of relevant links based on popularity and authority, determine whether results produce a usable response, and reformulate the query until results are satisfying.
“Specifically, the consumer first formulates a query that represents the desired information; the search engine then returns a list of relevant links related to the consumer's queries, based on popularity and authority, and the consumer determines whether the results produce a usable response.If not, the consumer reformulates the query until the results are satisfying [3].”
From Consumer Responses to Generative AI Chatbots Versus Search Engines for Product Evaluation (2025) · cites this paper as [3]
The introduction of AI chatbots, such as ChatGPT on 22 November 2022, has significantly reshaped how consumers search for information on the Internet, disrupting traditional search engines like Google.
“The introduction of AI Chatbots, such as ChatGPT on 22 November 2022, has significantly reshaped how consumers search for information on the Internet, disrupting traditional search engines like Google [3].”
From Consumer Responses to Generative AI Chatbots Versus Search Engines for Product Evaluation (2025) · cites this paper as [3]
Cites
Platform Competition in Two-Sided Markets
Rochet, J.-C., & Tirole, J. (2003) · Journal of the European Economic Association · doi:10.1162/154247603322493212 · Cited by 5,642 · see citing works
Chicken & Egg: Competition among Intermediation Service Providers
Caillaud, B., & Jullien, B. (2003) · The RAND Journal of Economics · doi:10.2307/1593720 · Cited by 1,799 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Consumer Responses to Generative AI Chatbots Versus Search Engines for Product Evaluation
Kim, S., & Priluck, R. (2025) · Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research · doi:10.3390/jtaer20020093 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
“First, while the conversational interaction features of AI chatbots (ChatGPT) disrupt the sequential search mode of traditional search engines [3], little research has empirically tested whether and how AI chatbots in comparison with traditional search engines differentially affect consumer…”
Influential
- Authors
- Liu, L., Meng, J., & Yang, Y.
- Affiliations
- Beihang University (CN)
- Corresponding author
- Liu, Lin
- Venue
- Journal of Economy and Technology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2024-11
- Volume
- 2
- Pages
- 269-277
- ISSN
- 2949-9488 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4402026018
- Cited by
- 35
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 19 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 1
- FWCI
- 13.19
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Economy and Technology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Natural Science Foundation of China
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in Service Interactions
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Recommender Systems and Techniques
- Keywords
- large language models, ChatGPT, information search, search engines, Google, conversational search, user behavior
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
