Research on the Interactive Effects of Product Recommendation Approaches and Product Types on Consumers’ Purchase Intention–Regulation of Product Involvement
Abstract
The main purpose is to analyze how different product recommendation approaches and product types influence consumers’ purchasing decisions, elucidate the interactive effects between these variables, and develop platform-specific operational strategies to optimize recommendation systems. Based on the Stimulus-Organism-Response (SOR) theory and the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM), this study employs a 2 (product recommendation type: AI vs. human) × 2 (product type: functional vs. hedonic) between-subjects experimental design to examine how recommendation systems interact with product characteristics to influence consumers’ purchase intentions. Specifically, it examines the mediating role of perceived value and the moderating effect of product involvement. An inter-group experimental design was employed to gather data via online questionnaires. ANOVA and other statistical methods were used to analyze the interaction, mediation, and moderation effects among the variables. The findings indicate a significant interaction between recommendation mode and product type. AI recommendations are more effective for functional products, whereas human recommendations are more advantageous for hedonic products. Perceived value mediates this interaction, with quality and price value being predominant in the AI recommendation pathway, while emotional, quality, and price value drive the human recommendation pathway. Moreover, the interaction effect is moderated by product involvement, with th…
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?
Low involvement decreases the negative impact of AI on purchase intent for functional or hedonic products.
“On the other hand, according to Li and Shi (2025), low involvement decreases the negative impact of AI on purchase intent for functional or hedonic products.”
From AI-generated versus human-created advertising: Effects on consumer trust and purchase intent (2025) · cites this paper as Li and Shi (2025)
Prior studies either manipulate disclosure without varying the true source or compare recommendation modes without crossing the source label, leaving unclear whether purchase intent is caused by the AI label, AI generation, or misaligned source labels.
“The studies above either manipulate disclosure without varying the true source (Kučinskas, 2025;Bui, 2025) or compare recommendation modes without crossing the source label (Li & Shi, 2025;Song et al., 2024).It's unclear whether the purchase intent is caused by the AI label, AI generation, or misaligned source labels.”
From AI-generated versus human-created advertising: Effects on consumer trust and purchase intent (2025) · cites this paper as Li & Shi, 2025
The current data show that transparent AI labelling reduces trust and intent for snacks, but the difference is smaller than for laptops.
“The current data show that transparent AI labelling reduces trust and intent for snacks, but the difference is smaller than for laptops, which supports Li and Shi's (2025) claim that low involvement reduces cue discrimination.”
From AI-generated versus human-created advertising: Effects on consumer trust and purchase intent (2025) · cites this paper as Li and Shi, 2025
Cites
Algorithm appreciation: People prefer algorithmic to human judgment
Logg, J. M., Minson, J. A., & Moore, D. A. (2019) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2018.12.005 · Cited by 2,061 · see citing works
Mende, M., Scott, M. L., van Doorn, J., Grewal, D., & Shanks, I. (2019) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/0022243718822827 · Cited by 1,197 · see citing works
Justification effects on consumer choice of hedonic and utilitarian goods.
Okada, E. M. (2005) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1509/jmkr.42.1.43.56889 · Cited by 1,069 · see citing works
What People Want From Their Professionals: Attitudes Toward Decision‐making Strategies
Eastwood, J., Snook, B., & Luther, K. (2012) · Journal of Behavioral Decision Making · doi:10.1002/bdm.741 · Cited by 97 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
AI-generated versus human-created advertising: Effects on consumer trust and purchase intent
Israfilzade, K. (2025) · Equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy · doi:10.24136/eq.4038 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
- Authors
- Li, Z., & Shi, Z.
- Affiliations
- Henan Polytechnic University (CN)
- Corresponding author
- Li, Zhifang
- Venue
- International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2025-11-13
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 13
- Pages
- 10365-10383
- ISSN
- 1044-7318 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-7590
- OpenAlex
- W4416194455
- Cited by
- 9
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 1
- FWCI
- 2.93
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Henan Province Higher Education Institutions Philosophy and Social Sciences Innovation Talent Support Program (2023-CXRC-32)
- The Annual Project of Henan Province Philosophy and Social Sciences Planning (2022CZH016)
- The Fundamental Research Funds for the Universities of Henan Province (SKJZD2022-01)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in Service Interactions
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Consumer Behavior and Marketing Influence
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Digital Marketing and Social Media
- Keywords
- product recommendation, product type, functional products, hedonic products, purchase intention, product involvement, perceived value, recommender systems, e-commerce platforms, stimulus-organism-response model, elaboration likelihood model, matching effect
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