CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 16Digital Marketing and Social MediaAI in Service InteractionsConsumer Behavior and Marketing Influence

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

When AI Becomes a Shopping Advisor: A Study on the Impact of Generative AI Review on Consumer Purchase Decision

Open access
Lei, Ke, Liu, Yixuan·2025·SAGE Open
DOI 10.1177/21582440251357671
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

With the swift advancement of artificial intelligence technology, generative AI reviews, as a novel form of online evaluation, are increasingly capturing consumers’ attention, thereby infusing innovation into the traditional online review paradigm. This technology, grounded in big data and sophisticated machine learning algorithms, seamlessly integrates users’ historical behavior data with real-time demand information. By meticulously excavating both commonalities and discrepancies from a vast corpus of reviews, it presents consumers with a more holistic and objective product representation. Nevertheless, the utility, transparency, and the fostering of consumer trust in generative AI reviews have precipitated extensive discourse. Drawing upon the Elaboration Likelihood Model, this investigation delves into the multifaceted attributes of generative AI reviews. Employing a questionnaire survey methodology, it systematically explores their influence on consumer purchase decision-making behavior. The findings reveal that the quality, emotional resonance, length, and credibility of generative AI reviews exert a positive influence on consumer purchase decisions. This impact is ultimately mediated through the perceived usefulness of the reviews. Furthermore, the inclination to trust artificial intelligence serves as a moderator, altering the perceived usefulness of reviews of varying lengths. This research not only enriches the landscape of online review studies and expands the horizons of generative AI review research but also bears substantial practical implications. It offers valuable insights for the refinement of the information ecosystem on e-commerce platforms and for enhancing consumer purchase decision-making processes.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/21582440251357671

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 4 references

Research works printed but not linked: 63

  1. 10.31128/AJGP-12-22-6630 · DOI · Paper page
  2. Bauer K. von Zahn M. Hinz O. (2023). Expl(AI)ned: The impact of explainable artificial intelligence on users’ information processing. Information Systems Research 34(4) 1582–1602. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2023.1199 · DOI
  3. Biswas B. Sengupta P. Chatterjee D. (2020). Examining the determinants of the count of customer reviews in peer-to-peer home-sharing platforms using clustering and count regression techniques. Decision Support Systems 135 Article 113324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2020.113324 · DOI
  4. 10.1177/135910457000100301 · DOI · Paper page
  5. 10.1016/j.procs.2024.03.146 · DOI
  6. Cacioppo J. T., Petty R. E. (1984). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. Advances in Consumer Research, 11, 673–675.
  7. Cao Q. Duan W. Gan Q. (2011). Exploring determinants of voting for the “helpfulness” of online user reviews: A text mining approach. Decision Support Systems 50(2) 511–521. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2010.11.009 · DOI
  8. 10.1080/15332861.2019.1672135 · DOI
  9. Chen Y. Xie J. (2008). Online consumer review: Word-of-mouth as a news element of marketing communication mix. Management Science 54(3) 477–491. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1070.0810 · DOI
  10. Christensen J. Hansen J. M. Wilson P. (2024). Understanding the role and impact of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) hallucination within consumers’ tourism decision-making processes. Current Issues in Tourism 28(4) 545–560. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2023.2300032 · DOI
  11. 10.1016/j.dss.2008.04.001 · DOI
  12. Dwivedi Y. K. Pandey N. Currie W. Micu A. (2024). Leveraging ChatGPT and other generative artificial intelligence (AI)-based applications in the hospitality and tourism industry: Practices challenges and research agenda. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 36(1) 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijchm-05-2023-0686 · DOI
  13. Filieri R. McLeay F. (2014). E-WOM and accommodation: An analysis of the factors that influence travelers’ adoption of information from online reviews. Journal of Travel Research 53(1) 44–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287513481274 · DOI
  14. Godes D. Mayzlin D. (2004). Using online conversations to study word-of-mouth communication. Marketing Science 23(4) 545–560. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.1040.0071 · DOI · Paper page
  15. Gu Y. Zhu J. (2023). The effect of online review and interaction on value co-creation in tourism virtual community. Cogent Social Sciences 9(2) Article 2261234. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2261234 · DOI · Paper page
  16. Huang G. Liang H. (2021). Uncovering the effects of textual features on trustworthiness of online consumer reviews: A computational-experimental approach. Journal of Business Research 126 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.12.052 · DOI
  17. Iyer G. R. Blut M. Xiao S. H. Grewal D. (2020). Impulse buying: A meta-analytic review. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 48(3) 384–404. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-019-00670-w · DOI
  18. Jensen M. L. Averbeck J. M. Zhang Z. Wright K. B. (2013). Credibility of anonymous online product reviews: A language expectancy perspective. Journal of Management Information Systems 30(1) 293–323. https://doi.org/10.2753/mis0742-1222300109 · DOI
  19. 10.1002/asi.24050 · DOI
  20. Kim M.-J. Chung N. Lee C.-K. (2011). The effect of perceived trust on electronic commerce: Shopping online for tourism products and services in South Korea. Tourism Management 32(2) 256–265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2010.01.011 · DOI
  21. Kim T. Kim M. J. Promsivapallop P. (2024). Investigating the influence of generative AI’s credibility and utility on travel consumer behaviour and recommendations through the lens of personal innovativeness. Current Issues in Tourism 28(14) 2220–2224. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2024.2364764 · DOI
  22. Kshetri N. (2024). Generative artificial intelligence and e-commerce. Computer 57(2) 125–128. https://doi.org/10.1109/mc.2023.3340772 · DOI
  23. 10.17705/1jais.00386 · DOI
  24. Lewis J. D. Weigert A. (1985). Trust as a social-reality. Social Forces 63(4) 967–985. https://doi.org/10.2307/2578601 · DOI · Paper page
  25. Li J. Wu L. Qi J. Zhang Y. Wu Z. Hu S. (2023). Determinants affecting consumer trust in communication with AI chatbots: The moderating effect of privacy concerns. Journal of Organizational and End User Computing 35(1) Article 328089. https://doi.org/10.4018/joeuc.328089 · DOI
  26. 10.1016/j.im.2018.04.007 · DOI
  27. 10.1016/j.techsoc.2024.102518 · DOI
  28. 10.2307/256727 · DOI · Paper page
  29. McKnight D. H. Choudhury V. Kacmar C. (2002). Developing and validating trust measures for e-commerce: An integrative typology. Information Systems Research 13(3) 334–359. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.13.3.334.81 · DOI · Paper page
  30. Meservy T. O. Jensen M. L. Fadel K. J. (2014). Evaluation of competing candidate solutions in electronic networks of practice. Information Systems Research 25(1) 15–34. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2013.0502 · DOI
  31. Mewada A. Dewang R. K. (2022). Research on false review detection methods: A state-of-the-art review. Journal of King Saud University-Computer and Information Sciences 34(9) 7530–7546. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jksuci.2021.07.021 · DOI
  32. Moon J. W. Kim Y. G. (2001). Extending the TAM for a World-Wide-Web context. Information & Management 38(4) 217–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0378-7206(00)00061-6 · DOI · Paper page
  33. 10.2307/20721420 · DOI
  34. Namvar M. Chua A. Y. K. (2023). The impact of context clues on online review helpfulness. Internet Research 33(3) 1015–1030. https://doi.org/10.1108/intr-02-2021-0093 · DOI
  35. Ning X. Lu Y. Li W. Gupta S. (2024). How transparency affects algorithmic advice utilization: The mediating roles of trusting beliefs. Decision Support Systems 183 Article 114273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2024.114273 · DOI
  36. Ooi K.-B. Tan G. W.-H. Al-Emran M. Al-Sharafi M. A. Capatina A. Chakraborty A. Dwivedi Y. K. Huang T.-L. Kar A. K. Lee V.-H. Loh X.-M. Micu A. Mikalef P. Mogaji E. Pandey N. Raman R. Rana N. P. Sarker P. Sharma A. . . . Wong L.-W. (2023). The potential of generative artificial intelligence across disciplines: Perspectives and future directions. Journal of Computer Information Systems 65(1) 76–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/08874417.2023.2261010 · DOI · Paper page
  37. Pan Y. Zhang J. Q. (2011). Born unequal: A study of the helpfulness of user-generated product reviews. Journal of Retailing 87(4) 598–612. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2011.05.002 · DOI
  38. Park C. Lee T. M. (2009). Antecedents of online reviews’ usage and purchase influence: An empirical comparison of US and Korean consumers. Journal of Interactive Marketing 23(4) 332–340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2009.07.001 · DOI
  39. Park D.-H. Kim S. (2008). The effects of consumer knowledge on message processing of electronic word-of-mouth via online consumer reviews. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 7(4) 399–410. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2007.12.001 · DOI
  40. Park D.-H. Lee J. Han I. (2007). The effect of on-line consumer reviews on consumer purchasing intention: The moderating role of involvement. International Journal of Electronic Commerce 11(4) 125–148. https://doi.org/10.2753/jec1086-4415110405 · DOI
  41. 10.1016/j.elerap.2012.06.003 · DOI
  42. Ren J. Nickerson J. V. (2019). Arousal valence and volume: How the influence of online review characteristics differs with respect to utilitarian and hedonic products. European Journal of Information Systems 28(3) 272–290. https://doi.org/10.1080/0960085x.2018.1524419 · DOI
  43. Saidani A. Nechoud L. Ghidouche F. Ait-Yahia K. G. (2023). Serial mediation of perceived usefulness and ewom adoption in virtual communities and the moderating effect of gender. Tourism and Hospitality Management-Croatia 29(1) 87–102. https://doi.org/10.20867/thm.29.1.8 · DOI
  44. Shen X.-L. Zhang K. Z. K. Zhao S. J. (2016). Herd behavior in consumers’ adoption of online reviews. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 67(11) 2754–2765. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23602 · DOI
  45. Shin D. Park Y. J. (2019). Role of fairness accountability and transparency in algorithmic affordance. Computers in Human Behavior 98 277–284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.04.019 · DOI · Paper page
  46. Song W., Park S., Ryu D. (2017). Information quality of online reviews in the presence of potentially fake reviews. Korean Economic Review, 33(1), 5–34.
  47. 10.1287/mnsc.1110.1458 · DOI
  48. Sussman S. W. Siegal W. S. (2003). Informational influence in organizations: An integrated approach to knowledge adoption. Information Systems Research 14(1) 47–65. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.14.1.47.14767 · DOI · Paper page
  49. 10.1016/j.jart.2015.02.001 · DOI
  50. Verma D. Dewani P. P. Behl A. Pereira V. Dwivedi Y. Del Giudice M. (2023). A meta-analysis of antecedents and consequences of eWOM credibility: Investigation of moderating role of culture and platform type. Journal of Business Research 154 113292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.08.056 · DOI
  51. 10.1016/j.tourman.2008.04.008 · DOI · Paper page
  52. Wang Q. Zhang W. Li J. Mai F. Ma Z. (2024). The devil is in the details! Effect of differentiated platform governance on online review manipulation. Humanities & Social Sciences Communications 11(1) Article 1352. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03859-9 · DOI
  53. 10.1108/OIR-07-2018-0216 · DOI
  54. Xiao S. Wei C.-P. Dong M. (2016). Crowd intelligence: Analyzing online product reviews for preference measurement. Information & Management 53(2) 169–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2015.09.010 · DOI
  55. Xie H. Miao L. Kuo P.-J. Lee B.-Y. (2011). Consumers’ responses to ambivalent online hotel reviews: The role of perceived source credibility and pre-decisional disposition. International Journal of Hospitality Management 30(1) 178–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2010.04.008 · DOI
  56. Xie K. L. Zhang Z. Zhang Z. (2014). The business value of online consumer reviews and management response to hotel performance. International Journal of Hospitality Management 43 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2014.07.007 · DOI
  57. Ye Q. Law R. Gu B. Chen W. (2011). The influence of user-generated content on traveler behavior: An empirical investigation on the effects of e-word-of-mouth to hotel online bookings. Computers in Human Behavior 27(2) 634–639. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.04.014 · DOI
  58. Yi C. Jiang Z. Li X. Lu X. (2019). Leveraging user-generated content for product promotion: The effects of firm-highlighted reviews. Information Systems Research 30(3) 711–725. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2018.0807 · DOI
  59. Yin D., Bond S., Zhang H. (2020). Anger in consumer reviews: Unhelpful but persuasive? (No. 3588859). MIS Quarterly, Forthcoming, Georgia Tech Scheller College of Business Research Paper.
  60. 10.25300/MISQ/2014/38.2.10 · DOI
  61. 10.1016/j.chb.2022.107415 · DOI
  62. Zhang K. Z. K. Zhao S. J. Cheung C. M. K. Lee M. K. O. (2014). Examining the influence of online reviews on consumers’ decision-making: A heuristic-systematic model. Decision Support Systems 67 78–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2014.08.005 · DOI · Paper page
  63. Zhu F. Zhang X. (2010). Impact of online consumer reviews on sales: The moderating role of product and consumer characteristics. Journal of Marketing 74(2) 133–148. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.74.2.133 · DOI

Metadata

Authors
Lei, K., & Liu, Y.
Affiliations
  • Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, Chengdu, China
  • Chongqing Jiaotong University (CN)
Corresponding author
Liu, Yixuan
ORCID
Venue
SAGE Open
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2025-01
Volume
15
Issue
3
ISSN
2158-2440 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1177/21582440251357671
OpenAlex
W7075964671
Cited by
16
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 1
FWCI
27.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • SAGE Open (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Postdoctoral Science FoundationResearch on the Digital Spatial Construction and Impact Mechanism of Internet Celebrity Tourism Destinations from the Perspective of Media Geography (2024M753861)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Digital Marketing and Social Media
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › AI in Service Interactions
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Consumer Behavior and Marketing Influence
Keywords
online reviews, purchase decision, perceived usefulness, trust in AI, review credibility, review length, emotional resonance, elaboration likelihood model, e-commerce, AI-generated content

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: When AI Becomes a Shopping Advisor: A Study on the Impact of Generative AI Review on Consumer Purchase Decision. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/21582440251357671
The paper
Lei, K., & Liu, Y. (2025). When AI Becomes a Shopping Advisor: A Study on the Impact of Generative AI Review on Consumer Purchase Decision. SAGE Open. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440251357671