KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Hacettepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 44 Sayı: 3

Dijital Platformlarda İnsan ve Yapay Zekâ Kaynaklı Bilgi Güvenilirliğinin Tüketici Satın Alma Niyeti Üzerindeki Etkisi

The Influence of Human and Artificial Intelligence Sourced Information Credibility on Consumer Purchase Intention on Digital Platforms

Sefa Üstüner(Kayseri University)0000-0003-1231-5694
Meltem Canoğlu(OSMANİYE KORKUT ATA ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-7712-1650
Gülhan Yenilmez(OSMANİYE KORKUT ATA ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-6570-6448
Sayfa
852–879
Yayın Tarihi
2026-09-30
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Bulgular, bilgi kullanışlılığının tüm senaryolarda satın alma niyeti üzerinde anlamlı etkiler yarattığını göstermektedir.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Dijital platformlarda yapay zekâ temelli uygulamaların yaygınlaşmasıyla birlikte, birçok şirket hem ürün tanıtımında hem de müşteri ilişkileri süreçlerinde yapay zekâdan etkin biçimde faydalanmaktadır.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Ancak, yapay zekâ tabanlı uygulamaların insan temelli etkileşimlerin yerini tamamen alabilme potansiyeli, hâlen belirsizliğini koruyan ve kapsamlı değerlendirme gerektiren önemli bir konu olarak düşünülmektedir.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Bulgular, bilgi kullanışlılığının tüm senaryolarda satın alma niyeti üzerinde anlamlı etkiler yarattığını göstermektedir.
🔬Tür:Modelleme & Sayısal Simülasyon
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Kaynak güvenilirliği · Yapay Zekâ · Bilgi Kabul Modeli

Özet

Dijital platformlarda yapay zekâ temelli uygulamaların yaygınlaşmasıyla birlikte, birçok şirket hem ürün tanıtımında hem de müşteri ilişkileri süreçlerinde yapay zekâdan etkin biçimde faydalanmaktadır. Ancak, yapay zekâ tabanlı uygulamaların insan temelli etkileşimlerin yerini tamamen alabilme potansiyeli, hâlen belirsizliğini koruyan ve kapsamlı değerlendirme gerektiren önemli bir konu olarak düşünülmektedir. Bu nedenle, bu çalışma, dijital ortamda insan ve yapay zekâ kaynaklı bilgi önerilerinin tüketici satın alma niyeti üzerindeki etkilerini karşılaştırmalı olarak incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Bilgi Kabul Modeli temelinde yürütülen çalışmada; bilginin kalitesi, bilginin güvenilirliği, bilgi ihtiyacı ve bilgiye yönelik tutumun bilginin kullanışlılığı üzerindeki etkisi incelenmiş, bu etkinin tüketici satın alma niyeti üzerindeki etkisi de değerlendirilmiştir. 2x2 deneysel tasarımla gerçekleştirilen çalışmada, insan ve yapay zekâ kaynaklı öneriler ile deneyimsel ve araştırma ürünleri senaryoları karşılaştırılmıştır. Bulgular, bilgi kullanışlılığının tüm senaryolarda satın alma niyeti üzerinde anlamlı etkiler yarattığını göstermektedir. Bununla birlikte, deneyimsel ürünlerde insan kaynaklı önerilerin, araştırma ürünlerinde ise yapay zekâ önerilerinin daha etkili olduğu saptanmıştır. Bu sonuçlar, öneri kaynağı ile ürün türü arasındaki uyumun, tüketici karar süreçlerinde belirleyici bir faktör olduğunu göstermektedir.

Abstract

With the growing prevalence of artificial intelligence (AI)-based applications on digital platforms, many companies have begun to leverage AI not only for product promotion but also for managing customer relations more effectively. However, whether AI-based applications can fully replace human interactions remains uncertain and is widely regarded as an important issue that warrants comprehensive evaluation. Accordingly, this study aims to investigate the impact of information sourced from humans versus AI on consumers’ purchase intentions in digital contexts through a comparative approach. Drawing on the Information Adoption Model, this study investigated the impacts of information quality, information credibility, information need, and attitude toward information on perceived information usefulness. Additionally, the influence of information usefulness on consumers’ purchase intention was evaluated. Utilizing a 2×2 experimental design, the impacts of recommendation source (human vs. AI) and product type (experience vs. search goods) were analyzed. The findings reveal that perceived information usefulness significantly impacts purchase intention across all scenarios. Notably, human-generated recommendations are more effective for experience products, while AI-generated suggestions exert a stronger influence for search products. These results shows that the contextual fit between recommendation source and product type as a critical factor in shaping consumer decision-making processes.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Üstüner, S., Canoğlu, M., Yenilmez, G. (2026). Dijital Platformlarda İnsan ve Yapay Zekâ Kaynaklı Bilgi Güvenilirliğinin Tüketici Satın Alma Niyeti Üzerindeki Etkisi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 44 Sayı: 3, 852–879. https://doi.org/10.17065/huniibf.1795073

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (74)

  1. Abedi, E., Ghorbanzadeh, D., & Rahehagh, A. (2020). Influence of ewom information on consumers’ behavioral intentions in mobile social networks: Evidence of Iran. Journal of Advances in Management Research, 17(1), 84-109. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAMR-04-2019-0058
  2. Ahn, J., Kim, J., & Sung, Y. (2022). The effect of gender stereotypes on artificial intelligence recommendations. Journal of Business Research, 141, 50-59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.12.007
  3. Atılgan, K. Ö., & Tanişman, H. (2019). Deneyimsel ürünler ve araştırma ürünleri ile ilgili çevrimiçi tüketici yorumları ve referans fiyat bilgisinin tüketicilerin satın alma davranışları üzerindeki etkisi. İzmir İktisat Dergisi, 34(4), 545-563. https://doi.org/10.24988/ije.2019344887
  4. Bhattacherjee, A., & Sanford, C. (2006). Influence processes for information technology acceptance: An elaboration likelihood model. Management Information Systems Quarterly (MIS Quarterly), 30(4), 805-825. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148755
  5. Cacioppo, J., & Petty, R. (1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42(1), 116-131. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.42.1.116
  6. Camilleri, M. A., & Camilleri, A. C. (2024). The acceptance and usage of ChatGPT: An information adoption model perspective. 8th International Conference on Communications and Future Internet (ICCFI). Kagoshima-shi: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCFI63302.2024.00017
  7. Castelo, N., Bos, M. W., & Lehmann, D. R. (2019). Task-dependent algorithm aversion. Journal of Marketing Research, 56(5), 809-825. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022243719851788
  8. Cheng, Z., Shao, B., & Zhang, Y. (2022). Effect of product presentation videos on consumers' purchase intention: The role of perceived diagnosticity, mental imagery, and product rating. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.812579
  9. Chocarro, R., & Cortiñas, M. (2013). The impact of expert opinion in consumer perception of wines. International Journal of Wine Business Research, 25(3), 227-248. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJWBR-2012-0014
  10. Chu, S.-C., & Kim, Y. (2011). Determinants of consumer engagement in electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM) in social networking sites. International Journal of Advertising, 30(1), 47-75. https://doi.org/10.2501/IJA-30-1-047-075
  11. Coyle, J. R., & Thorson, E. (2001). The effects of progressive levels of interactivity and vividness in web marketing sites. Journal of Advertising, 30(3), 65-77. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2001.10673646
  12. Darby, M., & Karni, E. (1973). Free competition and the optimal amount of fraud. Journal of Law and Economics, 16(1), 67-88. https://doi.org/10.1086/466756
  13. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. Management Information Systems Quarterly (MIS Quarterly), 13(3), 319-340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
  14. Dinulescu, C. C., & Prybutok, V. R. (2021). In authority, or peers we trust? Reviews and recommendations in social commerce. Behaviour and Information Technology, 41(13), 2887-2904. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2021.1957016
  15. Dong, H., Park, K. K.-c., & Kim, J. M. (2025). The role of product type in online review generation and perception: Implications for consumer decision-making. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 20(2). https://doi.org/10.3390/jtaer20020135
  16. Erkan, İ. (2021). Bilgiyi benimseme modeli. M. İ. Yağcı, & S. Çabuk içinde, Pazarlama Teorileri 2 (s. 113-129). İstanbul: Kapital Medya Hizmetleri.
  17. Erkan, I., & Evans, C. (2016). The influence of eWOM in social media on consumers’ purchase intentions: An extended approach to information adoption. Computers in Human Behavior, 61, 47-55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.003
  18. Erkan, I., & Evans, C. (2018). Social media or shopping websites? The influence of eWOM on consumers’ online purchase intentions. Journal of Marketing Communications, 24(6), 617-632. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2016.1184706
  19. Filieri, R. (2015). What makes online reviews helpful? A diagnosticity-adoption framework to explain informational and normative influences in e-WOM. Journal of Business Research, 68(6), 1261-1270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.11.006
  20. Fisher, J., Burstein, F., Lynch, K., & Lazarenko, K. (2008). Usability + usefulness = trust: An exploratory study of Australian health web sites. Internet Research, 18(5), 477-498. https://doi.org/10.1108/10662240810912747
  21. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(3), 382-388. https://doi.org/10.2307/3150980
  22. Gallo, I., Townsend, C., & Alegre, I. (2019). Experiential product framing and its influence on the creation of consumer. Journal of Business Research, 98, 177-190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.01.007
  23. Gattupalli, K. S. (2025). Impact of information usefulness and credibility on green product purchases with product type as moderator. Discover Sustainability, 6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-025-01680-1
  24. Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., & Straub, D. (2003). Trust and TAM in online shopping: An integrated model. Management Information Systems Quarterly (MIS Quarterly), 27, 51-90. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036519
  25. Granulo, A., Fuchs, C., & Puntoni, S. (2021). Preference for Human (vs. Robotic) labor is stronger in symbolic consumption contexts. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 31(1), 72-80. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcpy.1181
  26. Gunawan, D. D., & Huarng, K.-H. (2015). Viral effects of social network and media on consumers’ purchase intention. Journal of Business Research, 68(11), 2237-2241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.06.004
  27. Gupta, V., & Yang, H. (2024). Generative artificial intelligence (AI) technology adoption model for entrepreneurs: Case of ChatGPT. Internet Reference Services Quarterly, 28(2), 2023-242. https://doi.org/10.1080/10875301.2023.2300114
  28. Hair, J. F., Black, J. W., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2014). Multivariate data analysis (7. b.). Edinburg, Scotland.: Pearson.
  29. Holthöwer, J., & van Doorn, J. (2023). Robots do not judge: Service robots can alleviate embarrassment in service encounters. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 51, 767-784. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-022-00862-x
  30. Indrawati, Yones, P. C., & Muthaiyah, S. (2022). eWOM via the TikTok application and its influence on the purchase intention of somethinc products. Asia Pacific Management Review, 28(2), 174-184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmrv.2022.07.007
  31. Inman, J., Leigh, M., & Hoyer, W. (1990). Promotion signal: Proxy for a price cut. Journal of Consumer Research, 17(1), 74-81. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2626826
  32. Ismagilova, E., Rana, N. P., Slade, E. L., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2021). A meta-analysis of the factors affecting eWOM providing behaviour. European Journal of Marketing, 55(4), 1067-112. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-07-2018-0472 Jan, I. U., Ji, S., & Kim, C. (2023). What (de) motivates customers to use AI-powered conversational agents for shopping? The extended behavioral reasoning perspective. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2023.103440
  33. Jin, J., Wang, A., Wang, C., & Ma, Q. (2023). How do consumers perceive and process online overall vs. individual text-based reviews? Behavioral and eye-tracking evidence. Information & Management, 60(5), 103795. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2023.103795
  34. Kim, J., Kim, J. H., Kim, C., & Park, J. (2023). Decisions with ChatGPT: Reexamining choice overload in ChatGPT recommendations. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2023.103494
  35. Kim, T. W., & Duhachek, A. (2020). Artificial intelligence and persuasion: A Construal-Level account. Psychological Science, 31(4), 363-380. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797620904985
  36. Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2. b.). The Guilford Press. Lee, G., & Kim, H.-Y. (2024). Human vs. AI: The battle for authenticity in fashion design and consumer response. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2023.103690
  37. Leong, L.-Y., Jaafar, N. I., & Sulaiman, A. (2018). What triggers impulse purchase in Facebook commerce? International Journal of Mobile Communications, 16(4), 459-492. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMC.2018.092679
  38. Li, S., Huang, X., Sheng, Y., & Chen, K. (2025). The interactive effect of recommendation subjects and message types on. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2024.104200
  39. Lim, W. M., Kumar, S., Verma, S., & Chaturvedi, R. (2022). Alexa, what do we know about conversational commerce? Insights from a systematic literature review. Psychology and Marketing, 39(6), 1129-1155. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21654
  40. Longoni, C., & Cian, L. (2020). Artificial intelligence in utilitarian vs. hedonic contexts: The “Word-of-Machine” effect. Journal of Marketing, 86(1), 91-108. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022242920957347 Mariani, M. M., Perez-Vega, R., & Wirtz, J. (2022). AI in marketing, consumer research and psychology: A systematic literature review and research agenda. Psychology and Marketing, 39(4), 755-776. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21619
  41. 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
  42. Mende, M., Scott, M. L., van Doorn, J., Grewal, D., & Shanks, I. (2019). Service robots rising: How humanoid robots influence service experiences and elicit compensatory consumer responses. Journal of Marketing Research, 56(4), 535-556. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022243718822827
  43. Mudambi, S. M., & Schuff, D. (2010). What makes a helpful online review? A study of customer reviews on Amazon.com. Management Information Systems Quarterly (MIS Quarterly), 34(1), 185-200. https://doi.org/10.2307/20721420
  44. Nakip, M., & Yaraş, E. (2017). Pazarlama araştırma teknikleri ve SPSS uygulamaları (4. b.). Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
  45. Nelson, P. (1970). Information and consumer behavior. Journal of Political Economy, 78(2), 311-329. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1830691
  46. Ngo, T. T., Vuong, B. L., Le, M. D., Nguyen, T. T., Tran, M. M., & Nguyen, Q. K. (2024). The impact of eWOM information in social media on the online purchase intention of Generation Z. Cogent Business & Management, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2024.2316933
  47. 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
  48. Petty, R., & Cacioppo, J. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 123-205. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60214-2
  49. Phung, M. T., Ly, P. T., Nguyen, T. T., & Nguyen-Thanh, N. (2020). An FsQCA investigation of eWOM and social influence on product adoption intention. Journal of Promotion Management, 26(5), 726-747. https://doi.org/10.1080/10496491.2020.1729318
  50. Ray, P. P. (2023). ChatGPT: A comprehensive review on background, applications, key challenges, bias, ethics, limitations and future scope. Internet of Things and Cyber-Physical Systems, 3, 121-154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iotcps.2023.04.003
  51. Ruan, Y., & Mezei, J. (2022). When do AI chatbots lead to higher customer satisfaction than human frontline employees in online shopping assistance? Considering product attribute type. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 68, 103059 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2022.103059
  52. Sardar, A., Manzoor, A., Shaikh, K. A., & Ali, L. (2021). An empirical examination of the impact of eWom information on young consumers’ online purchase intention: Mediating role of eWom information adoption. SAGE Open, 11(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211052547
  53. Secginli, S., Erdogan, S., & Monsen, K. (2014). Attitudes of health professionals towards electronic health records in primary health care settings: a questionnaire survey. Informatics for Health and Social Care, 39(1), 15-32. https://doi.org/10.3109/17538157.2013.834342
  54. Sen, S., & Lerman, D. (2007). Why are you telling me this? An examination into negative consumer reviews on the Web. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 21(4), 76-94. https://doi.org/10.1002/dir.20090 Senecal, S., & Nantel, J. (2004). The influence of online product recommendations on consumers’ online choices. Journal of Retailing, 80(2), 159-169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2004.04.001
  55. Shaw, N. (2024). A study of the factors influencing consumer behaviour. Global Research Journal of Social Sciences and Management, 2(1), 48-58. https://doi.org/10.55306/GRJSSM.2024.2105
  56. Shen, X.-L., Zhang, K. Z., & 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
  57. Shin, D. (2022). How do people judge the credibility of algorithmic sources? AI and Society (AI & Soc.), 37, 81-96. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-021-01158-4
  58. Shin, D., Zhong, B., & Biocca, F. A. (2020). Beyond user experience: What constitutes algorithmic experiences? International Journal of Information Management, 52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.102061
  59. Stokel-Walker, C., & Noorden, R. V. (2023). What ChatGPT and generative AI mean for science. Nature, 614(7947), 214-216. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-00340-6
  60. 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
  61. Tabachnick, B., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics. London: Pearson Education Limited.
  62. Trzebiński, W., Marciniak, B., & Kulczycka, E. (2023). Online recommenders' anthropomorphism improves user response to hedonic and benefit-based product appeals through the recommenders' perceived ability to learn. Public Library of Science One(PLoS One), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0287663
  63. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Towards a unified view. Management Information Systems Quarterly (MIS Quarterly), 27(3), 425-478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
  64. Wien, A. H., & Peluso, A. M. (2021). Influence of human versus AI recommenders: The roles of product type and cognitive processes. Journal of Business Research, 137, 13-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.08.016
  65. Xie, Z., Yu, Y., Zhang, J., & Chen, M. (2022). The searching artificial intelligence: Consumers show less aversion to algorithm-recommended search product. Psychology and Marketing, 39(10), 1902-1919. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21706
  66. Xu, J. (., Benbasat, I., & Cenfetelli, R. T. (2020). The relative effect of the convergence of product recommendations from various online sources. Journal of Management Information Systems, 37(3), 788-819. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2020.1790192
  67. Xu, L., & Mehta, R. (2022). Technology devalues luxury? Exploring consumer responses to AI-designed luxury products. Original Empirical Research, 50, 1135–1152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-022-00854-x
  68. Yang, Y., Zheng, J., Yu, Y., Qiu, Y., & Wang, L. (2024). The role of recommendation sources and attribute framing in online product recommendations. Journal of Business Research, 174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2024.114498
  69. Yeap, J. A., Ignatius, J., & Ramayah, T. (2014). Determining consumers’ most preferred eWOM platform for movie reviews: A fuzzy analytic hierarchy process approach. Computers in Human Behavior, 31, 250-258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.10.034
  70. Yoon, V. Y., Hostler, R. E., Guo, Z., & Guimaraes, T. (2013). Assessing the moderating effect of consumer product knowledge and online shopping experience on using recommendation agents for customer loyalty. Decision Support Systems, 55(4), 883-893. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2012.12.024
  71. Zhang, H., Zhao, L., & Gupta, S. (2018). The role of online product recommendations on customer decision making and loyalty in social shopping communities. International Journal of Information Management, 38(1), 150-166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2017.07.006
  72. Zhang, X. (2024). A study on consumer buying behavior from the perspective of behavioral economics: A case study based on the purchase of sneakers. Dean and Francis, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.61173/dbfc8016
  73. Zhu, Y., Zhang, J., & Wu, J. (2023). Who did what and when? The effect of chatbots’ service recovery on customer satisfaction and revisit intention. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology, 14(3), 416-429. https://doi.org/10.1108/JHTT-06-2021-0164
  74. Zhu, Z., Liu, J., & Dong, W. (2022). Factors correlated with the perceived usefulness of online reviews for consumers: a meta-analysis of the moderating effects of product type. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 74(2), 265-288. https://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-02-2021-0054