AI搜索让酒店直接触达用户，削弱了预订平台的垄断地位。
The End of Rented Discovery: How AI Search Redistributes Power Between Hotels and Intermediaries
- 通过分析156个东京酒店查询，发现体验型提问更倾向引用非OTA来源。
- 体验型查询中非OTA引用率达55.9%，远高于交易型查询的30.8%。
- 日语查询下差异更大，凸显日本非OTA内容生态更丰富。
当旅行者向AI搜索引擎查询酒店推荐时，哪些信息源被引用？查询方式是否影响结果？我们对Google Gemini在东京156个酒店查询中生成的1,357条引用来源进行审计，发现一种系统性模式，称为意图-来源分歧。体验型查询中，55.9%的引用来自非OTA渠道，而交易型查询仅为30.8%，差距达25.1个百分点（p < 5 × 10⁻²⁰）。该效应在日本语查询中更为明显：体验型查询非OTA引用率达62.1%，英语查询为50.0%，反映出日本非OTA内容生态更丰富。这一模式对长期依赖佣金制中介获取流量的酒店业具有重要意义，表明AI搜索可能使酒店发现不再完全受控于基于佣金的中间商。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
When a traveler asks an AI search engine to recommend a hotel, which sources get cited -- and does query framing matter? We audit 1,357 grounding citations from Google Gemini across 156 hotel queries in Tokyo and document a systematic pattern we call the Intent-Source Divide. Experiential queries draw 55.9% of their citations from non-OTA sources, compared to 30.8% for transactional queries -- a 25.1 percentage-point gap ($p < 5 \times 10^{-20}$). The effect is amplified in Japanese, where experiential queries draw 62.1% non-OTA citations compared to 50.0% in English -- consistent with a more diverse Japanese non-OTA content ecosystem. For an industry in which hotels have long paid OTAs for demand acquisition, this pattern matters because it suggests that AI search may make hotel discovery less exclusively controlled by commission-based intermediaries.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品；中文卡片由大模型生成，请以原文为准。