Exploring the Role of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Tourism Information Search Behavior

Öz

Artificial intelligence applications have been adopted in numerous domains. Existing studies have yet to sufficiently address how generative artificial intelligence is used in tourism information search process. This research introduces a conceptual model examining the relationships among hedonic motivation, perceived usefulness, satisfaction, and behavioral intentions. The data were collected via a survey from 358 university students selected using convenience sampling, and PLS-SEM was used for the analysis. All hypothesized relationships were supported with the exception of the relationship between hedonic motivation and behavioral intention. The results of the study highlight the significant role of generative artificial intelligence, such as ChatGPT, in students’ tourism information search behavior. Both utilitarian and hedonic factors positively influence university students’ adoption of ChatGPT for the purpose of seeking tourism information. While hedonic motivation significantly predicts perceived usefulness and satisfaction it has no significant effect on behavioral intentions. Also perceived usefulness is a key antecedent of satisfaction and behavioral intention. This study extends the technology and tourism literature by examining how generative artificial intelligence is utilized in tourism information search behavior.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Generative Artificial Intelligence
• ChatGPT
• Tourism Information Search Behavior
• Hedonic Motivation
• Perceived Usefulness

Etik Beyan

Ethics committee approval for this study was obtained from the Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Committee of Mardin Artuklu University on December 22, 2025, under number 232833.

Turizm Bilgisi Arama Davranışında Üretken Yapay Zekanın Rolünün İncelenmesi

Öz

Yapay zekâ uygulamaları birçok alanda benimsenmiştir. Mevcut çalışmalar, üretken yapay zekânın turizm bilgi arama sürecinde nasıl kullanıldığını henüz yeterince ele almamıştır. Bu araştırma hedonik motivasyon, algılanan fayda, memnuniyet ve davranışsal niyet arasındaki ilişkileri inceleyen kavramsal bir model sunmaktadır. Araştırmanın verileri, kolayda örnekleme yöntemiyle belirlenen 358 üniversite öğrencisinden anket tekniği kullanılarak toplanmış ve analiz için PLS-SEM kullanılmıştır. Araştırma bulgularına göre hedonik motivasyon ile davranışsal niyet arasındaki ilişki hariç olmak üzere, varsayılan tüm ilişkiler desteklenmiştir. Çalışmanın sonuçları, ChatGPT gibi üretken yapay zekâ uygulamalarının üniversite öğrencilerinin turizm bilgisi arama davranışında önemli bir rol oynadığını ortaya koymaktadır. Hem faydacı hem hedonik faktörler, üniversite öğrencilerinin turizm bilgisi aramak amacıyla ChatGPT’yi benimsemesinde etkili olmaktadır. Hedonik motivasyon, algılanan fayda ve memnuniyeti önemli ölçüde etkilese de davranışsal niyetler üzerinde anlamlı bir etkisi yoktur. Algılanan fayda, memnuniyet ve davranışsal niyetler üzerinde anlamlı ve olumlu bir etkiye sahiptir. Ayrıca algılanan fayda, memnuniyet ve davranışsal niyetin temel öncülüdür. Bu çalışma, ChatGPT’nin turizm bilgi arama sürecinde nasıl kullanıldığını inceleyerek teknoloji ve turizm literatürüne katkı sağlamaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Üretken Yapay Zekâ
• ChatGPT
• Turizm Bilgi Arama Davranışı
• Hedonik motivasyon
• Algılanan Fayda

Etik Beyan

Bu çalışma için Mardin Artuklu Üniversitesi Bilimsel Araştırmalar ve Yayın Etiği Kurulu'ndan 22 Aralık 2025 tarih ve 232833 sayısıyla etik kurul onayı alınmıştır

Kaynakça

1. Abou-Shouk, M., Abdelhakim, A. S., Elgarhy, S. D., Rabea, A., & Abdulmawla, M. (2026). ChatGPT usage intention for tourism and hospitality customers. Tourism Recreation Research, 51(2), 533–550.
2. Açıksözlü, Ö. (2026). Turizm sektöründe robotların kullanımı: Sosyal etkilerin uygulama istekliliğine etkisi. Seyahat ve Otel İşletmeciliği Dergisi, (Advanced Online Publication), 134–154. https://doi.org/10.24010/soid.1832278
3. Al-Azawei, A., & Alowayr, A. (2020). Predicting the intention to use and hedonic motivation for mobile learning: A comparative study in two Middle Eastern countries. Technology in Society, 62, 101325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101325
4. Al-Rawashda, A. Z., Bouakaz, L., & Al-Arab, A. R. (2026). Degree of university students’ awareness of using artificial intelligence applications (ChatGPT) in the educational process in the UAE. Contemporary Educational Technology, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/17954
5. Alizadeh, H., & Nazarpour Kashani, H. (2025). The impact of perceived experience with ChatGPT on online consumers' information searching behavior: an empirical study of Iranian college students. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 37(4), 1007–1028. https://doi.org/10.1108/APJML-02-2024-0140
6. Alshammari, S. H., & Babu, E. (2025). The mediating role of satisfaction in the relationship between perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and students’ behavioural intention to use ChatGPT. Scientific Reports, 15(1), 7169. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-91634-4
7. Anand, T., Ramachandran, J., Sambasivan, M., & Batra, G. S. (2019). Impact of hedonic motivation on consumer satisfaction towards online shopping: Evidence from Malaysia. E-Service Journal, 11(1), 56–88. https://doi.org/10.2979/eservicej.11.1.03
8. Aslan, A. (2025). ChatGPT’nin seyahat önerilerine duyulan güvenin gezginlerin davranışsal niyetine etkisi: algılanan riskin aracılık rolü. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 69, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.30794/pausbed.1559251

9. Apak, Ö. C. (2025). ChatGPT’yi yöresel yiyecek danışmanı olarak kullanma niyeti: Algılanan kullanım kolaylığı, kullanışlılık ve güvenin rolü. Journal of Global Tourism and Technology Research, 6(2), 106–115. https://doi.org/10.54493/jgttr.1767778
10. Bendary, N., & Al-Sahouly, I. (2018). Exploring the extension of unified theory of acceptance and use of technology, UTAUT2, factors effect on perceived usefulness and ease of use on mobile commerce in Egypt. Journal of Business and Retail Management Research, 12(2). https://doi.org/10.24052/JBRMR/V12IS02
11. Bayhan, M., & Sarıışık, M. (2026). Akıllı turizm teknolojilerinin teknoloji deneyimi memnuniyeti, seyahat deneyimi memnuniyeti ve davranışsal niyetlere etkisi. İşletme Bilimi Dergisi, (Advanced Online Publication), 169–188. https://doi.org/10.22139/jobs.1678284
12. Biloš, A., & Budimir, B. (2024). Understanding the adoption dynamics of ChatGPT among generation Z: Insights from a modified UTAUT2 model. Journal of theoretical and applied electronic commerce research, 19(2), 863–879. https://doi.org/10.3390/jtaer19020045
13. Buhalis, D. (1998). Strategic use of information technologies in the tourism industry. Tourism management, 19(5), 409–421. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0261-5177(98)00038-7
14. Chen, C., & Wei, Z. (2024). Role of Artificial Intelligence in travel decision making and tourism product selling. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 29(3), 239–253. https://doi.org/10.1080/10941665.2024.2317390
15. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. (2nd ed.). Routledge.
16. Cox, C., Burgess, S., Sellitto, C., & Buultjens, J. (2009). The role of user-generated content in tourists' travel planning behavior. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & management, 18(8), 743–764. https://doi.org/10.1080/19368620903235753
17. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
18. De Vreede, T., Raghavan, M., & De Vreede, G. J. (2021). Design foundations for AI assisted decision making: A self determination theory approach. Proceedings of the 54th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 166–175). Hamilton Library. https://doi.org/10.24251/HICSS.2021.019
19. Dinç, H., Gürbüz, B., Dursun, M. T., Argan, M., Tokay Argan, M. & Koçak, F. (2026). Adoption of ChatGPT for travel: An integrated model of the extended technology acceptance model, the theory of planned behaviour and word of mouth. Tourism: An International Interdisciplinary Journal, 74(2), 176–191. https://doi.org/10.37741/t.74.2.1
20. Erdős, F., Thinakaran, R., Firuza, B., & Koloszár, L. (2025). The rise of AI in tourism- a systematic literature review. GeoJournal of Tourism & Geosites, 60. https://doi.org/10.30892/gtg.602spl22-1498
21. Fodness, D., & Murray, B. (1997). Tourist information search. Annals of tourism research, 24(3), 503–523. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-7383(97)00009-1
22. Fotis, J., Buhalis, D., & Rossides, N. (2012). Social media use and impact during the holiday travel planning process. In Information and communication technologies in tourism 2012 (pp. 13–24). Springer, Vienna. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7091-1142-0_2
23. Gursoy, D., & McCleary, K. W. (2004). Travelers’ prior knowledge and its impact on their information search behavior. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 28(1), 66–94. https://doi.org/10.1177/1096348003261218
24. Gürkan, A. S. (2026). Turizm ve yapay zeka ilişkisi: ChatGPT’nin seyahat kararlarına yönelik etkisi. Uluslararası İktisadi ve İdari İncelemeler Dergisi, 50, 179–198.
25. Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., Danks, N. P., & Ray, S. (2021). Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) using R: A workbook. Springer International Publishing.
26. Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European business review, 31(1), 2–24. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203
27. Hair, J., & Alamer, A. (2022). Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) in second language and education research: Guidelines using an applied example. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics, 1(3), 100027. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmal.2022.100027
28. Henseler, J., Hubona, G., & Ray, P. A. (2016). Using PLS path modeling in new technology research: updated guidelines. Industrial management & data systems, 116(1), 2–20. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-09-2015-0382
29. Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the academy of marketing science, 43(1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
30. Hlee, S., Yan, Z., & Li, P. (2025). AI-powered travel recommendations and decision-making: The role of spatio-temporal efficiency, destination type, and travel party composition. Electronic Markets, 35(1), 75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-025-00825-4
31. Ho, C. I., Lin, M. H., & Chen, H. M. (2012). Web users’ behavioural patterns of tourism information search: From online to offline. Tourism Management, 33(6), 1468–1482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2012.01.016
32. Hwang, Y., Gretzel, U., Xiang, Z., & Fesenmaier, D. R. (2006). Information search for travel decisions. Destination recommendation systems: Behavioral foundations and applications, 42(4), 357–371. https://doi.org/10.1079/9780851990231.0003
33. Ilieva, G., Yankova, T., & Klisarova-Belcheva, S. (2024). Effects of generative AI in tourism industry. Information, 15(11), 671. https://doi.org/10.3390/info15110671
34. Jin, J. H., & Lee, J. H. (2024). Impact of ChatGPT service quality on the intention of generation Z to continue using it for tourism information search. Asia-pacific Journal of Convergent Research Interchange, 10, 223–233. https://doi.org/10.47116/apjcri.2024.10.16
35. Kang, S., Jodice, L. W., & Norman, W. C. (2020). How do tourists search for tourism information via smartphone before and during their trip? Tourism Recreation Research, 45(1), 57–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/02508281.2019.1627076
36. Kayışkan, D. (2025). Yapay zeka tabanlı pazar araştırması ve tüketici davranışı analizi [Artificial intelligence-based market research and consumer behavior analysis]. In H. Karadal & V. Kahya (Eds.), Girişimcilik ekosistemi ve yapay zeka: Yeni nesil inovasyon ve iş modelleri (pp. 115–130). Ankara, Turkey: Gazi Kitabevi.
37. Kock, N. (2015). Common method bias in PLS-SEM: A full collinearity assessment approach. International Journal of e-Collaboration, 11(4), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijec.2015100101
38. Kock, N., & Hadaya, P. (2018). Minimum sample size estimation in PLS‐SEM: The inverse square root and gamma‐exponential methods. Information Systems Journal, 28(1), 227–261. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12131
39. Koo, I., Zaman, U., Ha, H., & Nawaz, S. (2025). Assessing the interplay of trust dynamics, personalization, ethical AI practices, and tourist behavior in the adoption of AI-driven smart tourism technologies. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 11(1), 100455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joitmc.2024.100455
40. Kotler, P., & Keller, K. L. (2009). Marketing management. Prentice-Hall
41. Lee, J. C., Tang, Y., & Jiang, S. (2023). Understanding continuance intention of artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled mobile banking applications: an extension of AI characteristics to an expectation confirmation model. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 10(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems11090438
42. Li, H., & Aral, S. (2025). Human trust in AI search: A large-scale experiment. arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.06435. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2504.06435
43. Liu, Y. L., Hu, B., Yan, W., & Lin, Z. (2023). Can chatbots satisfy me? A mixed-method comparative study of satisfaction with task-oriented chatbots in mainland China and Hong Kong. Computers in Human Behavior, 143, 107716. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2023.107716
44. Lowry, P. B., Gaskin, J., Twyman, N., Hammer, B., & Roberts, T. (2013). Taking ‘fun and games’ seriously: Proposing the hedonic-motivation system adoption model (HMSAM). Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 14(11), 617–671. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00347
45. Ma, J., Wang, P., Li, B., Wang, T., Pang, X. S., & Wang, D. (2025). Exploring user adoption of ChatGPT: A technology acceptance model perspective. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 41(2), 1431–1445. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2024.2314358
46. Meng, C. K., Wijaya, L., Lasian, L., Lestari, M. I., Wahono, J. W., & Anisa, N. N. (2025, August). Understanding ChatGPT Adoption in Manila Universities: A UTAUT2 Approach on Hedonic Motivation and Habitual Use. In 2025 International Conference on Information Management and Technology (ICIMTech) (pp. 193–198). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICIMTech67074.2025.11265225
47. Mohd Amir, R. I., Mohd, I. H., Saad, S., Abu Seman, S. A., & Tuan Besar, T. B. H. (2020, July). Perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, and behavioral intention: the acceptance of crowdsourcing platform by using technology acceptance model (TAM). In Charting a Sustainable Future of ASEAN in Business and Social Sciences: Proceedings of the 3ʳᵈ International Conference on the Future of ASEAN (ICoFA) 2019—Volume 1 (pp. 403–410). Singapore: Springer Singapore.
48. Murugesan, S., Sivakumaran, B., Sharma, P., & Ganesan, L. (2025). Artificial intelligence and consumer information search: a review, synthesis, and propositions. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 73, 1100–1115. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2025.3648018
49. Oliver, R. L. (2010). Satisfaction: A behavioral perspective on the consumer. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315700892
50. OpenAI. (2025). How people are using ChatGPT. Retrieved May 12, 2026, from https://openai.com/index/how-people-are-using-chatgpt/
51. Orden-Mejía, M., Carvache-Franco, M., Huertas, A., Carvache-Franco, O., & Carvache-Franco, W. (2025). Analysing how AI-powered chatbots influence destination decisions. PLOS ONE, 20(3), e0319463. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0319463
52. Pagnanelli, M. A., Colamatteo, A., Cassia, F., & Sansone, M. (2025). Unveiling user intentions: an integrated analysis of hedonic motivation and service quality in e-grocery technology acceptance. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 42(7), 1933–1950 https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM-02-2024-0062
53. Palos-Sanchez, P., Saura, J. R., & Correia, M. B. (2021). Do tourism applications’ quality and user experience influence its acceptance by tourists? Review of Managerial Science, 15(5), 1205–1241. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-020-00396-y
54. Peter, P. J., & Olson, J. C. (2010). Consumer behavior and marketing strategy. Homewood, IL, itd: Irwin.
55. Pratt, M., Boudhane, M., Taskin, N., & Cakula, S. (2020). Use of AI for improving employee motivation and satisfaction. In International Conference on Interactive Collaborative Learning (pp. 289–299). Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-68201-9_30
56. Prayag, G. (2009). Tourists’ evaluations of destination image, satisfaction, and future behavioral intentions—the case of Mauritius. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 26(8), 836–853. https://doi.org/10.1080/10548400903358729
57. Qu, K., & Wu, X. (2024). ChatGPT as a CALL tool in language education: A study of hedonic motivation adoption models in English learning environments. Education and Information Technologies, 29(15), 19471–19503. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12598-y
58. Ramesh, D. (2023). The impact of artificial intelligence in the present world. Journal of Artificial Intelligence & Machine Learning and Neural Network, 3(2), 60–64. https://doi.org/10.55529/jaimlnn.35.9.13
59. Romero-Rodríguez, J. M., Ramírez-Montoya, M. S., Buenestado-Fernández, M., & Lara-Lara, F. (2023). Use of ChatGPT at university as a tool for complex thinking: Students’ perceived usefulness. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 12(2), 323–339. https://doi.org/10.7821/naer.2023.7.1458
60. Sithipolvanichgul, J., Chen, C., Land, J., & Ractham, P. (2021). Enhancing user experiences with cloud computing via improving utilitarian and hedonic factors. Energies, 14(7), 1822. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14071822
61. Stankov, U., Gretzel, U., & Vujičić, M. D. (2025). AI-powered smartphones and phygital tourism experiences: implications and future research directions. Information Technology & Tourism, 27(2), 307–316. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40558-025-00317-3
62. Suasapha, A. H. (2025). Will generation z use ChatGPT for tourism recommendations. Tourism and Hospitality Management, 31(3), I–IX. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:278845538
63. Tamilmani, K., Rana, N. P., Prakasam, N., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2019). The battle of Brain vs. Heart: A literature review and meta-analysis of “hedonic motivation” use in UTAUT2. International Journal of Information Management, 46, 222–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.01.008
64. Türkeş, M. C., Stăncioiu, A. F., & Bănacu, C. S. (2024). The intention to use ChatGPT in office work in Romania: Between utility and hedonic motivation. Amfiteatru Economic, 26(67), 783–800. https://doi.org/10.24818/EA/2024/67/783
65. Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 157–178. https://doi.org/10.2307/41410412
66. Wilson, N., Keni, K., & Tan, P. H. P. (2021). The role of perceived usefulness and perceived ease-of-use toward satisfaction and trust which influence computer consumers' loyalty in China. Gadjah Mada International Journal of Business, 23(3), 262–294. https://doi.org/10.22146/gamaijb.32106
67. Xiang, Z., & Gretzel, U. (2010). Role of social media in online travel information search. Tourism Management, 31(2), 179–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2009.02.016
68. Xiang, Z., Magnini, V. P., & Fesenmaier, D. R. (2015). Information technology and consumer behavior in travel and tourism: Insights from travel planning using the internet. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 22, 244–249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2014.08.005
69. Yoo, C., Kwon, S., Na, H., & Chang, B. (2017). Factors affecting the adoption of gamified smart tourism applications: An integrative approach. Sustainability, 9(12), 2162. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9122162
70. Yoon, Y., & Uysal, M. (2005). An examination of the effects of motivation and satisfaction on destination loyalty: a structural model. Tourism Management, 26(1), 45–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2003.08.016
71. Yoon, T. H., & Wang, S. (2023). Examining Users' Intention to Use Generative Artificial Intelligence for Travel Information Search: An Exploratory Study of ChatGPT. Journal of Tourism Studies, 35(4), 197–221. https://doi.org/10.21581/jts.2023.11.35.4.197
72. Yu, C., Yan, J., & Cai, N. (2024). ChatGPT in higher education: factors influencing ChatGPT user satisfaction and continued use intention. In Frontiers in Education (Vol. 9, p. 1354929). Frontiers Media SA. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1354929
73. Yu, W. (2025). The Use of Artificial Intelligence: Exploring using motivations, involvement, and satisfaction with the case of Alexa. Journalism and Media, 6(2), 82. https://doi.org/10.3390/journalmedia6020082
74. Zhu, C. Z. G., Hall, C. M., Fong, L. H. N., Lin, F., & Naderi Koupaei, S. (2024). Examining the effects of ChatGPT on tourism and hospitality student responses through integrating technology acceptance model. International Journal of Tourism Research, 26(4), e2727. https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.2727
75. Zogheib, S., & Zogheib, B. (2024). Understanding University Students' Adoption of ChatGPT: Insights from TAM, SDT, and Beyond. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research 23, 25. https://doi.org/10.28945/5377