The exact text we saved

This is the version exactly as it was saved, character for character. The SHA-256 hash below is a 64-character code worked out from that text. Run the same text through SHA-256 and you get the same code; change a single letter and the code comes out completely different. Each version also stores the previous version’s hash, which chains them together so no version can be swapped out quietly.

TRUVACE RECORD VERSION
record: TRV-2026-2662
version: 1
kind: certified
reason: Certified into the record
timestamp: 2026-11-12T16:57:54.325645Z
status: published
lens: p_space
sector: lifestyle
headline: Artificial intelligence in digital tourism: evidence from an experimental study of consumer decision-making
dek: Introduction This study examines how different digital environments influence user experience and consumer behavior when selecting accommodation in tourism, comparing Booking, ChatGPT, and general internet search. Methods A controlled experiment was conducted with 165 participants from Croatia, Serbia, and Bosnia and Herzegovina. User experience was assessed through pragmatic and hedonic dimensions, while decision-making outcomes included booking likelihood and perceived simplicity. Results Significant differenc…
gain_title: (none)
problem_title: In a controlled experiment with 165 people choosing a hotel in Graz, Booking.com users rated their experience and booking likelihood significantly higher than web-search users, while ChatGPT users did not differ significantly from either group and did not surpass Booking.
trace_subject: (none)
gain_reading: (none)
gain_evidence: (none)
problem_reading: In a controlled experiment with 165 people choosing a hotel in Graz, Booking.com users rated their experience and booking likelihood significantly higher than web-search users, while ChatGPT users did not differ significantly from either group and did not surpass Booking.
problem_evidence: ChatGPT achieved results comparable to Booking but did not surpass it. | the ChatGPT group did not differ significantly from the other two groups
quick_read: A controlled experiment run in April 2026 with 165 participants from Croatia, Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina compared three ways of choosing accommodation: Booking.com, ChatGPT and general internet search. Booking users scored significantly higher than web-search users on pragmatic user experience (1.84 vs 1.03), booking likelihood (5.52 vs 4.80) and perceived simplicity (6.40 vs 5.28).

ChatGPT users landed in between on all three measures (1.62, 5.15 and 5.90) and did not differ significantly from either of the other groups. The authors read this as AI being a useful complement to booking platforms rather than a replacement.

Price and decision time were similar in every group. Chosen stays averaged €203.70 with Booking, €214.42 with ChatGPT and €217.68 with web search, and decisions took roughly 211 to 223 seconds. The authors say the effects were small to moderate and that the results reflect the technology available when the experiment was run.
limitation: ChatGPT was compared with Booking.com without live availability, verified reservations or booking functions, and the sample was mostly young adults, so the comparison is not between equivalent services and may not generalise.
tag: Evidence-backed problem
key_points: Participants were split into three groups: Booking.com (67 people), ChatGPT (48) and general internet search (50). Each person used only one tool. | The task was to pick lodging in Graz, Austria, for two nights with a budget of €300 for two people, within about 3 km of the city centre, in at most 15 minutes. | Pragmatic user experience differed significantly across groups (F = 5.90, ω² = 0.056); only the Booking vs web-search gap was significant. | Hedonic (enjoyment) experience did not differ significantly, although ChatGPT had the highest mean (1.22 vs 0.76 for Booking and 0.77 for web search). | Perceived simplicity showed the largest gap (F = 12.91, ω² = 0.126): Booking 6.40, ChatGPT 5.90, web search 5.28. | Self-rated likelihood of booking the chosen stay was 5.52 for Booking, 5.15 for ChatGPT and 4.80 for web search; only Booking vs web search was significant. | In an exploratory analysis, older participants rated ChatGPT as more pragmatic, and the link from ease of use to booking likelihood via pragmatic quality held for women only with ChatGPT.
rundown: Participants averaged 24.72 years old (range 19 to 54); 83 were men and 82 were women. They came from Croatia (68), Serbia (55) and Bosnia and Herzegovina (40). Experimenters supervised sessions and read standardized instructions. Participants were told to imagine a short business trip, and ChatGPT users could not open external links the tool suggested.

User experience was measured with the short User Experience Questionnaire, which covers pragmatic quality (efficiency and usability) and hedonic quality (enjoyment). Group differences were tested with one-way ANOVA and post hoc comparisons. Booking beat web search on pragmatic quality, simplicity and booking likelihood, and no other pairwise comparison reached significance.

Objective outcomes barely moved. Price (F = 1.00) and decision time (F = 0.08) did not differ between tools, so the differences were in how easy and trustworthy the process felt, not in what people chose or how fast.

The authors say ChatGPT was the weaker contender partly because, unlike Booking.com, it offered no live availability, real-time prices, verified reservation data or booking function during the experiment. They suggest AI conversation features may work best inside established booking platforms.
sources:
- peer_reviewed | Frontiers in Sustainable Tourism | https://doi.org/10.3389/frsut.2026.1924194 | 2026-08-26
prev: 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

SHA-256 hash

284a6db372c3eac82b9b01024f00113db0d1d835d24e70e206132b946ccd3775

Previous version’s hash

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000