Google Gemini favors non-OTA sources for experiential hotel queries far more than for transactional ones, widening the discovery path beyond commission-driven intermediaries; the effect is stronger in Japanese than in English.

Main Finding

Generative AI search (Google Gemini 2.5 Flash with Search grounding) exhibits an "Intent‑Source Divide" in hotel discovery: when queries are framed experientially (information/seeking) the model cites non-OTA sources far more often than when queries are framed transactionally (booking/price oriented). Across 156 paired queries in Tokyo (English and Japanese) and 1,357 grounding citations, experiential queries produced 55.9% non‑OTA citations vs. 30.8% for transactional queries — a 25.1 percentage‑point gap (χ2(1)=84.23, p≈4.4×10−20; unadjusted OR=2.84; adjusted OR≈2.95).

Key Points

• Intent-Source Divide: Experiential framing nearly triples the odds that Gemini cites non‑OTA sources relative to transactional framing (adjusted OR ≈ 2.95, 95% CI [2.34, 3.71], p<0.001). The effect holds across query categories and in query-weighted robustness checks.
• Language amplification: The effect is stronger in Japanese. Japanese experiential queries: 62.1% non‑OTA citations; English transactional queries: 31.8% non‑OTA. The interaction experiential×Japanese is significant (OR=1.77, p=0.015).
• Source composition differs by language:
  • English non‑OTA citations are dominated by travel blogs (22.9%) and editorial curation (22.5%).
  • Japanese non‑OTA citations are more diverse: hotel direct sites (23.6%), travel agency sites (12.9%), coworking/workspace platforms (8.3%), etc.
• Hotel‑direct citations: Not strongly driven by intent within a language. Cross‑linguistically, Japanese queries are more likely to produce any hotel‑direct citation (query‑level OR=2.27, 95% CI [1.08, 4.75], p=0.03). Aggregate hotel‑direct share: ~11.0% (JP) vs ~8.2% (EN).
• Category heterogeneity:
  • Budget transactional queries show the lowest non‑OTA share (15.5%), consistent with OTAs' price‑comparison advantage.
  • Business experiential queries show the highest non‑OTA share (68.5%) and largest absolute gap (28.4 pp), driven by niche content (coworking reviews, workspace info).
  • All four category gaps (Budget, Rating/Quality, Business, Convenience) are significant after Bonferroni correction.
• Data reliability/limitations flagged by authors: grounding output non‑deterministic (stratified re‑runs for a subset; ICC=0.656); citations clustered within queries so citation‑level inference should be interpreted cautiously; study limited to Tokyo and one model/version.

Data & Methods

• Corpus: 156 paired queries (transactional vs experiential), executed in both English and Japanese:
  • Design: 4 traveler need categories (Budget, Rating/Quality, Convenience, Business) × 9 Tokyo wards × 2 intents × 2 languages = 144 area‑level queries, plus 12 city‑level queries = 156 total.
  • Paired design isolates intent while holding topic, geography, and language constant.
• Execution: Queries run on Gemini 2.5 Flash with Google Search grounding (March 2026). Each query executed once; 20 queries re‑run 5 times for test‑retest checks.
• Outputs: 1,357 grounding citations extracted (mean 8.7 citations/query, range 2–32).
• Classification:
  • Sources labeled OTA vs non‑OTA; non‑OTA further subdivided into 9 subtypes (hotel direct, editorial curation, travel blog, travel media, local tourism, coworking/workspace, travel agency, user‑generated content, accommodation platform).
  • Hotel names extracted and classified into tiers (international chain, domestic chain, independent) using brand occurrence thresholds.
• Statistical analysis:
  • Chi‑square tests, odds ratios with 95% CIs, Cramer's V.
  • Logistic regression at citation level; quasibinomial model at query level to account for clustering.
  • Mann–Whitney U for query‑weighted checks; controls for language and query category; robustness checks for query length and lexical richness.
• Key quantitative results: Overall OTA share = 55.3% (751/1,357). Non‑OTA share: experiential 55.9% (419/750) vs transactional 30.8% (187/607). Japanese experiential non‑OTA = 62.1% (364 citations), English experiential non‑OTA = 50.0% (386 citations).

Implications for AI Economics

• Redistribution of discovery power: AI search citation behavior can erode the exclusivity of OTA‑controlled discovery when users ask experiential questions. That suggests a potential reduction in the "rented discovery" economic model (commission fees paid to OTAs) if discovery increasingly routes users to hotel‑owned pages or other non‑commissioned sources.
• Importance of content, not just placement: Because AI grounding appears to match content to information need, hotels and local platforms that produce rich, experience‑oriented content (in relevant languages) gain visibility without paying commissions. Investments in hotel‑owned content, localized SEO, and experience narratives may become higher‑return marketing.
• Market and language asymmetries matter: Outcomes vary by language/market ecosystem. In markets with dense domestic content and diverse non‑OTA actors (e.g., Japan), hotels and local platforms stand to gain more. Global strategies must be localized—English content alone may not capture AI‑driven discovery in non‑English markets.
• Strategic responses by incumbents:
  • OTAs may optimize content for GEO (generative engine optimization), create richer experiential content, or pursue paid placements / API integrations with AI vendors to retain discovery rents.
  • Hotels may prioritize multilingual, experience‑focused content, partnerships with local travel agencies/media, and structured data that aids grounding.
• Limits to conversion effects: Citation source ≠ booking outcome. Non‑OTA citations include editorial and blog content that may inspire consideration but not directly convert. Economic impact depends on downstream conversion; future work should measure bookings and revenue attribution.
• Platform economics and competition policy:
  • If AI search reconfigures discovery channels, commission market structure and bargaining leverage between hotels and OTAs may shift, potentially lowering intermediaries' margins but also risking new concentration among a small set of widely cited non‑OTA publishers.
  • Policymakers and platforms should monitor transparency of grounding signals and equitable access to citation opportunities (so small properties are not excluded).
• Research agenda: Replicate across other cities and languages, test other AI models/versions and grounding providers, measure booking/monetization outcomes, and evaluate dynamic responses by OTAs and hotels (pricing, content investment, contractual changes).

Overall, the paper provides empirical evidence that query intent and language‑specific content ecosystems shape which sources generative search engines cite, with practical consequences for who captures the discovery moment in hospitality markets and for the economics of intermediated vs. direct distribution.