IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jscscx/v14y2025i8p454-d1708952.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fake News in Tourism: A Systematic Literature Review

Author

Listed:
  • Fanni Kaszás

    (Doctoral School of Regional and Business Administration Sciences, Széchenyi István University, Egyetem tér 1., 9026 Győr, Hungary)

  • Soňa Chovanová Supeková

    (Faculty of Media, Pan-European University, Tomášikova 20, 821 02 Bratislava, Slovakia)

  • Richard Keklak

    (Faculty of Media, Pan-European University, Tomášikova 20, 821 02 Bratislava, Slovakia)

Abstract

In recent years, the number of fake news stories has significantly increased in the world of media, especially with the widespread use of social media. It has impacted several industries, including tourism. From a tourism point of view, the spread of fake news can contribute to the reduction of the popularity of a destination. It may influence travel decisions by discouraging tourists from visiting certain places and thus damage the reputation of the destination, contributing to economic loss. After a literature review on the communication aspect of fake news and a general introduction of fake news in the tourism and hospitality industry, we conducted a systematic literature review (SLR), a research methodology to collect, identify, and analyse available research studies through a systematic procedure. The current SLR is based on the Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases of existing literature on the topic of fake news in the tourism and hospitality industry. The study identifies, lists, and examines existing papers and conference proceedings from a vast array of disciplines, in order to give a well-rounded view on the issue of fake news in the tourism and hospitality industry. After selecting a total of 54 previous studies from more than 20 thousand results for the keywords ‘fake news’ and ‘tourism,’ we have analysed 39 papers in total. The SLR aimed to highlight existing gaps in the literature and areas that may require further exploration in future primary research. We have found that there is relatively limited academic literature available on the subject of fake news affecting tourism destinations, compared to studies focused on hospitality services.

Suggested Citation

  • Fanni Kaszás & Soňa Chovanová Supeková & Richard Keklak, 2025. "Fake News in Tourism: A Systematic Literature Review," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-34, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jscscx:v:14:y:2025:i:8:p:454-:d:1708952
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/14/8/454/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/14/8/454/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Theodoros Lappas & Gaurav Sabnis & Georgios Valkanas, 2016. "The Impact of Fake Reviews on Online Visibility: A Vulnerability Assessment of the Hotel Industry," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 940-961, December.
    2. Gordon Pennycook & Adam Bear & Evan T. Collins & David G. Rand, 2020. "The Implied Truth Effect: Attaching Warnings to a Subset of Fake News Headlines Increases Perceived Accuracy of Headlines Without Warnings," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(11), pages 4944-4957, November.
    3. Michael Luca & Georgios Zervas, 2016. "Fake It Till You Make It: Reputation, Competition, and Yelp Review Fraud," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(12), pages 3412-3427, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jesper Akesson & Robert Hahn & Robert Metcalfe & Manuel Monti-Nussbaum, 2025. "The Impact of Fake Reviews on Demand and Welfare," Framed Field Experiments 00821, The Field Experiments Website.
    2. Ajay Kumar & Ram D. Gopal & Ravi Shankar & Kim Hua Tan, 2022. "Fraudulent review detection model focusing on emotional expressions and explicit aspects : investigating the potential of feature engineering," Post-Print hal-03630420, HAL.
    3. Zhuang, Mengzhou & Cui, Geng & Peng, Ling, 2018. "Manufactured opinions: The effect of manipulating online product reviews," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 24-35.
    4. Hung-Pin Shih & Pei-Chen Sung, 2021. "Addressing the Review-Based Learning and Private Information Approaches to Foster Platform Continuance," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 649-661, June.
    5. Ku, Hsuan-Hsuan & Shang, Rong-An & Fu, Yi-Fan, 2021. "Social learning effects of complaint handling on social media: Self-construal as a moderator," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    6. Cheng Zhao & Chong Alex Wang, 2023. "A cross-site comparison of online review manipulation using Benford’s law," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 365-406, March.
    7. Dimitrios Tsekouras & Dominik Gutt & Irina Heimbach, 2024. "The robo bias in conversational reviews: How the solicitation medium anthropomorphism affects product rating valence and review helpfulness," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 52(6), pages 1651-1672, November.
    8. Xiaohui Zhang & Qianzhou Du & Zhongju Zhang, 2022. "A theory‐driven machine learning system for financial disinformation detection," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(8), pages 3160-3179, August.
    9. Cuixia Jiang & Jun Zhu & Qifa Xu, 2022. "Dissecting click farming on the Taobao platform in China via PU learning and weighted logistic regression," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 157-176, March.
    10. Ishita Chakraborty & Minkyung Kim & K. Sudhir, 2019. "Attribute Sentiment Scoring With Online Text Reviews : Accounting for Language Structure and Attribute Self-Selection," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2176, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    11. Harrison-Walker, L. Jean & Jiang, Ying, 2023. "Suspicion of online product reviews as fake: Cues and consequences," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    12. Uttara M. Ananthakrishnan & Beibei Li & Michael D. Smith, 2020. "A Tangled Web: Should Online Review Portals Display Fraudulent Reviews?," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(3), pages 950-971, September.
    13. Tim Kollmer & Andreas Eckhardt & Victoria Reibenspiess, 2022. "Explaining consumer suspicion: insights of a vignette study on online product reviews," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(3), pages 1221-1238, September.
    14. Guo, Qiaozhen & Chen, Ying-Ju & Huang, Wei, 2022. "Dynamic pricing of new experience products with dual-channel social learning and online review manipulations," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    15. Warut Khern-am-nuai & Karthik Kannan & Hossein Ghasemkhani, 2018. "Extrinsic versus Intrinsic Rewards for Contributing Reviews in an Online Platform," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(4), pages 871-892, December.
    16. Huanhuan Cao & Dan Wu & Yijing Gu, 2025. "Economic role of online review filtering systems in the electronic marketplaces," Information Technology and Management, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 339-360, September.
    17. Hui Zhao & Xiaoyuan Wang & Debing Ni & Kevin W. Li, 2023. "The Quality-Signaling Role of Manipulated Consumer Reviews," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 32(3), pages 503-536, June.
    18. Li, Yuanshuo & Zhang, Zili & Pedersen, Susanne & Liu, Xudong & Zhang, Ziqiong, 2023. "The influence of relative popularity on negative fake reviews: A case study on restaurant reviews," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    19. Plotkina, Daria & Munzel, Andreas & Pallud, Jessie, 2020. "Illusions of truth—Experimental insights into human and algorithmic detections of fake online reviews," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 511-523.
    20. Koukova, Nevena T. & Wang, Rebecca Jen-Hui & Isaac, Mathew S., 2023. "“If you loved our product”: Do conditional review requests harm retailer loyalty?," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 99(1), pages 85-101.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jscscx:v:14:y:2025:i:8:p:454-:d:1708952. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.