IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2607.28780.html

Optimizing Monetization Strategies for Generative AI Firms: Implications for Search Engagement

Author

Listed:
  • Veronica Rosendo-Rios

    (Universidad Pontificia Comillas, ICADE, Madrid. Spain)

  • Paurav Shukla

    (Southampton Business School, University of Southampton, Southampton. UK)

Abstract

As Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) platforms, such as ChatGPT, have transformed digital search querying behavior, mounting operational costs challenge firms to explore alternative monetization strategies beyond traditional subscription models. However, little is known about how alternative advertising-supported monetization models can help GenAI firms recover costs while maintaining search query engagement. Drawing on the compromise effect and affective primacy theories, we develop a framework wherein the introduction of advertising-supported monetization models influences user upgrading and downgrading decisions, contingent on the number of available monetization options. Across four experiments (N=1063), findings reveal that introducing a single advertising-supported option enhances the compromise effect, encouraging free users to upgrade, but leading paid subscribers to downgrade. However, offering two advertising-supported models mitigates the effect, maintaining subscriber retention while still motivating free users to upgrade. We show that affective and cognitive evaluations serially mediate preference for advertising-supported models, with temporal intrusiveness, but not visual, moderating these effects. We provide actionable insights for GenAI firms on potentially optimizing revenue strategies while balancing user engagement with search queries on their platform.

Suggested Citation

  • Veronica Rosendo-Rios & Paurav Shukla, 2026. "Optimizing Monetization Strategies for Generative AI Firms: Implications for Search Engagement," Papers 2607.28780, arXiv.org.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2607.28780
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2607.28780
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simonson, Itamar, 1989. "Choice Based on Reasons: The Case of Attraction and Compromise Effects," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 16(2), pages 158-174, September.
    2. Hana Choi & Carl F. Mela, 2019. "Monetizing Online Marketplaces," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 38(6), pages 948-972, November.
    3. Chuang, Shih-Chieh & Kao, Danny Tengti & Cheng, Yin-Hui & Chou, Chu-An, 2012. "The effect of incomplete information on the compromise effect," Judgment and Decision Making, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(2), pages 196-206, March.
    4. Wessel, Michael & Adam, Martin & Benlian, Alexander & Majchrzak, Ann & Thies, Ferdinand, 2025. "Generative AI and its transformative value for digital platforms," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 155517, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    5. Ioannis Evangelidis & Jonathan Levav & Itamar Simonson, 2023. "A Reexamination of the Impact of Decision Conflict on Choice Deferral," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(5), pages 2691-2712, May.
    6. Shih-Chieh Chuang & Danny Tengti Kao & Yin-Hui Cheng & Chu-An Chou, 2012. "The effect of incomplete information on the compromise effect," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 7(2), pages 196-204, March.
    7. Jaewon Yoo & Hyunsik Park & Wonjoon Kim, 2018. "Compromise effect and consideration set size in consumer decision-making," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(8), pages 513-517, May.
    8. Djordje Djurica & Tyge-F. Kummer & Jan Mendling & Kathrin Figl, 2025. "Investigating the impact of representation features on decision model comprehension," European Journal of Information Systems, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(1), pages 21-45, January.
    9. Rutz, Oliver & Aravindakshan, Ashwin & Rubel, Olivier, 2019. "Measuring and forecasting mobile game app engagement," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 185-199.
    10. Lin Boldt & Neeraj Arora, 2017. "Dyadic Compromise Effect," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(3), pages 436-452, May.
    11. Leonard Michels & Jessica Ochmann & Kathrin Schmitt & Sven Laumer & Verena Tiefenbeck, 2024. "Salience, transparency, and self-nudging: a digital nudge to promote healthier food product choices," European Journal of Information Systems, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(5), pages 717-747, September.
    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. Anna Wielicka-Regulska, 2017. "Efekty kontekstowe jako element teorii wyboru konsumenta," Ekonomista, Polskie Towarzystwo Ekonomiczne, issue 2, pages 159-174.
    2. Bogard, Jonathan E. & Reiff, Joseph S. & Caruso, Eugene M. & Hershfield, Hal E., 2024. "Social inferences from choice context: Dominated options can engender distrust," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    3. Raphael Thomadsen & Robert P. Rooderkerk & On Amir & Neeraj Arora & Bryan Bollinger & Karsten Hansen & Leslie John & Wendy Liu & Aner Sela & Vishal Singh & K. Sudhir & Wendy Wood, 2018. "How Context Affects Choice," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 5(1), pages 3-14, March.
    4. Pravesh Kumar Padamwar & Jagrook Dawra & Vinay Kumar Kalakbandi, 2018. "Range effect on extremeness aversion," DECISION: Official Journal of the Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, Springer;Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, vol. 45(4), pages 345-355, December.
    5. abhinash Borah & Raghvi Garg, 2020. "Torn between want and should: Self regulation and behavioral choices," Working Papers 29, Ashoka University, Department of Economics.
    6. Jang, Sunghoon & Hong, Doosun & Kim, Youngho & Lee, Chungwon, 2025. "Investigation of preferences for ride-sourcing taxis: Compromise effect and regret-based latent class modeling," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    7. Gary Charness & Eugen Dimant & Daniela Grieco, 2026. "Blue Lies," CESifo Working Paper Series 12827, CESifo.
    8. Vibhanshu Abhishek & Kinshuk Jerath & Siddhartha Sharma, 2025. "The Impact of “Retail Media” on Online Marketplaces: Insights from a Field Experiment," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 36(1), pages 456-473, March.
    9. John A. List, 2007. "On the Interpretation of Giving in Dictator Games," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 115(3), pages 482-493.
    10. Bahamonde-Birke, Francisco & Guevara, C. Angelo, 2026. "Which rubber duck makes the best decoy? Considering the decoy effect on the basis of different behavioral theories," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    11. H. Henry Cao & Bing Han & David Hirshleifer & Harold H. Zhang, 2011. "Fear of the Unknown: Familiarity and Economic Decisions," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 15(1), pages 173-206.
    12. de Meza, David & Pathania, Vikram, 2021. "Is the Second-Cheapest Wine a Rip-Off? Economics vs. Psychology in Product-Line Pricing," Working Papers 321852, American Association of Wine Economists.
    13. Boto-García, David & Mariel, Petr & Baños-Pino, José Francisco, 2023. "Intra-household bargaining for a joint vacation," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 47(C).
    14. Jonathan C. Pettibone, 2012. "Testing the effect of time pressure on asymmetric dominance and compromise decoys in choice," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 7(4), pages 513-523, July.
    15. Chorus, Caspar & van Cranenburgh, Sander & Daniel, Aemiro Melkamu & Sandorf, Erlend Dancke & Sobhani, Anae & Szép, Teodóra, 2021. "Obfuscation maximization-based decision-making: Theory, methodology and first empirical evidence," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 28-44.
    16. Chorus, Caspar G., 2014. "Benefit of adding an alternative to one׳s choice set: A regret minimization perspective," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 49-59.
    17. Giarlotta, Alfio & Petralia, Angelo & Watson, Stephen, 2023. "Context-sensitive rationality: Choice by salience," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    18. Ekström, Mathias, 2018. "The (un)compromise effect," Discussion Paper Series in Economics 10/2018, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Economics, revised 16 May 2018.
    19. Vinh Truong, 2024. "Optimizing mobile in-app advertising effectiveness using app publishers-controlled factors," Journal of Marketing Analytics, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 12(4), pages 925-943, December.
    20. Todd McElroy & David L. Dickinson & Irwin P. Levin, 2019. "Thinking About Decisions: An Integrative Approach of Person and Task Factors," Working Papers 19-04, Department of Economics, Appalachian State University.

    More about this item

    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:arx:papers:2607.28780. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arxiv.org/ .

    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.