Author
Listed:
- Federico Boffa
(Faculty of Economics and Management, Free University of Bozen-Bolzano, Bolzano, Italy)
- Chiara Farronato
(Harvard Business School, Boston, MA, USA)
- Alessandro Fedele
(Faculty of Economics and Management, Free University of Bozen-Bolzano, Bolzano, Italy)
- Eugenio Levi
(Link Campus University, Rome, Italy)
- Andrea Mantovani
(TBS Business School, Toulouse, France)
Abstract
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used by consumers to search for information, compare alternatives, and obtain purchasing advice. As conversational AI systems progressively complement traditional search engines and recommender systems, they may influence consumer choice by determining which products receive visibility and attention. Despite their growing importance, little is known about how LLMs construct product recommendations, whether they concentrate attention on a narrow set of products, or whether vertically integrated providers favor affiliated products and services. This paper conducts an audit study of leading LLMs, including ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, DeepSeek, Grok, and Mistral. Using standardized prompts and repeated queries, we collect recommendations across a broad range of products and service categories that differ in market characteristics and the presence of vertically integrated products. We characterize recommendations along several dimensions, including breadth, first-position concentration, prominence, best-overall selections, and personalization. We find substantial heterogeneity across models in the breadth and structure of their recommendations. At the same time, first-position recommendations are highly concentrated in a substantial subset of markets. In 20 of the 100 product and service categories, a single product is listed first in more than three quarters of responses. We also find that some LLMs are likely to recommend products affiliated with their providers.
Suggested Citation
Federico Boffa & Chiara Farronato & Alessandro Fedele & Eugenio Levi & Andrea Mantovani, 2026.
"An Empirical Audit of LLM Product Recommendations,"
Working Papers
26-09, NET Institute.
Handle:
RePEc:net:wpaper:2609
Download full text from publisher
More about this item
Keywords
;
;
;
;
;
JEL classification:
- L15 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Information and Product Quality
- L41 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - Monopolization; Horizontal Anticompetitive Practices
- L86 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Information and Internet Services; Computer Software
- D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness
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:net:wpaper:2609. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Nicholas Economides (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.NETinst.org/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.