Monday, December 29, 2025

AI Video Translation Offers Efficiency Potential but Human Nuance Remains Key

A study evaluated consumer responses to marketing videos translated by a generative AI tool (HeyGen) versus human translators across English–Indonesian and Indonesian–English language pairs. Two online experiments involved participants in Indonesia (Study 1) and the United States and United Kingdom (Study 2), measuring language comprehension, accent neutrality, naturalness, and customer engagement intention.

AI translations were consistently rated as less natural and less accent-neutral than human translations. Language comprehension varied by direction: AI performed worse translating into Indonesian but better into English, reflecting differences in AI training data. Despite these perceptual differences, viewers were equally willing to like, share, or comment on both types of videos.

Research shows AI struggles with tone and accents, though marketing engagement matches human translations. Thoughtful use of emerging technologies requires balancing innovation with responsibility, ensuring progress benefits people without misleading or harming them.

"These insights suggest that AI video translation is not yet a perfect substitute for human translation...", explains UEA in a newsroom post. Adding further, "But it already offers practical value".
According to Jiseon Han, Assistant Professor at University of East Anglia: "For [online] marketers, AI can be a great choice when speed and straightforward messaging matter most, but when it comes to capturing tone, personality, and cultural context, human expertise is still irreplaceable".

The authors note several limitations: findings reflect a single AI tool, specific language pairs, one video per condition, and a single point in time, which restricts generalizability. They suggest future research should explore additional AI tools, languages, and translation contexts to further understand consumer evaluation of AI video translation.

Source: Journal of International Marketing; research led by the University of Jyväskylä with co-authorship from University of East Anglia (UEA).

Notes: This post was drafted with the assistance of AI tools and reviewed, fact-checked, edited, and published by humans.

Read next: Global Survey: 66% Say 2025 Bad Year for Country, 71% Optimistic 2026 Will Be Better
by Asim BN via Digital Information World

Friday, December 26, 2025

Global Survey: 66% Say 2025 Bad Year for Country, 71% Optimistic 2026 Will Be Better

Ipsos surveyed 23,642 adults (under the age of 75) across 30 countries between 27 October and 4 November 2025. The survey found that 50% of respondents said 2025 was a bad year for them and their family. At the national level, 66% of respondents said 2025 was a bad year for their country, with the highest percentages reported in France (85%), South Korea (85%), and Türkiye (80%).

Looking ahead, 71% of respondents expressed optimism that 2026 will be better than 2025. Countries with the highest optimism included Indonesia (90%), Colombia (89%), and Chile (86%), while France (41%), Japan (44%), and Belgium (49%) reported the lowest optimism.

Public pessimism dominated 2025 globally, but strong optimism for 2026 emerges across emerging economies surveyed.

Country % agree % disagree
30-country avg. 71 29
Indonesia 90 10
Colombia 89 11
Chile 86 14
Thailand 86 14
Peru 86 14
India 85 15
Argentina 83 17
South Africa 82 18
Mexico 82 18
Malaysia 82 18
Brazil 80 20
Hungary 77 23
Poland 74 26
Romania 70 30
Canada 70 30
Spain 69 31
Sweden 68 32
Singapore 67 33
Netherlands 67 33
United States 66 34
Australia 66 34
South Korea 65 35
Türkiye 63 37
Ireland 63 37
Great Britain 58 42
Germany 57 43
Italy 57 43
Belgium 49 51
Japan 44 56
France 41 59

On economic expectations, 49% of respondents predicted a stronger global economy in 2026, while 51% expected it to be worse.

The report also notes that in 2020, 90% of average respondents globally said their country had a bad year, reflecting the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. Current optimism levels remain below pre-2022 figures.

Source: Ipsos Predictions 2026 Report

Read next:

• How Schema Markup Is Redefining Brand Visibility in the Age of AI Search, According to Experts at Status Labs

• How ChatGPT could change the face of advertising, without you even knowing about it
by Ayaz Khan via Digital Information World

Wednesday, December 24, 2025

How Schema Markup Is Redefining Brand Visibility in the Age of AI Search, According to Experts at Status Labs


The way brands are discovered, evaluated, and recommended has fundamentally changed. As AI platforms like ChatGPT, Google's Gemini, and Perplexity increasingly mediate the relationship between businesses and their audiences, the technical infrastructure behind digital reputation has become just as important as the content itself. At the center of this shift is schema markup, a structured data framework that serves as a translation layer between your digital presence and the AI systems now shaping public perception.

The Growing Importance of Machine-Readable Branding

When a potential customer, investor, or partner asks an AI assistant about your company, the response depends on whether that AI system can accurately identify, understand, and trust your brand. Unlike traditional search engines that present links for users to evaluate, AI platforms synthesize information and deliver direct answers. This creates a fundamental challenge: if your brand's information isn't structured in ways that AI systems can reliably interpret, you risk being misrepresented, conflated with competitors, or excluded from responses entirely.

According to research from Schema App, Microsoft's Fabrice Canel, Principal Product Manager at Bing, confirmed at SMX Munich in March 2025 that schema markup directly helps Microsoft's large language models understand web content. This represents one of the first official confirmations from a major AI platform that structured data influences how LLMs process and present information.

The implications extend beyond simple visibility. Studies indicate that pages with comprehensive schema implementation are significantly more likely to appear in AI-generated summaries. A benchmark study from Data World found* that LLMs grounded in knowledge graphs achieve 300% higher accuracy compared to those relying solely on unstructured data. For brands, this accuracy translates directly into reputation protection and opportunity capture.

Understanding Schema Markup as Digital Identity Infrastructure

Schema markup uses standardized vocabulary from Schema.org to explicitly label elements on web pages that AI systems prioritize: organizational information, reviews, author credentials, products, and services. Rather than forcing AI models to infer meaning from unstructured text, this structured data provides explicit signals about what your content represents and how different elements relate to each other.

Google's own documentation states that structured data helps search systems understand page content by providing explicit clues about meaning. This guidance has taken on new significance as Google's AI Overviews and Gemini increasingly rely on the Knowledge Graph, which is enriched by schema markup crawled from the web.

The digital reputation management firm Status Labs has emerged as a leading voice on this topic, developing comprehensive frameworks for how businesses should approach structured data in an AI-dominated landscape. Their research indicates that company websites optimized with Organization schema and connected entity markup represent the most controllable authoritative source for AI training data. As Status Labs explains in their detailed analysis of schema markup's role in AI reputation, implementing structured data that signals contextual relationships to AI platforms is essential for preventing entity confusion that damages digital reputation.

The Entity Recognition Challenge

One of the most significant reputation risks in the AI era involves entity recognition, the process by which AI platforms distinguish between concepts sharing identical names. When someone asks an AI assistant about your company, the system must determine whether you're the technology firm based in Austin or the manufacturing company with the same name in Ohio.

Without Organization schema establishing your company as a distinct legal entity with specific founding dates, locations, and verifiable credentials, AI systems may merge information about different organizations into a single, confused representation. This creates scenarios where achievements are attributed to competitors or negative information about unrelated entities appears in responses about your business.

Status Labs has documented cases where proper schema implementation resolved significant entity confusion issues. Their GEO (Generative Engine Optimization) practice focuses specifically on these challenges, helping clients establish clear digital identities that AI systems can accurately recognize and represent.

The "sameAs" property in Organization schema proves particularly valuable here, linking your official website to verified profiles on LinkedIn, Crunchbase, and other authoritative platforms. This creates a network of corroborating signals that AI systems use to validate your identity and distinguish you from similarly named entities.

Performance Data: Schema's Measurable Impact

Research from BrightEdge demonstrates that schema markup improves brand presence and perception in Google's AI Overviews, with higher citation rates observed on pages with robust structured data. A recent analysis** also found that 72% of sites appearing on Google's first page search results use schema markup, indicating a strong correlation between structured data and visibility.

The stakes have increased substantially as AI Overviews reduce traditional organic clicks*** by approximately 34.5% year-over-year. Businesses not appearing in AI-generated summaries face accelerating invisibility as users increasingly accept AI responses without clicking through to websites.

An AccuraCast study**** analyzing over 2,000 prompts across ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews, and Perplexity found that 81% of web pages receiving citations included schema markup. While correlation doesn't prove causation, the data suggests that structured data plays a meaningful role in determining which sources AI platforms reference. Notably, ChatGPT showed particular preference for Person schema, with 70.4% of cited sources including this markup type, reflecting the platform's emphasis on source authority and reliability.

Critical Schema Types for Reputation Management

Different schema types serve distinct reputation management functions. Understanding which to prioritize depends on your specific visibility and protection goals.

Organization Schema consolidates business information into formats that AI platforms trust. This includes legal name, logo, founding date, official addresses, contact information, and social media profiles. Status Labs' detailed analysis outlines how implementing a comprehensive Organization schema across all digital properties creates the foundation for accurate AI representation.

Person Schema prevents the misattribution that damages executive and professional reputation. When multiple individuals share identical names, this markup defines biographical information, professional credentials, affiliations, and accomplishments, distinguishing separate careers and ensuring accurate attribution.

Review and AggregateRating Schema directly impact AI trustworthiness assessments. AI systems weigh verified customer feedback heavily when generating recommendations. Properly structured review markup must match visible page content exactly, as AI platforms detect and penalize mismatched data.

Article and BlogPosting Schema establish content authority and topical expertise. These schemas identify authors, publication dates, and subject matter, helping AI systems attribute information correctly and recognize your organization as an authoritative voice on specific topics.

Building Connected Knowledge Graphs

Basic schema provides value, but connected schema creates compounding advantages. As Search Engine Journal reports, enterprises are increasingly viewing structured data not merely as rich result eligibility criteria but as the foundation for content knowledge graphs.

This approach establishes relationships between entities on your website and links them to external authoritative knowledge bases, including Wikidata, Wikipedia, and Google's Knowledge Graph. When AI systems encounter your content, the connected schema provides comprehensive context about relationships between your products, services, team members, and broader industry concepts.

Status Labs' five-pillar approach to AI reputation management places schema implementation within this comprehensive framework. The methodology optimizes corporate websites as primary authoritative sources while establishing authoritative third-party references and managing review ecosystems with properly structured data.

Platform-Specific Considerations

Different AI platforms process schema markup according to their unique architectures and data sources. Understanding these variations enables targeted optimization.

Google's AI Overviews and Gemini prioritize websites with a comprehensive schema that contributes to Google's Knowledge Graph. Recent data shows that 80% of AI Overview citations come from top-3 organic results, but among those results, pages with well-implemented schema receive preferential selection.

ChatGPT with SearchGPT combines real-time web search with language model capabilities. While ChatGPT doesn't require schema to understand content, research suggests it retrieves information more thoroughly and accurately from pages with structured data. Schema reduces hallucinations by providing factual anchors that ground AI responses.

Perplexity AI explicitly values structured data's role in identifying reliable sources. Pages with robust schema markup appear more frequently in Perplexity's cited sources because the platform prioritizes well-defined, machine-readable information.

Common Implementation Errors

Several schema implementation mistakes can undermine or damage AI reputation rather than enhance it.

Mismatched Data represents the most damaging error. Discrepancies between visible page content and schema markup cause AI systems to question credibility. If your website displays a 4.8-star rating but schema markup shows a different figure, AI platforms may penalize or exclude your pages.

Incomplete Entity Definitions miss opportunities for AI recognition. Implementing Organization schema without comprehensive properties like founding date, leadership, and external profile links reduces AI confidence in your entity definition.

Static Schema on Dynamic Content creates accuracy problems over time. Businesses with changing inventory or pricing need systems that automatically update schema when underlying data changes.

Schema Manipulation backfires as AI detection improves. Adding irrelevant keywords or inaccurate information to structured data triggers penalties that compound over time.

The Strategic Imperative

Schema markup's value compounds as AI systems incorporate structured data into their understanding of the digital landscape. Organizations implementing comprehensive schema today establish authoritative representations that become increasingly difficult for competitors to displace.

This dynamic mirrors earlier digital transformations. Early adopters of mobile optimization gained advantages that persisted for years. With AI platforms already controlling significant information discovery, the window for establishing schema-based authority continues to narrow.

Status Labs' analysis shows that businesses with comprehensive schema markup maintain visibility across current and emerging AI search technologies, while competitors without structured data face accelerating invisibility. As the firm notes, schema markup has evolved from an optional technical enhancement to a foundational requirement for any organization serious about managing how AI systems understand, evaluate, and represent their brand.

Beyond Visibility: Schema as Reputation Protection

Schema markup functions as insurance against reputation damage that occurs when AI systems misunderstand, misidentify, or misrepresent your organization. By explicitly defining your entity with verifiable attributes and establishing connections to authoritative external sources, you reduce the probability of harmful misattribution.

This protective function becomes critical as AI systems increasingly mediate first impressions. When stakeholders query AI platforms about your company, the generated response shapes perceptions before any human visits your website. Accurate, comprehensive schema markup ensures these AI-generated first impressions align with reality.

The businesses and individuals investing in sophisticated schema strategies position themselves for an information environment where reputation depends on machine readability. For those seeking to understand how to implement these strategies effectively, Status Labs' comprehensive guide on schema markup's role in AI reputation provides detailed implementation frameworks and case studies demonstrating measurable impact.

As AI continues reshaping how information is discovered and presented, the organizations that control their structured data narrative will maintain the ability to shape their own story in an increasingly AI-mediated world.

* https://ift.tt/cWlArmB

** https://ift.tt/XGcRgp8

*** https://ift.tt/HVtDyjF

**** https://ift.tt/XHpKScD

by Sponsored Content via Digital Information World

Tuesday, December 23, 2025

How ChatGPT could change the face of advertising, without you even knowing about it

Nessa Keddo, King's College London
Image: DIW-Aigen

Online adverts are sometimes so personal that they feel eerie. Even as a researcher in this area, I’m slightly startled when I get a message asking if my son still needs school shirts a few hours after browsing for clothes for my children.

Personal messaging is part of a strategy used by advertisers to build a more intense relationship with consumers. It often consists of pop-up adverts or follow-up emails reminding us of all the products we have looked at but not yet purchased.

This is a result of AI’s rapidly developing ability to automate the advertising content we are presented with. And that technology is only going to get more sophisticated.

OpenAI, for example, has hinted that advertising may soon be part of the company’s ChatGPT service (which now has 800 million weekly users). And this could really turbocharge the personal relationship with customers that big brands are desperate for.

ChatGPT already uses some advanced personalisation, making search recommendations based on a user’s search history, chats and other connected apps such as a calendar. So if you have a trip to Barcelona marked in your diary, it will provide you – unprompted – with recommendations of where to eat and what to do when you get there.

In October 2025, the company introduced ChatGPT Atlas, a search browser which can automate purchases. For instance, while you search for beach kit for your trip to Barcelona, it may ask: “Would you like me to create a pre-trip beach essentials list?” and then provide links to products for you to buy.

“Agent mode” takes this a step further. If a browser is open on the page of a swimsuit, a chat box will appear where you can ask specific questions. With the browser history saved, you can log back in and ask: “Can you find that swimsuit I was looking at last week and add it to the basket in a size 14?”

Another new feature (only in the US at the moment), “instant checkout”, is a partnership with Shopify and Etsy which allows users to browse and immediately purchase products without leaving the platform. Retailers pay a small fee on sales, which is how OpenAI monetises this service.

However, only around 2% of all ChatGPT searches are shopping-related, so other means of making money are necessary – which is where full-on incorporated advertising may come in.

One app, lots of ads?

OpenAI’s rapid growth requires heavy investment, and its chief financial officer, Sarah Friar, has said the company is “weighing up an ads model”, as well as recruiting advertising specialists from rivals Meta and Google.

But this will take some time to get right. Some ChatGPT users have already been critical of a shopping feature which they said made them feel like they were being sold to. Clearly a re-design is being considered, as the feature was temporarily removed in December 2025.

So there will continue to be experimentation into how AI can be part of what marketers call the “consumer journey” – the process customers go through before they end up buying something.

Some consumers prefer to use customer reviews and their own research or experience. Others appreciate AI recommendations, but studies suggest that overall, some sense of autonomy is essential for people to truly consider themselves happy customers. It has also been shown that audiences dislike aggressive “retargeting”, where they are continuously bombarded with the same adverts.

So the option of ChatGPT automatically providing product recommendations, summaries and even purchasing items on our behalf might seem very tempting to big brands. But most consumers will still prefer a sense of agency when it comes to spending their money.

This may be why advertisers will work on new ways to blur the lines – where internet search results are blended with undeclared brand messaging and product recommendations. This has long been the case on Chinese platforms such as WeChat, which includes e-commerce, gaming, messaging, calling and social networking – but with advertising at its core.

In fact, platforms in the west seem far behind their East Asian counterparts, where users can do most of their day-to-day tasks using just one app. In the future, a similarly centralised approach may be inevitable elsewhere – as will subliminal advertising, with the huge potential for data collection that a single multi-functional app can provide.

Ultimately, transparency will be minimal and advertising will be more difficult to recognise, which could be hard on vulnerable users – and not the kind of ethically responsible AI that many are hoping for.The Conversation

Nessa Keddo, Senior Lecturer in Media, Diversity and Technology, King's College London

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Read next: Shrinking AI memory boosts accuracy


by External Contributor via Digital Information World

Shrinking AI memory boosts accuracy

Researchers have developed a new way to compress the memory used by AI models to increase their accuracy in complex tasks or help save significant amounts of energy.

Shrinking AI memory boosts accuracy
Image: Luke Jones / Unsplash

Experts from University of Edinburgh and NVIDIA found that large language models (LLMs) using memory eight times smaller than an uncompressed LLM scored better on maths, science and coding tests while spending the same amount of time reasoning.

The method can be used in an alternative way to help LLMs respond to more user queries simultaneously, reducing the amount of power needed per task.

As well as energy savings, experts say the improvements could benefit AI systems that are used to solve complicated tasks or in devices that have slow or limited memory, such as smart home devices and wearable technology.

Problem solving

By “thinking” about more complex hypotheses or exploring more hypotheses concurrently, AI models improve their problem-solving abilities. In practice, this is achieved by generating more reasoning threads – a step-by-step logical process used to solve problems – in text form.

The model’s memory – called the KV cache – which stores the portions of the threads generated, can act as a bottleneck, as its size slows down the generation of reasoning thread outputs during inference – the process by which AI models respond to an input prompt, such as answering a user query.

The more threads there are, and the longer they are, the more memory is required. The larger the memory size used, the longer the LLM takes to retrieve the KV cache from the part of the AI device where it is stored.

Memory compression

To overcome this, the team developed a method to compress the models’ memory – called Dynamic Memory Sparsification (DMS). Instead of keeping every token – the units of data that an AI model processes – DMS decides which ones are important enough to keep and which ones can be deleted.

There is a slight delay between the time when the decisions to delete tokens using sparsification are made and when they are removed. This gives the model a chance to pass on any valuable information from the evicted tokens to preserved ones.

In managing which tokens to keep and which to discard, DMS lets the AI model "think” in more depth or explore more possible solutions without needing extra computer power.

Models tested

The researchers tested DMS on different versions of the AI models Llama and Qwen and compared their performance to models without compression.

The models’ performance was assessed using standardised tests. It was found even with memories compressed to one eighth their original size, LLMs fully retain their original accuracy in difficult tasks while accelerating reasoning compared with non-compressed models.

In the standardised maths test AIME 24, which served as the qualifier for the United States Mathematical Olympiad, the compressed models performed twelve points better on average using the same number of KV cache reads to produce an answer.

For GPQA Diamond – a series of complex questions in biology, chemistry and physics authored by PhD-level experts – the models performed over eight points better.

The models were also tested with LiveCode Bench, which measures how well AI models can write code. The compressed models scored on average ten points better than non-compressed models.

In a nutshell, our models can reason faster but with the same quality. Hence, for an equivalent time budget for reasoning, they can explore more and longer reasoning threads. This improves their ability to solve complex problems in maths, science, and coding.

Dr Edoardo Ponti - GAIL Fellow and Lecturer in Natural Language Processing at the University’s School of Informatics

The findings from this work were peer reviewed and were presented at the prestigious AI conference NeurIPS.

Dr Ponti and his team will continue to investigate ways how large AI systems represent and remember information, making them far more efficient and sustainable as part of a 1.5 million euros European Research Council-funded project called AToM-FM.

This article has been republished on DIW with permission from The University of Edinburgh.

Read next:

• Subnational income inequality revealed: Regional successes may hold key to addressing widening gap globally

• Why many Americans avoid negotiating, even when it costs them


by External Contributor via Digital Information World

Monday, December 22, 2025

Subnational income inequality revealed: Regional successes may hold key to addressing widening gap globally

A new study visualises three decades of income inequality data, the most comprehensive worldwide mapping to be done at a subnational level. Confirming worsening income inequality for areas with over 3.6 billion inhabitants, it also reveals hidden ‘bright spots’ where policy may be closing the gap.

Income inequality is one of the most important measures of economic health, social justice and quality of life. More reliably trackable than wealth inequality, which was recently given a gloomy report card by the G20, income inequality is particularly relevant to immediate economic relief, mobility and people’s everyday standard of living.

The new study, from an international team led by Aalto University and Cambridge University, is the first to comprehensively map three decades of income inequality data within 151 nations around the world. Despite finding that income inequality is worsening for half the world’s people, the study also indicates that effective policy may be helping to bridge the gap in regions such as Latin America — ‘bright spots’ in administrative areas that account for around a third of the global population.

‘This research gives us much more detail than the existing datasets, allowing us to zoom in on specific regions within countries,’ says one of the study’s lead authors, Professor Matti Kummu, from Aalto University.‘This is significant because in many countries national data would tell us that inequality has not changed much over the past decades, while subnational data tells a very different story.’

‘The new data is particularly relevant in light of recent failings around wealth inequality, given that it could help shed light on what policy levers might be pulled to address inequality in the short-term,’ says co-lead author Daniel Chrisendo, now an Assistant Professor at Cambridge University.

‘We have vastly more complete data on income than we do on wealth, which tends to be much harder to uncover and track,’ explains Chrisendo. ‘Especially given that income inequality leads to wealth inequality, it’s critical to tackle both forms — but income inequality is perhaps the easiest to address from an immediate policy perspective.’

The study was published in Nature Sustainability on 5th December, and the new global subnational Gini coefficient (SubNGini) dataset, spanning 1990-2023, is publicly accessible online. Global annual data and trends can be explored visually using the Online Tool, which enables users to explore how income inequality has played out in regions around the globe and also download the data for further analyses.

Pinpointing the role of policy

There are many examples where regional efforts have shone more brightly than is revealed by national statistics, say the researchers. However India, China and Brazil all present interesting case studies that affect large swathes of the global population.

‘With regards to India, relative success in the south is linked to sustained investments in public health, education, infrastructure and economic development that have benefited the local population more broadly,’ says Chrisendo.

Meanwhile, in China, market-oriented reforms and open-door policy have driven economic growth and dramatically reduced poverty since the 1990s. ‘But we can also see how this growth has been uneven, likely due to the Chinese government’s ‘Hukou’ policy limiting rural migrants' access to urban services,’ he explains. In response, the government has implemented various policy measures — such as regional development programs and relaxed Hukou restrictions — to address disparities and support internal migrants.

In Brazil, the mapping shows a potential correlation between reduced inequality and a regional cash transfer programme providing cash to poor families on condition of their children attending school and receiving vaccinations.

‘Overall, being able to visualise these success stories and pinpoint the changing trends in time could help decision-makers see what works,’ says Chrisendo.

Income inequality rising for half the world’s people

Relative income growth for the world’s poorest 40 percent is one of the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), yet the study confirms the collective failure to meet this goal by 2030. ‘Unfortunately, not only are we quite far from that goal, but the trend for rising inequality is actually stronger than we thought,’ says Kummu.

The researchers are now expanding the data visualisation to encompass a vast range of other socio-economical indicators, from how populations are aging, to life expectancy and time spent in schooling, to improved access to drinking water — with the extensive new datasets slated for public launch in 2026.

As an expert in global food systems and sustainable use of natural resources, Kummu hopes the new datasets can be used to better understand, for example, the linkages between development and environmental changes. The recent study revealed links between more unequal regions and lower ecological diversity, which he would like to explore further.

‘It’s ambitious, but to have subnational, high quality data spanning over three decades is crucial to understand different social responses to environmental changes and vice versa. It gives us the means to start understanding the causalities, not just the correlations — and with that comes the power to make better decisions,’ he concludes.

Matti Kummu - Professori - T213 Built Environment - matti.kummu@aalto.fi - +358504075171

Daniel Chrisendo - Assistant Professor in Rural and Agricultural Economics, University of Cambridge - dc951@cam.ac.uk

More:

Editor's Note: This article has been republished on DIW with permission from Aalto University. Original publication date: December 4, 2025.

Read next:

• Why many Americans avoid negotiating, even when it costs them

• How U.S. Employees Report Using AI at Work

by External Contributor via Digital Information World

Sunday, December 21, 2025

Why many Americans avoid negotiating, even when it costs them

Would you pay thousands of dollars more for a car just to skip the negotiation process? According to new research by David Hunsaker, clinical associate professor of management at the IU Kelley School of Business Indianapolis, many Americans would—and do.

Study finds negotiation avoidance costs consumers thousands annually. Discover the psychology behind it and three strategies to overcome negotiation anxiety today.
Image: Cytonn Photography / Unsplash

How common is this mindset?

“Across five studies, we found that 95% of individuals choose not to negotiate up to 51% of the time,” Hunsaker explained. This means negotiation avoidance is not the exception, rather the norm.

The research, published in Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, was conducted by Hunsaker in collaboration with Hong Zhang of Leuphana University and Alice J. Lee of Cornell University. Their work explores why people avoid negotiating, what it costs them, and how organizations can respond.

Negotiation avoidance is the norm, not the exception

This study spans five large-scale experiments exploring why people avoid negotiating and what it costs them. The research examines:

  • How often individuals forgo negotiation opportunities
  • The Threshold for Negotiation Initiation (TFNI)—the minimum savings people need to justify negotiating
  • The Willingness to Pay to Avoid Negotiation (WTP-AN)—how much extra people will pay to skip negotiating
  • Whether interventions, such as utility comparisons or social norm prompts, can reduce avoidance

“Our work focuses on how much individuals are willing to sacrifice, or even pay, to avoid negotiating altogether,” David explained.

The idea for this research emerged at a negotiation conference in Israel. Hunsaker and his colleagues visited a market where bargaining is expected, yet none of them negotiated. “We asked ourselves: Why don’t people negotiate even when the opportunity is clear?” Hunsaker recalled.

“We framed this research around a simple question: When you have the chance to negotiate, will you?” Hunsaker said. “Even in traditional contexts like buying a car, companies now advertise ‘no-haggle pricing’ as a selling point. Businesses can raise prices by 5% to 11%, and more than half of consumers will pay it.”

The research also revealed that people judge negotiation value by percentage saved, not the absolute dollar amount.

“On average, participants needed savings of 21% to 36% of an item’s price before considering negotiation worthwhile,” Hunsaker noted. “This shows that decisions are driven by perceived proportional value—not absolute dollars.”

Hunsaker hopes the findings spark awareness. “Negotiation aversion is real, but at key points in your career, negotiation skills matter,” he emphasized. “Recognizing these tendencies is the first step toward overcoming them.”

Negotiation tips from the expert

To help you become a better negotiator, here are three tips from Dr. Hunsaker:

Preparation is everything

“Most of the work happens before the conversation begins,” Hunsaker said. “Information is power. Know your options and be honest about whether you have strong alternatives. If you don’t, you’ll enter with less leverage. Many people overlook this step—understand your position before you negotiate.”

Start higher than your target

“This is hard for a lot of people because you don’t want to sound selfish, but there needs to be room for concessions. If you don’t make that room, the other party will become upset. Start with an offer better than your goal and it will help the other party feel more satisfied with the deal.” Hunsaker shared.

Focus on relationships, not victory

“It’s about developing strong relationships. People that go into negotiation with a winning mindset end up burning bridges or hurting feelings. The people you most often negotiate with will be repeat customers or longtime clients. If you burn those bridges, you will miss out on deals later. Focus on doing well but also focus on listening to the other party and creating a foundation of trust,” Hunsaker said.

David Hunsaker is a clinical associate professor of management at the Kelley School of Business Indianapolis. He joined the faculty in 2024 and specializes in organizational behavior and negotiation.

This article was first published on the Indiana University Kelley School of Business website on December 16, 2025. Republished with permission.

Read next: 

• Most Data Centers Are Located Outside Recommended Temperature Ranges

How U.S. Employees Report Using AI at Work


by External Contributor via Digital Information World