Understanding Value Propositions and Perceptions of Sharing Economy Platforms Between South Korea and the United States: A Content Analysis and Topic Modeling Approach

Abstract

The sharing economy (SE) has rapidly expanded to become a key component of the global economy. However, as SE platforms evolve, a growing disconnect may exist between the value propositions companies emphasize and the values consumers actually perceive. Do the value frames communicated by SE companies align with those perceived as important by consumers, and how does this alignment differ across cultural contexts such as South Korea and the U.S.? Drawing on two complementary studies, we examine value alignment between SE companies and consumers in South Korea and the U.S. Study 1 employs content analysis of marketing messages from 246 SE platforms across five sectors, identifying the core value propositions emphasized. Study 2 applied structural topic modeling (STM) to consumer reviews from major SE platforms in both countries, focusing on three sectors: accommodation, service exchanges, and second-hand transactions. The findings reveal that SE companies in both countries primarily emphasize functional and economic values, with U.S. companies placing greater additional emphasis on emotional and social values than their South Korean counterparts. Similarly, consumers in both countries value functional, emotional, and economic aspects, showing general alignment with company marketing communications. However, South Korean consumers tended to emphasize functional and economic values more, while U.S. consumers were relatively more oriented toward emotional and social values. Notably, sustainability, widely regarded as a core principle of the SE, was not strongly emphasized by either companies or consumers. These findings contribute to the theoretical understanding of value dynamics in the SE and offer practical implications for developing culturally informed and value-driven marketing strategies.

1. Introduction

The sharing economy (SE) has experienced remarkable growth since its emergence, becoming a significant component of the global economy and influencing various aspects of daily life [1,2,3,4,5]. Projections indicate that the global SE’s total value will surge from 150 billion U.S. dollars in 2023 to 794 billion U.S. dollars by 2031, representing a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of approximately 32 percent [6]. This explosive growth highlights the substantial momentum behind this economic model.

However, as SE firms expand globally, they face numerous challenges in navigating diverse regulatory landscapes, competitive environments, and local market dynamics. The experiences of Airbnb and Uber exemplify these difficulties, with Airbnb’s decision to exit the Chinese market [7] and Uber’s withdrawal from South Korea [8] underlining the complexities of international expansion. These challenges emphasize the importance of understanding and catering to the nuanced value perceptions of consumers across different cultural contexts.

Existing research has predominantly explored the impact of consumer-perceived value in the SE on participation and satisfaction, emphasizing the importance of functional, economic, emotional, and social value dimensions [9,10,11]. However, few studies have investigated the relative hierarchy or prioritization of these values, nor examined the underlying reasons for such differences [12]. Moreover, with the exception of Wruk et al. [13], limited attention has been paid to the specific value propositions emphasized by SE companies.

Notably, there is a lack of cross-cultural comparative research between collectivist societies such as South Korea (Individualism Index: 18; China: 20; Japan: 46) and individualist societies like the U.S. (Index: 91; U.K.: 89; Australia: 90) [14], where cultural logics are likely to shape value priorities in distinct ways [12,15]. Such misalignments between consumer value perceptions and company value propositions may contribute to platform underperformance, low user retention, or failed international expansions—as seen in the cases of Uber and Airbnb in parts of Asia [16,17]. Therefore, a systematic comparison of platform value propositions and consumer value perceptions across cultures is both timely and essential.

To address this gap, the present study investigates the following research question: RQ: Do the value frames communicated by SE companies align with those perceived as important by consumers, and how does this alignment differ across cultural contexts such as South Korea and the U.S.?

Accordingly, this study aims to identify the primary value frames emphasized by SE companies and to explore how consumers perceive value, with particular attention to cross-cultural differences between the U.S. and South Korea. To this end, we employ a mixed-methods design. Study 1 conducts a content analysis of marketing communications from 246 SE companies (107 in South Korea and 139 in the U.S.) across five sectors: second-hand transactions, accommodation, mobility, service exchanges, and space-sharing, to examine the types of value frames companies emphasize in their marketing communications. Study 2 employs STM on consumer reviews from major SE platforms in both countries, focusing on three sectors: accommodation, service exchanges, and second-hand transactions, to identify the values consumers prioritize in practice. Finally, we assess the alignment between platform value propositions and consumer value perceptions, and explore the cultural and strategic factors that may explain these patterns. By uncovering where and why such misalignments occur, this research deepens theoretical understanding of value dynamics in the SE and provides practical insights for developing culturally responsive, value-driven marketing strategies.

The remainder of this paper is structured as follows: Section 2 outlines the conceptual foundations and consumer value frameworks of the SE. Section 3 outlines the research question and provides an overview of the methodological approach. Section 4 and Section 5 present the empirical results of Study 1 and Study 2, respectively. Section 6 offers a general discussion of the findings and explores the underlying mechanisms behind the results. Finally, Section 7 concludes the study and discusses implications for future research.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Understanding the Sharing Economy

2.1.1. Definition and Characteristics of the Sharing Economy

SE was initially defined by Lessig [18] as “Collaborative consumption made by the activities of sharing, exchanging, and rental of resources without owning the goods.” The non-transfer of ownership of resources was emphasized as a differentiating feature from traditional market economies. SE has evolved alongside technological advancements and rapid changes in social culture. Six common characteristics have been identified that encompass the concept of the SE, with varying degrees of consensus among researchers: (1) on-demand access, (2) platform mediation, (3) shared utilization of resources, (4) socio-economic system, (5) peer-to-peer transactions, and (6) peer-to-peer transactions with ownership transfer.

Scholars have consistently agreed that the first three are key characteristics of the SE. “On-demand access” refers to the flexible and convenient availability of resources as needed, allowing consumers to use them without long-term commitment [9]. Platforms like Airbnb exemplify this concept by enabling temporary access without requiring ownership. Second, platforms leveraging technology play a crucial role in mediating transactions between providers and users [19]. Third, shared utilization of resources promotes efficiency and sustainability by allowing individuals to access and use scarce resources more effectively, extending beyond tangible assets to include intangible resources like skills and expertise [4,20].

The fourth characteristic of the SE is its socio-economic nature, which remains debated, particularly regarding whether it must rely on market mediation. Most SE platforms operate under a market-mediated model, where platforms serve as intermediaries, facilitating transactions between users and charging service fees [21]. However, some SE models function outside traditional market mechanisms, prioritizing mutuality and community-based sharing without monetary exchange, as exemplified by Couchsurfing [22]. Consequently, the SE should be conceptualized as a broad system encompassing diverse transaction mechanisms rather than being restricted solely to market-driven models [2].

The fifth characteristic pertains to peer-to-peer transactions, where individuals share resources directly through intermediaries [19]. However, whether peer-to-peer transactions are an essential condition for SE remains debated. Models like Zipcar, which provide consumers with direct access to shared assets rather than facilitating exchanges between individuals, challenge this definition. While Zipcar does not fit the strict peer-to-peer model, some scholars argue that it should still be classified within the SE, as it promotes shared resource utilization and prosumer engagement [23,24].

The sixth characteristic concerns peer-to-peer transactions that involve ownership transfer, such as second-hand platforms. While SE is frequently defined as access-based, wherein ownership remains with the provider [24], others contend that resource redistribution platforms also qualify as part of the SE framework [20,25]. Since second-hand platforms extend product lifecycles and reduce waste, they align with SE’s core values of sustainability and efficiency [25]. Following prior research, particularly Schor’s [25] definition and classification of the SE, this study incorporates peer-to-peer platforms that involve ownership transfer, such as second-hand platforms, into the SE framework.

In conclusion, the SE can be defined as a socio-economic system in which individuals interact by sharing tangible and intangible resources, facilitated through technological platforms, to promote efficient resource utilization.

2.1.2. Classifications of the Sharing Economy

Previous research has extensively examined the industries where the SE has gained prominence. Hossain [26] reviewed 219 academic studies and identified accommodation and transportation as key sectors. Kauffman and Naldi [27] expanded this analysis, revealing the SE’s widespread use in media and entertainment, accommodation and hospitality, transportation, retail and consumer goods, services, finance, and machinery sectors. Schor [25] categorized industries that use the SE into four types based on resource types and transaction forms as follows:

• Recirculation of goods. This category emphasizes the exchange and reuse of unwanted items through platforms like eBay and Craigslist. Such transactions embody the spirit of the SE by promoting the efficient use of resources and reducing waste [9,20].
• Increased utilization of durable assets. This category involves sharing durable assets (e.g., cars) through platform-based access services (e.g., Zipcar) and ride-sharing platforms (e.g., Uber). The model can be either dyadic or triadic, depending on whether resources are provided by individuals or platforms [24]. Its aim is to enhance resource utilization by sharing durable assets, thereby reducing resource waste.
• Exchange of services. This category revolves around the exchange of services as the primary form of exchange, rooted in the concept of time banking established in the 1980s. Through platforms like Fiverr, individuals can offer various services in exchange for compensation. This model blurs the boundaries between personal and professional services and provides flexible employment opportunities [4].
• Sharing of productive assets and space. This category involves sharing productive assets and space to facilitate production and creation [28]. Examples include cooperatives, hackerspaces, coworking spaces, and educational platforms like Skillshare.com and Peer 2 Peer University.

2.2. Consumer Value Frameworks in the Sharing Economy

The concept of value has long been regarded as a fundamental construct in marketing and consumer research [29,30,31]. From the consumer’s perspective, value is typically conceptualized as the overall assessment of utility derived from a product or service, based on a trade-off between perceived benefits and costs [32]. Classic value theories, such as that of Sheth et al. [29], proposed a multidimensional view of value, encompassing functional, emotional, social, epistemic, and conditional dimensions. These frameworks have since been refined and extended to address the complexities of emerging consumption contexts, including platform-based and digital economies [30,31].

In the context of the SE, the nature of value creation has evolved to reflect the platform-mediated, co-creative interactions among users, service providers, and digital infrastructure [11,33]. Accordingly, scholars have extended existing frameworks to better account for the distinct characteristics of SE exchanges. A growing body of research converges on five key dimensions of consumer-perceived value in SE environments: functional, economic, emotional, social, and sustainability value [9,10,34,35,36].

Functional value in the SE derives from the perceived usefulness and efficiency of shared products or services. It encompasses attributes such as convenience, location specificity, time efficiency, flexibility, reliability, and overall effectiveness [9,10]. By optimizing resource utilization and enhancing accessibility, SE platforms significantly amplify functional value, making it a critical determinant in consumer decision-making. For example, the quality of services provided by Airbnb exemplifies functional value, with empirical evidence indicating a strong positive correlation between high functional value and consumers’ future behavioral intentions [35].

Economic value in the SE extends beyond monetary savings to include behavioral costs such as time, effort, and cognitive resources. The decentralized nature of SE platforms helps address inefficiencies in traditional systems, offering cost-effective alternatives that enhance economic value [21]. For instance, consumers perceive significant economic benefits from using platforms like Uber, where ease of use and reasonable pricing are key factors influencing repurchase intentions [10].

Emotional value encompasses the range of affective experiences that consumers associate with SE participation, including excitement, joy, and a sense of belonging. These emotions foster brand loyalty and encourage advocacy for the sharing model [9,10,34]. Platforms like Airbnb offer distinct emotional value by facilitating enriching interpersonal experiences [35]. On second-hand platforms such as eBay or The Luxury Closet, consumers may experience emotional gratification from acquiring rare, vintage, or personally meaningful items, which evoke pride, nostalgia, or a sense of discovery [34,37]. While the sources of emotional value may differ, their core function remains consistent in providing affective satisfaction through symbolic or experiential meaning [31,32,34].

Social value refers to the extent to which SE platforms foster trust, belonging, and community bonding among users. These platforms often transcend transactional exchanges by incorporating elements of mutual support, reciprocity, and interpersonal engagement [10,35,36]. For instance, Airbnb is widely recognized for enabling meaningful interpersonal interactions between hosts, guests, and other users, thereby transforming short-term stays into culturally enriching experiences [35].

Sustainability value captures the extent to which SE platforms promote resource conservation, environmental stewardship, and responsible consumption. By facilitating access-based consumption and the reuse of underutilized resources, SE platforms reduce overproduction and encourage circular economy practices [9,38]. Environmentally conscious consumers often express more favorable attitudes toward platforms that emphasize sustainability [31]. However, cross-cultural studies suggest that while hedonic and economic values are broadly appealing, the influence of sustainability value may vary across cultural and institutional contexts [3,12].

Building on service-dominant logic, recent scholarship highlights the co-creative nature of value in the SE, where users actively shape perceived value through interaction, personalization, and participation [11,33]. However, as many SE platforms increasingly adopt profit-driven strategies, their value propositions tend to prioritize efficiency and scalability over community engagement and sustainability-oriented values [25]. This strategic shift raises critical questions about the alignment between firm-driven value propositions and users’ value perceptions, particularly across different cultural contexts [12].

3. Research Question and General Methodology

As the SE evolves into a dominant socio-economic model, scholars have increasingly examined consumer-perceived values [9,10,11]. However, limited research has explored whether these consumer values align with the value propositions communicated by SE platforms themselves, particularly across different cultural contexts [12,15,39].

To address this critical gap, the present study investigates the following research question:

RQ: Do the value frames communicated by SE companies align with those perceived as important by consumers, and how does this alignment differ across cultural contexts such as South Korea and the U.S.?

To explore this question in depth, we adopted a two-study mixed-method design, integrating both qualitative and computational approaches:

Study 1 examines the value propositions of SE platforms through qualitative content analysis of marketing communications from 246 platforms in South Korea and the U.S. This study focuses on platform-generated texts, such as website homepages and app store descriptions, to identify the explicit value frames used by companies.

Study 2 investigates consumers’ actual value perceptions using structural STM applied to user-generated reviews from Airbnb, eBay, Joonggonara, Fiverr, and Kmong. By extracting latent themes within large-scale textual data, this method offers a data-driven approach to mapping consumers’ value frameworks in real usage contexts.

4. Study 1. Content Analysis of Sharing Economy Platform Value Propositions

Study 1 aims to identify the dominant value propositions of SE platforms in South Korea and the U.S., as well as to uncover any differences between the two countries. To achieve this, we employed content analysis, a method that has been widely used in numerous studies to analyze corporate marketing communication strategies [40,41].

4.1. Data Collection

In this study, marketing communication messages were collected from 246 platforms, including 107 from South Korea and 139 from the U.S. The data collection process involved conducting a thorough online search from October to December 2023, with the aim of including as many platforms as possible. The communication messages, crucial for understanding the platforms’ value propositions, were manually extracted during the same period from two primary sources: official websites, specifically from the starting page of the platform’s official website, and app overviews, obtained from introductory sections within the applications themselves. The collected data were then analyzed by categorizing them into five business sectors, which were adapted from the original four categories proposed by Schor [25], as detailed in

Table 1. Number of samples from five business sectors in Study 1.

Categories	Business Sector	South Korea	U.S.	Total
The recirculation of goods	Mobility	29	38	67
	Accommodation	9	24	33
The enhanced usage of long-lasting assets	Second-hand transactions	30	30	60
The trading of services	Service exchange	22	20	42
The communal use of productive resources	Space-sharing	17	27	44
Total number of SE platforms		107	139	246

.

4.2. Coding Procedure

4.2.1. Coding Scheme

To systematically analyze the core value propositions communicated by SE platforms, we employed a content analysis approach guided by a structured coding scheme. The objective was to identify the primary (Top 1) and secondary (Top 2) value frames emphasized in each platform’s marketing communication messages.

The coding scheme was developed based on established frameworks in the literature on perceived consumer value and marketing communications [9,10,35]. The value propositions were classified into five distinct categories: emotional, functional, economic, social, and sustainability values. Each value category was clearly defined with conceptual criteria and illustrative indicators to ensure consistent interpretation across coders.

Table 2. Coding schemes.

Value Type	Definition	Examples	References
Functional value	It refers to the utility and practical advantages associated with shared products or services.	“The basics of movement, ride with TADA” (TADA), “Our safest vehicle to date.” (Veo).	[10,35]
Economic value	It refers to a broad assessment of costs, such as monetary expenses, time, effort, and cognitive resources.	“Save up to 20% with UberX Share” (Uber). “Save money for being flexible” (Lyft).	[10,21]
Emotional value	It refers to the spectrum of emotions and experiences that consumers experience through engagement.	“Travel, live it up” (Airbnb South Korea), “Get inspired for a family trip” (Vrbo).	[9,10]
Social value	It refers to the enhancement of social ties and interactions facilitated by products or services.	“Nextdoor: Neighborhood network” (Nextdoor), “Stay with locals and meet travelers, Discover Destinations” (Couch Surfing).	[35,36]
Sustainability value	It refers to the encouragement of responsible consumption practices and the minimization of resource waste.	“Enhancing the share of bicycles in transportation to reduce CO2 emissions” (Ttareungyi), “Ride green (Lime)”.	[9,38]

presents the operational definitions and example indicators for each value category. This coding scheme served as the basis for identifying the primary (Top 1) and secondary (Top 2) value frames emphasized in platform communications.

4.2.2. Coding Process

Two independent authors of this research systematically reviewed each platform’s marketing messages, which included:

• Website homepage messages
• App store descriptions (Apple App Store or Google Play Store)

Following the coding scheme, each author independently assessed and assigned the primary (Top 1) and secondary (Top 2) value frames for each platform. Coding was conducted using a standardized Excel template, with separate columns designated for recording Top 1 and Top 2 classifications. A sample case for Couchsurfing is shown in

Table 3. Coding example.

Source Type	Message	Identified Phrases	Value Frame	Top 1	Top 2
Website	Join BeWelcome! - Connect and stay with great people, and offer travelers a free place to stay. - Meet: BeWelcome is about meeting others online and in real life. - Travel: Organize your journey and meet nice people. - Host: Tools to make sharing and meeting fun and easy. - Share: Sharing creates a better world through experiences, moments, and knowledge.	connect, meeting others, sharing, free place to stay, create a better world	Social (Primary)	Social value	Emotional value
App Store	- Stay with amazing locals, make lifelong travel friends, or host travelers. - Find local hosts, events, and new friends. - Host travelers visiting your hometown. - Discover amazing events where you are. - Easily create and manage your itinerary.	amazing locals, lifelong friends, local hosts, travel events, discover amazing events	Social (Primary), Emotional (Secondary)

. The determination of value categories was based on the frequency, salience, and linguistic context of value-related terms and phrases in the platform’s messaging.

To ensure the reliability and validity of the coding process, inter-coder agreement was rigorously assessed following the methodological guidelines of Lombard et al. [41]. Among the 246 SE platforms analyzed, the two coders achieved agreement on 210 cases (85.4%) for the Top 1 value and 213 cases (86.6%) for the Top 2 value. In addition to percentage agreement, Krippendorff’s alpha was calculated to account for the possibility of chance agreement. The resulting alpha values were 0.818 for the primary value frame and 0.835 for the secondary value frame, both exceeding the commonly accepted threshold of 0.80 for acceptable inter-coder reliability. Any discrepancies between coders were resolved through a structured panel discussion involving both coders and a third researcher, ensuring consistency and methodological rigor in the final coding decisions.

4.3. Results

4.3.1. Value Frames Highlighted by Sharing Economy Platforms in Marketing Communications

To address research question 1a, which aims to identify the value frames used by SE platforms in their marketing communications, we analyzed the frequency of each value frame of South Korea and the U.S.

Table 4. Value frames prioritized in the SE.

Rank	Value Type	Top 1 Value		Top 2 Value		Total	%
		South Korea	U.S.	South Korea	U.S.
1	Functional	85	92	21	21	219	44.5%
2	Economic	16	18	54	53	141	28.7%
3	Emotional	6	12	14	33	65	13.2%
4	Social	0	13	6	18	37	7.5%
5	Sustainability	0	4	4	9	17	3.5%
6	N/A	—	—	8	5	13	2.6%
7	Total	107	139	107	139	492	1

presents the results, showing that the functional value frame appears most frequently, with 219 occurrences (44.5%), suggesting that platforms heavily prioritize functional aspects like convenience, ease of use, and service utility. The economic frame ranks second, with a frequency of 141 (28.7%), indicating a strong emphasis on economic benefits like affordability and cost-effectiveness. The emotional value frame, with a frequency of 65 (13.2%), plays an important role in marketing communications, although not as predominant as functional and economic value frames. The social value frame accounts for 37 occurrences (7.5%), while the sustainability value frame appears least frequently, with only 17 occurrences (3.5%). These findings suggest that SE platforms are more likely to highlight functional and economic values in their marketing communications, while emotional, social, and sustainability frames receive comparatively less emphasis.

4.3.2. Value Frame Differences Between South Korea and the U.S.

As shown in

Table 5. Differences in value frames prioritized in South Korea and the U.S.

Value × Country Crosstabulation
			Country		Total
			South Korea	U.S.
Value	Functional value	Count	106	113	219
		% within country	49.5%	40.6%	44.5%
	Economic value	Count	70	71	141
		% within country	32.7%	25.5%	28.7%
	Emotional value	Count	20	45	65
		% within country	9.3%	16.2%	13.2%
	Social value	Count	6	31	37
		% within country	2.8%	11.2%	7.5%
	Sustainability value	Count	4	13	17
		% within country	1.9%	4.7%	3.5%
	N/A	Count	8	5	13
		% within country	3.7%	1.8%	2.6%
Total		Count	214	278	492
		% within country	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%

Note: In instances where a single value frame dominates the marketing communication, the “N/A” designation indicates an absence of a secondary value frame.

, research question 1b tries to find out whether the value frames emphasized by SE platforms are different for South Korea and the U.S. under different cultural backgrounds. The Pearson chi-square test yielded an overall value of 24.28 with 5 degrees of freedom, indicating a significant difference in at least one value frame between the two countries (χ² = 24.28, p < 0.01). Functional value is the dominant frame in both countries, but significantly more prevalent in South Korea (49.5% vs. 40.6% in the U.S.). Economic value is more emphasized in South Korea (32.7%) than in the U.S. (25.5%). Emotional value is noticeably more emphasized in the U.S. (16.2%) compared to South Korea (9.3%). Social value also sees a considerably stronger emphasis in the U.S. (11.2%) than in South Korea (2.8%). Sustainability value is relatively low in both countries, but slightly more pronounced in the U.S.

4.4. Discussion

In Study 1, we found that functional and economic values were consistently emphasized across both South Korean and U.S. platforms, while emotional and social values were more prominently highlighted by U.S. platforms. While there is limited research examining value propositions in the SE, Wruk et al. [13] analyzed 62 German organizations and examined how they strategically integrate social, ecological, and economic values with distinct business model characteristics to align with societal expectations. Our study expands upon this work by introducing a cross-cultural perspective, comparing SE value propositions in South Korea and the U.S. This broader scope contributes to a deeper understanding of how cultural contexts shape the strategic communication of value by SE platforms.

5. Study 2. Topic Modeling of Consumer-Perceived Values

The objective of Study 2 is to ascertain the consumer value perceptions of SE platforms in the actual marketplace of South Korea and the U.S. To achieve this, we gathered review data from consumers who use SE platforms and applied the STM method to identify and categorize their perceived values (e.g., topics).

5.1. Review Data Collection

This study investigates consumer perceptions of the SE across three business sectors: second-hand transactions, accommodation, and service exchanges in Study 1 [25]. Space-sharing platforms were excluded due to their limited activity in South Korea and insufficient review data. Representative platforms were selected based on market dominance and academic relevance: Airbnb for accommodation [42], Kmong and Fiverr for service exchange in South Korea and the U.S., respectively [43], and Joonggonara and eBay for second-hand transactions [6,44].

For Joonggonara and eBay, 10,000 recent reviews (up to 2023) were collected from the Google Play Store. Reviews were filtered based on country ID (KR for South Korea and US for the United States) and language (Korean and English). Similarly, 3200 reviews each were collected for Kmong and Fiverr using the same method. For Airbnb, 10,000 recent reviews per city (Seoul and New York) were sourced from its official website, also filtered by country ID and language (up to 2023).

5.2. Pre-Processing of Consumer Reviews

To analyze the data using STM, we first translated Korean reviews from three business sectors into English using Google Translate. Each sector’s reviews were processed separately in R (version 4.3.2). The pre-processing steps included removing duplicate entries, non-English texts, and extremely short reviews. Text normalization involved converting all content to lowercase, removing special characters, numbers, and standard English stop words. Sparse terms, those appearing in less than 1% of the corpus, were removed to enhance topic coherence. Finally, stemming was applied to reduce words to their root forms and ensure lexical consistency across the dataset.

5.3. Structural Topic Modeling

STM is an unsupervised probabilistic machine learning approach used for the automated coding of large collections of unstructured text and the identification of hidden themes. Unlike its predecessor, Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA), STM incorporates metadata, allowing researchers to analyze thematic structures alongside contextual variables (e.g., platform type or geographic region). This dual capability enables STM to address two key questions: “What are the main topics discussed?” and “How do different groups emphasize these topics?” [45].

The number of topics (k) is a crucial parameter that affects the performance and interpretability of the STM model. Following established practices [46], we selected k values by balancing semantic coherence and exclusivity. After testing k values ranging from 5 to 25, the most acceptable for interpreting the value dimensions of each business sector were identified as ($k_{Airbnb}=10,k_{KmongandFiverr}=7{,k}_{joonggonaraandeBay}=10)$. Figure 1 illustrates how the optimal number of topics for Airbnb reviews was determined by evaluating both semantic coherence and exclusivity, serving as an example of the STM diagnostic process.

Topic prevalence, defined as the proportion of each topic within a document, was estimated using STM outputs. The model incorporates metadata to account for contextual variables, as expressed in the following formula:

Prevalence_d,k = β0 + β1 × metadata + εd,

where Prevalence_d,k represents the share of topic k in document d. Metadata incorporates document-level variables of two countries. β0 is the intercept, εd summarizes residuals.

Topics were labeled using FREX statistics, which balance term frequency and exclusivity to ensure representativeness and distinctiveness [45]. Two independent authors and two industry experts reviewed the topic labels to ensure alignment with theoretical definitions. Any discrepancies were resolved through panel discussion, resulting in consistent coding. Subsequently, the topics were mapped to five SE value frames—functional, economic, emotional, social, and sustainability—using the same rigorous procedure as the labeling process.

5.4. Results and Discussion

To address consumer-perceived value, we first compared value perceptions of Airbnb between South Korea and the U.S. Figure 2 presents the mean differences in topic prevalence with 95% confidence intervals. In South Korea, Facilities and Convenience (39.7%) and General Stay Experience (20.8%) are more frequently discussed, whereas U.S. consumers discussed more frequently Satisfaction and Loyalty (30.3%) and Host’s Friendliness (10.8%).

Next, we analyzed the distribution of value frames in consumer reviews from South Korea and the U.S. Drawing on previous literature, topics were initially categorized based on five commonly accepted value dimensions in the SE: functional, emotional, social, economic, and sustainability value. [10,42,47], as shown in

Table 6. Topic labeling for Airbnb in South Korea and the U.S.

Accommodation
Topic Label and Value Type	Top Words (Frex Criterion)	South Korea	U.S.	References
		Topic Prev.	Topic Prev.
1. Functional		58.2%	38.3%	[10,47]
Facilities and convenience	convenience, toilet, station, parking, boiler, soundproofing, cold, mart, advantages, disadvantages	39.7%	2.3%	[42]
Room	Water, floor, shower, air, noise, towels, pressure, hot, broken, mold	7.6%	5.1%	[47]
Transport	subway, close, restaurants, station, walking, distance, bus, shops, walkable, train	5.3%	11.5%	[47]
Interior design and aesthetics	space, room, spacious, stayed, private, check, best, new, hotel, nice	4.0%	7.5%
Location	apartment, neighborhood, park, kitchen, quiet, lots, walk, fantastic, area, central	1.6%	11.9%	[47]
2. Emotional		26.1%	15.7%	[47,48]
General stay experience	clean, accommodation, location, really, interior, host, comfortable, pretty, atmosphere, warm	20.8%	6.8%	[47,48]
Homeliness	home, felt, parking, provided, safe, issue, host, check in, thankful, arrival	5.3%	8.9%	[47]
3. Social		1.7%	10.8%	[10,42]
Host’s friendliness	thank, host, kind, better, stay, trip, staying, hospitality, comfortable, feel	1.7%	10.8%	[42]
4. Economic		7.4%	4.9%	[10,47]
Value for money	price, value, room, bed, bathroom, small, uncomfortable, night, stairs, people	7.4%	4.9%	[47]
5. Satisfaction and loyalty		6.6%	30.3%
Satisfaction and loyalty	place, great, clean, host, recommend, location, responsive, perfect, friendly, helpful	6.6%	30.3%	[49,50]

.

Our results show that functional value (e.g., Facilities and Convenience, Room, Location) dominates user reviews in both countries, but particularly in South Korea, where it accounts for 58.2% of consumer discourse, substantially higher than the 38.3% observed in U.S. reviews. This suggests that South Korean users are more likely to emphasize instrumental and utilitarian aspects of the service. Emotional value, which reflects affective experiences, is represented by topics such as Homeliness [48] and appears more modestly, at 26.1% in South Korea and 15.7% in the U.S., indicating that affective engagement is a secondary, though still relevant, evaluative factor.

We identified a separate Satisfaction and Loyalty theme based on high-probability keywords such as recommend, perfect, friendly, helpful, and responsive. Unlike the other themes, which represent specific attributes or sources of perceived value, this topic captures users’ global evaluations and post-experience reactions, including satisfaction, trust, and willingness to recommend. Importantly, prior studies [49,50] have shown that such recommendation behavior is not based on a single value driver, but rather emerges as a composite outcome of perceived functional, emotional, and interpersonal benefits. Thus, we argue that this category is best understood as the result of multidimensional value integration, rather than as an independent value frame.

Notably, this topic was far more prevalent in U.S. reviews (30.3%) than in South Korean ones (6.6%). This suggests that U.S. consumers are more likely to articulate and translate positive experiences into behavioral signals of attitudinal loyalty, such as public recommendations or expressions of advocacy. This pattern may reflect cultural tendencies in self-expression and social signaling in digital environments [51]

In contrast, social value which emphasizes interpersonal interaction, particularly with hosts, was also more prominent in the U.S. (10.8%) than in South Korea (1.7%), reinforcing the notion that U.S. users place greater value on social and relational aspects of peer-to-peer services. Finally, economic value, associated with price sensitivity and cost-effectiveness, appeared slightly more frequently in South Korea (7.4%) than in the U.S. (4.9%), indicating that economic considerations play a relatively greater role for South Korean users.

For service exchange platforms (Figure 3), South Korean consumers place greater emphasis on Pricing and Fee Transparency (22.9%) and Usability and Functionality (17.6%), whereas U.S. consumers focus more on Emotional Feedback (27.0%).

Functional value (Usability and Functionality, Technical Issues and Account Security, Technical Support and Service) is more prominent in South Korea (44.8%) than in the U.S. (24.7%), indicating a stronger emphasis on practicality. Economic value (Pricing and Fee Transparency, Refunds and Trust Issues) is also higher in South Korea (31.6%) compared to the U.S. (26.4%). In contrast, emotional value such as Emotional Feedback and sentiment-oriented themes such as Satisfaction and Loyalty are more prevalent in the U.S. (48.8%) than in South Korea (23.6%), indicating that U.S. consumers place relatively greater emphasis on affective experiences even in task-oriented contexts.

For second-hand platforms (Figure 4), South Korean consumers prioritize Ease of Use and Convenience (26.9%) as well as Pricing and Transaction Safety (11.3%), whereas U.S. consumers highlight Pleasant Trading Experience (21.3%), Cross-Border Trade and Security (14.6%), and Seller–Buyer Interaction (8.7%).

Functional value (Product Search and Functionality, Login and Account Issues, Cross-Border Trade and Security, Technical Issues and Updates) dominates in South Korea (65.1% vs. 49.5% in the U.S.). Conversely, emotional value (Pleasant Trading Experience, User-Friendlinessand Experience) is more emphasized in the U.S. (26.6% vs. 12.7%). Economic value (Pricing and Transaction Safety, Refunds and Trust Issues) is slightly higher in South Korea (16.6% vs. 15.1%). Lastly, social value (Seller–Buyer Interaction) is slightly higher in the U.S. (8.7% vs. 5.7%).

6. General Discussion

6.1. Overview of Consumer-Platform Value Alignment

An analysis of consumer value perceptions and SE platform value propositions reveals that both sides tend to prioritize functional, economic, and emotional values, while sustainability remains notably absent from consumer priorities. However, SE platforms appear to place greater priority on economic value, whereas consumers tend to attach higher importance to emotional value, as shown in Appendix A.

In accommodation platforms, both South Korean and U.S. platforms and consumers prioritize functional and emotional values, with functional value emphasized more in South Korea (38.9% frequency, 58.2% prevalence), while emotional and social dimensions resonate more strongly in the U.S. (emotional: 27.1% frequency, 15.7% prevalence; social: 18.8% frequency, 10.8% prevalence). In service exchange platforms, functional and economic values dominate, with economic value emphasized more in South Korea (36.4%, 31.6%), and emotional value more pronounced in the U.S. (15%, 27%). On second-hand platforms, functional value remains the most prominent, particularly in South Korea (48.3%, 65.1%) compared to the U.S. (28.3%, 49.5%).

Overall, functional, emotional, and economic values dominate both platform value propositions and consumer value perceptions, while sustainability-related concerns appear far less frequently. This pattern aligns with prior research, such as the meta-analysis by Kozlenkova et al. [12], which reviewed 55 studies and concluded that consumer engagement in the SE is primarily driven by practical and experiential motivations rather than by social or environmental ideals.

Two key factors help explain this tendency. First, psychological distance theory offers a compelling lens. According to this theory, individuals perceive abstract, temporally distant, or socially remote events as less relevant to their immediate decision-making processes [52]. Numerous studies indicate that environmental and sustainability issues, such as climate change, are often perceived as affecting distant locations, future generations, or socially remote others, rather than having immediate personal relevance or impact. As a result, these issues are seen as less personally relevant and urgent, which in turn hinders pro-environmental behavior [53,54]. In the context of the SE, similar psychological mechanisms apply. For example, individuals who perceive themselves as socially or temporally closer to the consequences of environmental degradation are more likely to express concern and engage in pro-environmental behaviors [55,56], such as participating in second-hand transactions on online platforms [56]. Furthermore, many SE interactions particularly in sectors like accommodation involve significant social and psychological distance between providers (e.g., hosts) and users, further diminishing the perceived social and environmental value of the transaction [57]. By contrast, functional and economic values are psychologically proximate, offering immediate, tangible benefits such as convenience, cost savings, and ease of access, which can be readily evaluated at the point of decision-making [29,57]. As a result, consumers are more likely to prioritize these values. This tendency corresponds with Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, which posits that individuals are primarily motivated by basic and unmet needs such as safety, efficiency, and financial security, before attending to higher-order goals like environmental sustainability [58].

Second, the increasing commercialization of the SE has further marginalized sustainability concerns. As SE platforms scale, attract venture capital, and pursue market dominance, their operational models have increasingly diverged from the original ideals of community-based exchange and environmental stewardship [2]. This transformation, often described as “platform capitalism” [25], has shifted platform communication strategies away from sustainability and toward economic utility and convenience. Moreover, investor expectations further reinforce this shift, pushing platforms to deliver rapid financial returns at the expense of long-term social and environmental goals [59]. As Huang et al. [60] observe, capital and resources are increasingly concentrated among regions and actors who achieve higher returns on digital platforms. Consequently, value accrues primarily to asset holders and platform owners, leading to rising inequality and capital accumulation, as described by Piketty [61]. In this context, sustainability is frequently reduced to peripheral branding, serving more to enhance public image than to achieve substantive environmental impact, which contributes to phenomena such as corporate social responsibility washing [62].

To address this, platforms could implement interventions aimed at reducing psychological distance and making sustainability more salient in the user experience. Promising approaches include gamified rewards [63], real-time environmental impact feedback, and intuitive data visualizations [64], which have shown potential in enhancing user engagement with long-term sustainability goals.

6.2. Differences Between South Korea and the U.S.

Our findings indicate that both U.S. and South Korean SE platforms predominantly emphasize functional and economic values. However, U.S. platforms display greater value diversity, incorporating higher levels of emotional (16.2% vs. 9.3%) and social value (11.2% vs. 2.8%) compared to those in South Korea. This distinction may be attributed to the relative maturity of the SE market in the U.S., the birthplace of the SE, where sustained development and innovation [22] may have fostered broader expectations about platform value. In contrast, South Korea’s SE market remains in an earlier stage of development, leading platforms to focus more on functional and economic efficiency [3].

From the consumer perspective, cross-cultural differences are also evident. U.S. consumers place more emphasis on emotional and social value, especially within accommodation services, where emotional value accounts for 15.7% prevalence and social value for 10.8%. South Korean consumers, along with SE platforms operating in this market, prioritize functional and economic values, particularly noticeable on service exchange platforms, where economic value is dominant, accounting for 31.6% prevalence.

Few studies have systematically explored the role of cultural differences in shaping value perceptions within the SE context. Davidson et al. [15] illustrate that cultural values significantly influence participation motives: U.S. consumers are primarily driven by hedonic experiences, enhancing self-image and well-being, whereas consumers in collectivist contexts like India are primarily motivated by the utilitarian value derived from sharing initiatives. Similarly, Kozlenkova et al. [12] suggest that economic and social inequalities among SE participants heighten the importance of utilitarian benefits while diminishing hedonic considerations, especially in cultures characterized by higher power distance and collectivism.

Our findings partially align with these earlier studies yet also reveal some differences. Consistent with prior research, South Korea, a high power distance society (Power Distance Index: 60; China: 80; India: 77), indeed emphasizes functional and economic values more strongly compared to their U.S. counterparts (Index: 40; U.K.: 35) [14], who prioritize emotional values. This finding aligns with theoretical perspectives suggesting that in high power distance societies, economic benefits become especially salient due to pronounced resource inequality, consequently suppressing hedonic and emotional satisfaction derived from interactions among strangers [12]. Conversely, individualistic cultures such as the U.S. place greater emphasis on leisure, exploration, and emotional expression, explaining the observed prioritization of emotional values among U.S. consumers [15].

However, our findings also reveal nuances that challenge traditional cultural assumptions, which posit that social value is more prominently emphasized in collectivist societies than in individualist ones [14,17]. Although social value was not the dominant theme among South Korean consumers overall, its frequent emergence suggests that collectivist norms continue to exert a significant influence on consumer perceptions in shared experiences. One possible explanation is the ongoing generational transformation in South Korea. Empirical studies indicate that younger Koreans, particularly university students, now exhibit lower levels of collectivism compared to their counterparts in China and even the U.S. [39]. This generational shift may foster greater individualism and a stronger emphasis on utility and self-benefit among younger Koreans, even as collectivist values remain salient in particular contexts.

Additionally, platform architecture plays a critical role in shaping how value is expressed within the SE. Prior research indicates that consumers from individualistic cultures are more responsive to engagement cues such as peer reviews, host participation, and interactive design features, which foster connection and trust [65,66]. In contrast, collectivist consumers are more likely to base their decisions on familiar networks and established social roles [65,66]. These cultural tendencies can interact with platform structures in meaningful ways. For example, platforms like Airbnb, which facilitate interpersonal interactions, promote greater expression of emotional and social value [47]. Consequently, U.S. consumers may perceive higher social value in SE platforms due to features that encourage community engagement, such as host ratings, local recommendations, and user storytelling, compared to consumers in South Korea.

Thus, what may initially appear to be a contradiction in cultural expectations may instead reflect an evolving and context-specific re-configuration of collectivist values. Future research should further explore how platform design and cultural orientation interact to shape user perceptions and value expression in diverse SE contexts.

7. Conclusions

7.1. Theoretical Contributions

This study contributes to the literature on the SE in several ways. Firstly, it aligns platform value propositions with consumer value perceptions in South Korea and the U.S., addressing a gap in prior research, which has largely focused on consumer perspectives alone. By examining the interplay between platform strategies and consumer preferences, this study provides a more holistic understanding of value dynamics within the SE.

Secondly, the study highlights the cultural nuances influencing SE perceptions, bridging a research gap where most studies have focused on Western contexts. By comparing South Korea and the U.S., this research underscores how collectivist and individualistic cultures shape consumer priorities and platform strategies differently.

Thirdly, this study employs a rigorous methodological approach by combining content analysis of platform value propositions with structural topic modeling of consumer reviews. This methodological rigor ensures robustness and offers a replicable framework for future research exploring value alignment within dynamic SE ecosystems.

7.2. Managerial Implications

The findings of this study offer several insights for SE platforms. First, SE platforms should address the misalignment between their value propositions and consumer priorities. Our findings reveal that while platforms tend to emphasize functional and economic value, consumers particularly in the U.S. increasingly seek emotional and social dimensions in their experiences. This value gap may hinder user engagement, trust, and long-term loyalty. To address this, platforms should move beyond transactional messaging and integrate emotionally resonant design elements.

Second, cross-cultural differences in value preferences necessitate localized strategy design. South Korean users show a stronger preference for practical utility and cost-efficiency, while U.S. users place more weight on experiential and relational factors. These differences imply that global SE platforms cannot rely on a one-size-fits-all communication model. Instead, they should develop culturally adaptive interfaces and service models, aligning platform communication with the dominant value frames of each market. For example, highlighting affordability and reliability may be more effective in Korea, while community impact and host narratives may resonate more in the U.S.

Third, although sustainability did not emerge as a dominant consumer concern in this study, prior research consistently positions sustainability as a central value of the SE [9,38], emphasizing its potential to promote environmentally responsible and sustainable consumption behaviors [3,67]. From the perspective of corporate social responsibility, it is imperative for SE platforms to strike a balance between commercial viability and efforts that cultivate prosocial awareness among users [68].

To address this, future research should explore mechanisms that can reduce consumers’ psychological distance from sustainability goals and counteract the commercial dilution of sustainability values. For instance, Fox et al. [63] demonstrated that interactive environmental games can lower psychological distance, increase risk perception, and promote pro-environmental behavior; thus, SE platforms might employ gamified incentives for eco-friendly choices to achieve similar effects. Additionally, technological interventions, such as IoT dashboards that visualize carbon emissions, can make environmental data more concrete and enhance user awareness [64]. For example, displaying real-time emissions savings from shared mobility services may help users recognize the impact of their choices. Platforms can also highlight environmentally responsible hosts through green certification badges or eco-labels, increasing user trust and encouraging more sustainable choices by making environmental efforts visible and credible [69]. Finally, partnerships with NGOs can further enhance the credibility and personal relevance of sustainability initiatives [70]. These approaches could help embed sustainability into the core operations of SE platforms, making it a more visible and actionable part of the user experience.

7.3. Limitations and Future Research

This study has several limitations. First, although we analyzed marketing communications from 246 SE platforms and consumer reviews from major platforms like the Google Play Store, some relevant businesses or user segments may have been excluded. Our platform selection, based on market share and prior research, may also reflect strategic biases that influence value perception. Expanding future samples to include a wider range of platforms and data sources would improve representativeness.

Second, consumer-perceived value is not static but evolves across time and cultural contexts. Future research should employ longitudinal methods to track changes in value perception, particularly in response to market shifts or platform strategies. Experimental designs could also test how specific sustainability messages affect psychological distance and behavioral outcomes. Finally, cross-generational comparisons within collectivist societies may reveal how cultural values are reconfigured across age groups, offering deeper insight into emerging patterns of engagement in the SE.

Despite these limitations, this study enhances our understanding of SE value perceptions and propositions across different cultural contexts, providing valuable insights for both scholars and practitioners.