Sustainable Informativeness in Digital Accommodation Platforms and Sustainable Consumption Behavior: The Roles of Value and Trust

Abstract

As digital transformation accelerates in tourism and hospitality, sustainability-related information on booking platforms has become increasingly relevant to consumer decision-making. However, prior research has not sufficiently explained how such information operates as part of digital choice architecture or how it becomes meaningful for sustainable consumption decisions. To address this gap, this study introduces sustainable informativeness as a sustainability-specific and platform-contextual construct reflecting the visibility, interpretability, usefulness, comparability, and decision-facilitating role of sustainability-related information. Drawing on digital choice architecture, value theory, and trust theory, this study examines the structural relationships among sustainable informativeness, sustainable functional value, ethical–emotional value, trust, and sustainable consumption behavior. Data were collected through an online survey of 304 Korean adult consumers with experience using digital accommodation booking platforms and analyzed using structural equation modeling. The results show that sustainable informativeness was positively associated with both value dimensions, and both value dimensions were positively associated with trust. Trust showed the strongest direct association with sustainable consumption behavior, whereas the direct association between sustainable informativeness and behavior was not significant. Significant indirect associations through value and trust suggest that sustainability-related information is more closely related to sustainable consumption behavior when it is useful, meaningful, and trustworthy. Practically, the findings suggest that platforms should design sustainability-related information to be not only visible but also comparable, interpretable, useful, and credible.

1. Introduction

The hospitality and tourism industry has entered a phase in which consumer decision making is increasingly organized by digital interfaces. In accommodation markets, online platforms now function not merely as transactional channels but as environments in which consumers search, compare, interpret, and evaluate information before making booking decisions. Earlier work consistently showed that website quality is an important antecedent of online adoption and platform usage [1,2], that online reviews are central sources of judgment in hotel booking contexts [3,4], that perceived value is a key psychological determinant of online travel and hotel purchase intentions [5,6], that brand image and price shape online booking decisions [7,8], and that trust remains indispensable in reducing uncertainty in online environments [9,10]. Subsequent studies further refined this line of work by examining the roles of review readability and reviewer characteristics [11], review polarity and hotel category [12], managerial responses to reviews [13], and the social media trustworthiness of tourism information [14]. At the same time, sustainability has become one of the defining themes of contemporary hospitality and tourism research. A growing body of work has examined environmental sustainability in hospitality and tourism consumer behavior more broadly [15], the drivers of sustainable consumption behavior in sharing-economy settings [16,17], sustainable choices in peer-to-peer accommodation [18], and tourists’ evaluations of sustainable accommodation attributes [19]. Other studies have emphasized the importance of hotels’ green practices in shaping consumer citizenship behavior [20], the adoption of environmental technologies and pro-environmental behavior in the hotel industry [21], eco-label credibility in generating green word-of-mouth [22], the damaging effects of greenwashing on trust and behavioral intentions [23], and the mediating role of green trust in the relationship between hotels’ environmental efforts and guests’ sustainable behaviors [24]. More recent work has extended this discussion to Gen Z’s sustainable stay choices [25], the antecedents of green hotel consumer behavior [26], and consumers’ perceptions of sustainability-certified hotels on global online travel platforms [27].

Yet these two streams of research have not been fully integrated. Digital platform studies have generally provided sophisticated accounts of information quality, review effects, and trust formation, but they have often treated sustainability as peripheral or as one attribute among many. Conversely, sustainable hospitality studies have offered rich explanations of green attitudes, eco-labels, green trust, and pro-environmental behavior, but they have rarely theorized how consumers’ sustainable choices are shaped within digital platform environments where information is ranked, framed, filtered, signaled, and visually prioritized. Accordingly, the key gap is the absence of a process-oriented model explaining how sustainability-related information in platform environments is interpreted, valued, trusted, and associated with sustainable consumption behavior.

This gap is especially consequential because sustainable consumption research continues to wrestle with the persistent attitude–behavior gap. Consumers frequently express positive attitudes toward environmentally responsible options, yet do not act on those attitudes in actual purchase situations [28]. This problem has also been discussed in hospitality and tourism, including green hotel choice research grounded in the Theory of Planned Behavior [29], broader reviews of sustainable consumer behavior in hospitality [15], integrative sustainable behavior frameworks [30], and extended TPB applications to luxury-hotel guests’ sustainable consumption [31]. Taken together, this literature implies that internal orientations alone are insufficient; the architecture of the decision environment also matters. This is where Nudge Theory and digital choice architecture become theoretically relevant. The foundational premise of libertarian paternalism is that behavior can be influenced without eliminating freedom of choice [32]. Nudge was then formalized as an approach to improving decisions by altering the structure of choice environments rather than by coercion or economic prohibition [33]. The classic demonstration that defaults can alter life-and-death choices illustrates the power of seemingly minor design features in shaping actual behavior [34]. Later work argued that nudging deserves greater policy attention [35], while the MINDSPACE framework elaborated specific channels through which behavior may be influenced [36]. In digital contexts, this logic has been translated into digital nudging, that is, the use of interface design, information ordering, cues, defaults, and recommendations to shape user decisions in online environments [37,38]. Research on recommender systems has reinforced this position by showing how digital choice environments guide user behavior through structured presentation and suggestion mechanisms [39]. Recent tourism studies suggest that the digitalization–sustainability nexus is no longer speculative. Digital innovation has been discussed as a driver of sustainable tourism development [40]. Digital tourism platforms have been linked to the advancement of sustainable development goals in the Industry 4.0 era [41]. Platform-based approaches have also been proposed as tools for promoting sustainable and authentic tourism in low-density territories [42], while eco-travel applications have been shown to matter for Gen Z’s eco-friendly travel behavior [43]. Other work has examined digital empowerment and sustainable tourism at destination level [44], the use of decoy effects in sustainable tourism recommender systems [45], sustainability nudges on OTA websites [46], virtual technologies supporting sustainable consumption [47], augmented reality as a pathway to sustainable tourism [48], and the impact of digital technology on travel intentions [49].

However, much of this literature remains either macro-level or technology-centric, with limited attention to the consumer-level process through which sustainability-related information on accommodation platforms is associated with sustainable consumption behavior. Against this background, the present study conceptualizes sustainable informativeness in digital accommodation platforms as a distinct construct and interprets it through the lens of digital choice architecture. Rather than treating sustainability information as neutral background content, this study argues that it can operate as a structured decision cue that is associated with consumers’ value perceptions, trust, and sustainable consumption tendencies. More specifically, the study proposes that sustainable informativeness is linked to sustainable consumption behavior through two forms of perceived value—sustainable functional value and ethical–emotional value—and through trust.

To clarify the theoretical positioning of the study, this research does not seek to test the full scope of digital choice architecture, value theory, or trust theory. Rather, it applies and extends these perspectives to the specific context of sustainability-related information in digital accommodation booking platforms. Given the cross-sectional survey design, the study examines theoretically proposed structural associations among sustainable informativeness, value formation, trust, and sustainable consumption behavior, rather than establishing definitive causal mechanisms.

Accordingly, this study addresses the following research questions. First, how is sustainable informativeness associated with sustainable functional value and ethical–emotional value in digital accommodation booking platforms? Second, how are these two value dimensions associated with trust and sustainable consumption behavior? Third, do sustainable functional value, ethical–emotional value, and trust mediate the relationship between sustainable informativeness and sustainable consumption behavior? These research questions directly guide the development of the hypotheses and the SEM-based analytical strategy. In doing so, this study aims to integrate digital platform research with sustainable hospitality research and to offer a more precise, process-oriented account of the structural associations through which sustainability-related information becomes behaviorally meaningful in platform-mediated accommodation decisions.

2. Theoretical Background

2.1. Digitized Hospitality and Tourism Environments and the Expansion of Sustainable Consumption Research

Research on digitized hospitality and tourism environments has primarily developed through an information-processing perspective. Early studies in online commerce established that consumers’ willingness to transact online depends heavily on trust in the digital environment [1,50]. In tourism contexts, online relational exchange has likewise been shown to depend on consumers’ confidence in both the medium and the service provider [9]. Subsequent studies demonstrated that online reviews influence hotel booking intentions and trust perceptions [3], that eWOM affects website perceptions and booking-related attitudes [4], and that trust, brand image, price, and perceived value jointly explain online hotel purchase intentions [7]. This stream of research later moved beyond simple exposure effects to examine how review information is processed, including the roles of readability, reviewer characteristics, helpfulness perceptions, and managerial responses [11,12,13,51]. Related work on website quality, review quality, and e-trust further reinforced the view that booking behavior in digital hospitality settings is strongly shaped by information environments [2,10].

In parallel, sustainable consumption research in hospitality and tourism has broadened substantially. Earlier studies relied heavily on attitude-based frameworks, particularly the Theory of Planned Behavior, to explain green hotel choice and other pro-environmental intentions [29]. More recent work has extended this focus from intention to a broader range of outcomes, including sustainable consumption behavior, green revisit intentions, green WOM, green customer citizenship behavior, and sustainable stay choice [15,16,18,20,22,25]. At the same time, hospitality scholars have investigated tourists’ perceptions of sustainable accommodation attributes [19], the effects of eco-label credibility [22], the role of green trust and gratitude in sustainable behavior adoption [24], and the mediating role of information-seeking behavior in green hotel preferences [26]. Reviews and bibliometric studies similarly suggest that sustainability has become a central axis of hospitality scholarship rather than a peripheral niche [52,53,54].

Nevertheless, a conceptual imbalance remains. Research on digitized platforms has been strong in explaining online evaluation and booking mechanisms, whereas sustainable hospitality research has been strong in explaining pro-environmental intentions and green evaluations. What remains underdeveloped is a framework that explains how sustainability-related information on digital accommodation platforms becomes psychologically meaningful and behaviorally effective. This gap is particularly important because sustainable consumer behavior cannot be fully understood through internal dispositions alone. The persistent attitude–behavior gap suggests that favorable environmental attitudes do not automatically translate into actual marketplace choices [28]. Frameworks such as SHIFT further imply that context, convenience, and decision architecture matter alongside values and norms [30]. To understand sustainable accommodation choices in digital contexts, the literature must therefore move beyond internal orientation models and more directly examine the role of platform-based information environments.

2.2. Sustainable Informativeness

The central construct of this study, sustainable informativeness, builds on but also extends several established lines of research. Existing work on information-related constructs in online consumption can be broadly organized into three perspectives: information quality and usefulness, signaling, and choice architecture.

The first perspective emphasizes the functional properties of information. Within this tradition, information is treated as a resource that helps consumers evaluate alternatives more accurately and efficiently. Studies in hospitality and tourism have shown that review readability and reviewer characteristics shape perceived value [11], that review helpfulness influences purchase intention in service settings [51], and that website quality and online review quality significantly affect online hotel booking intention and platform usage [2]. Research on online hotel booking intentions has also linked tourists’ hope, knowledge, and perceived value to booking decisions, suggesting that informative environments help consumers form evaluative judgments in digital accommodation contexts [55]. In a related vein, work from banking and digital-service contexts has shown that website usability and satisfaction contribute to loyalty and positive word-of-mouth, underscoring the broader relevance of functional digital experience quality [56,57].

The second perspective treats information as a signal. From this viewpoint, information matters not only because it is useful, but also because it conveys hidden qualities such as responsibility, reliability, authenticity, or competence. In the sustainability literature, customer behavior in sharing and platform economies has been shown to respond to multiple interacting signals, including those sent by platforms, service providers, and other customers [16]. Eco-labels, sustainability certifications, green marketing claims, and user-generated cues all function as signals that reduce uncertainty regarding whether a hospitality service is genuinely sustainable [22,27]. The significance of such signals is also reflected in studies of green image, green trust, green brand equity, and greenwashing, all of which indicate that sustainability-related information affects consumer response insofar as it is interpreted as credible and meaningful [23,58,59].

The third perspective focuses on choice architecture. From this standpoint, information is not behaviorally neutral. What matters is not only what is communicated, but also how it is ordered, framed, compared, highlighted, and filtered. Digital environments make such structuring particularly influential because online platforms can shape attention and comparison processes in real time [37,38,39]. Tourism applications of this perspective increasingly demonstrate that decision framing and interface structures affect consumers’ preferences. For example, online review evaluation modes can nudge preferences [60], sustainability nudges can influence OTA booking decisions [46], eco-labels can become especially persuasive when made easier to evaluate [61], and decoy effects may influence sustainable tourism recommendations [45].

Taken together, these three perspectives suggest that sustainability-related information on digital accommodation platforms should not be understood only as factual content. From the information-quality perspective, such information helps consumers evaluate accommodation options more clearly and efficiently. From the signaling perspective, it communicates responsibility, credibility, and authenticity. From the choice-architecture perspective, it shapes how sustainability-related attributes are noticed, compared, and interpreted in platform-based decision environments. Together, these perspectives provide the conceptual basis for defining sustainable informativeness as a platform-specific construct that combines sustainability-related content quality, signaling value, and decision-structuring functions.

This study integrates these three perspectives and defines sustainable informativeness as the degree to which sustainability-related information on a digital accommodation platform is sufficiently visible, interpretable, relevant, comparable, and decision-facilitating to support consumers’ platform-based accommodation choices. In this study, sustainable informativeness is positioned as a higher-order, sustainability-specific platform information construct that integrates three related but distinct dimensions: the informational quality of sustainability-related content, its signaling function, and its role within digital choice architecture. It is therefore not intended to replace existing concepts such as information quality, eco-label credibility, sustainability signaling, or digital nudging. Rather, it extends these concepts by focusing specifically on how sustainability-related information is perceived by consumers as useful, credible, interpretable, comparable, and decision-supportive within digital accommodation booking platforms.

This concept therefore differs from generic information quality because it is anchored specifically in sustainability content. It differs from eco-label credibility and sustainability signaling because it is not limited to whether a specific label, claim, or certification is perceived as credible, but also captures whether sustainability-related information is interpretable, comparable, and useful for platform-based decision making. It also differs from a narrow digital nudging concept because it includes substantive sustainability information rather than interface manipulations alone. Most importantly, sustainable informativeness is conceptually distinct from sustainable functional value, ethical–emotional value, and trust. Sustainable informativeness refers to consumers’ perception of the informational environment itself, whereas sustainable functional value refers to the practical benefits derived from that information, ethical–emotional value refers to the moral and affective meaning attached to using it, and trust refers to confidence in its credibility, reliability, and integrity. Thus, sustainable informativeness is treated as an antecedent information-environment construct rather than as an evaluative outcome or a relational response.

Accordingly, sustainable informativeness is best understood as a sustainability-specific and platform-contextual extension of information quality, perceived usefulness, signaling, and information-based choice architecture. This conceptual positioning clarifies what the construct adds to the literature: it captures how sustainability-related information functions as a decision-relevant platform resource before consumers form value perceptions and trust judgments. This distinction helps establish its conceptual independence from perceived value and trust and strengthens its role as the central antecedent in the proposed model.

This conceptualization is consistent with recent research on digitally enabled sustainability in tourism. Digital tourism platforms have been framed as vehicles for sustainable development and industry transformation [41], while digital platforms have also been discussed as tools for promoting sustainable and authentic tourism in peripheral areas [42]. Eco-travel applications have been shown to influence eco-friendly travel behavior among younger consumers [43], and destination-level work has highlighted the role of digital empowerment in sustainable tourism development [44]. Further, technologies such as virtual environments and augmented reality have been linked to more sustainable consumption and tourism experiences [47,48]. Taken together, these studies suggest that sustainability information in digital tourism contexts is becoming more visible, more structured, and more behaviorally relevant.

2.3. Digital Choice Architecture and Nudging

The theoretical foundation for linking sustainable informativeness to behavior lies in Nudge Theory and digital choice architecture. Libertarian paternalism argues that people’s decisions can be guided through the design of choice environments without removing freedom of choice [32]. The publication of Nudge formalized this argument and made it influential across behavioral policy and consumer research [33]. A classic demonstration of this logic is the finding that default options can substantially alter socially consequential choices [34]. Later work extended the discussion by examining whether public institutions should invest more heavily in nudging and by specifying the psychological channels through which behavioral interventions operate [35,36].

In digital settings, these ideas evolved into the concept of digital nudging. Rather than relying on physical environments or policy rules, digital nudging operates through interface elements, recommendation systems, information placement, salience cues, and the structuring of online choice spaces [37,38,62]. In recommender-system environments, these mechanisms can shape what users notice, compare, and eventually choose [39]. This is particularly important in accommodation booking platforms, where users face multiple alternatives, limited attention, and high information density.

The tourism and hospitality literature has increasingly applied this perspective more directly. Online review presentation can influence consumer preferences through evaluative framing [60]. Sustainability-oriented nudges have been observed in OTA booking interfaces [46]. Sustainable tourism recommender systems can exploit decoy effects to steer choices [45]. Eco-labels can serve as powerful nudges when their evaluability is increased [61]. Moreover, studies on digital innovation suggest that platforms are becoming key infrastructures through which sustainability can be communicated and normalized in tourism decision making [40,41].

However, existing nudging studies in tourism remain limited in at least three respects. First, many focus on specific design manipulations rather than broader platform-level informational structures. Second, they often emphasize direct behavioral influence while underdeveloping the psychological mechanisms through which nudges work. Third, they rarely integrate sustainability-related content with information, value, trust, and behavior in a single coherent model. The present study addresses this gap by treating sustainable informativeness as a form of digital choice architecture that is associated with consumers’ value perceptions and trust, which in turn are linked to sustainable consumption behavior.

In this study, digital choice architecture is used as a theoretical lens rather than as an experimentally manipulated design condition. The focus is therefore not on testing the isolated effect of a specific nudge, such as a default, ranking, label, salience cue, or recommendation format. Instead, the study examines users’ perceived sustainable informativeness as a consumer-level manifestation of sustainability-related information architecture in digital accommodation platforms. This positioning clarifies how digital choice architecture informs the proposed relationships among sustainable informativeness, perceived value, trust, and sustainable consumption behavior.

2.4. Sustainable Informativeness and Perceived Value

Value has long been one of the most influential concepts in consumer research. Consumption values theory proposed that consumer choices are shaped by multiple value dimensions, including functional, social, emotional, epistemic, and conditional values [63]. Perceived value was later framed as a broad consumer assessment of the trade-off between what is received and what is given [64]. Subsequent research distinguished between utilitarian and hedonic value [65] and developed multidimensional scales for empirical analysis [66]. In digital hospitality contexts, value has repeatedly been linked to travel purchase intentions, booking decisions, and customer engagement [5,6,7].

Yet the value literature in hospitality has often treated value either as a global construct or as a simple functional–hedonic distinction, without fully reconsidering value in relation to sustainability information. This is a limitation because sustainability-related information can plausibly generate at least two distinct evaluative pathways.

The first is sustainable functional value. Sustainability-related platform information may help consumers make more informed, efficient, and rational decisions. Eco-labels, sustainability certifications, descriptions of green practices, information about environmental technologies, and transparent service attributes can reduce search costs and improve perceived decision quality. This argument is consistent with studies showing that review readability, review helpfulness, website quality, and information quality support more confident and useful decision making [2,11,51,55]. It also aligns with recent work arguing that sustainability may add value in destination-related decision contexts [67].

The second is ethical–emotional value. Sustainability information can also trigger feelings that one’s choice is responsible, appropriate, morally satisfying, or aligned with personal values. This is especially relevant in hospitality, where sustainable choices are often associated with environmental concern, social responsibility, and identity-congruent consumption. Research on green customer citizenship behavior, moral elevation, pride, and sustainable hospitality consumption value indicates that sustainability-related evaluations are not purely instrumental but are also emotionally and ethically charged [20,58,68]. Studies of stakeholder-valued green practices likewise suggest that what counts as “valuable” in sustainability contexts cannot be reduced to efficiency alone [69].

Accordingly, this study proposes that sustainable informativeness is positively associated with both sustainable functional value and ethical–emotional value. In doing so, it moves beyond one-dimensional treatments of value and recognizes that sustainability-related platform information may be associated with both perceived usefulness and moral desirability.

H1. 

Sustainable informativeness is positively associated with sustainable functional value.

H2. 

Sustainable informativeness is positively associated with ethical–emotional value.

2.5. Perceived Value and Trust

Trust is a foundational construct in digital commerce and online decision making. In information systems research, trust has been conceptualized as a central response to uncertainty, risk, and lack of direct control in online exchanges [1,50]. In relationship marketing, trust is a key mechanism sustaining long-term exchange relationships [70]. In hospitality and tourism, trust has been examined in relation to platforms, websites, reviews, brands, managerial responses, and sustainability claims [3,4,9,13,14].

Recent sustainable hospitality studies have expanded this discussion by introducing green trust. Hotels’ green practices have been linked to green image and green trust [58], green marketing has been associated with green brand trust and tourism purchase intentions [71], and greenwashing has been shown to undermine trust and behavioral intentions [23]. Eco-label credibility has also been shown to influence green WOM partly through trust-related mechanisms [22].

Although the literature makes clear that trust matters, it is less clear how trust is associated with consumers’ value-based interpretations of sustainability-related information in digital accommodation settings. Much existing research implies a relatively direct path from information quality or platform characteristics to trust. The present study proposes a more nuanced view: consumers may first interpret sustainability-related information in value terms, and these value interpretations may then be associated with trust perceptions. When consumers perceive sustainability-related information as useful, decision-enhancing, and practically beneficial, they may infer platform competence and reliability. When they perceive such information as morally meaningful and emotionally satisfying, they may infer sincerity, authenticity, and integrity. In this sense, functional and ethical–emotional values are proposed as interpretive pathways through which sustainable informativeness is associated with trust.

This argument is consistent with research showing that value and trust are deeply interconnected in online travel purchase settings [5], that perceived value is associated with engagement and booking intention [6], and that sustainability-related meanings can be linked to consumer confidence in the provider or platform [58,71]. Therefore, the study posits that both sustainable functional value and ethical–emotional value are positively associated with trust.

H3. 

Sustainable functional value is positively associated with trust.

H4. 

Ethical–emotional value is positively associated with trust.

2.6. Trust and Sustainable Consumption Behavior

Sustainable consumption behavior in hospitality and tourism encompasses more than mere purchase intention. It includes the selection of sustainable accommodation options, the endorsement of green practices, the sharing of positive sustainability-related word-of-mouth, and broader forms of consumer citizenship behavior. Recent research has examined sustainable stays among younger generations [25], antecedents of green hotel consumer behavior [26], sustainable consumption behavior among luxury-hotel guests [31], and consumers’ perceptions of sustainability-certified hotels on global online travel platforms [27].

The challenge, however, is that sustainable consumer behavior often fails to follow directly from favorable attitudes. This is the essence of the attitude–behavior gap [28], which continues to be relevant in tourism and hospitality [15,29,30]. Trust helps explain why some favorable evaluations are more closely associated with behavioral outcomes while others are not. If sustainability-related claims are not trusted, consumers may dismiss them as superficial, opportunistic, or greenwashing-oriented. If they are trusted, consumers are more likely to incorporate them into actual booking and consumption decisions.

Empirical studies support this logic. Hotels’ green practices have been associated with consumer citizenship behavior [20]. Eco-label credibility has been linked to green WOM [22]. Green efforts have been associated with guests’ sustainable behaviors through mediators including green trust [24]. Green image and green trust have been linked to revisit intentions [58], while green brand trust has been associated with tourism purchase intentions [71]. In addition, research on perceived sustainable accommodation value and green brand equity suggests that value itself is associated with behavioral outcomes not only through trust, but also directly [58].

Based on this literature, the present study expects that both dimensions of value are positively associated with sustainable consumption behavior and that trust is also positively associated with sustainable consumption behavior. Functional value should matter because sustainable options are more likely to be chosen when they are perceived as practical, useful, and decision-enhancing. Ethical–emotional value should matter because sustainable choices are more likely to be enacted when they evoke moral satisfaction and emotional reward. Trust should matter because it reduces skepticism and helps link sustainability-related evaluations to consumer action.

H5. 

Sustainable functional value is positively associated with sustainable consumption behavior.

H6. 

Ethical–emotional value is positively associated with sustainable consumption behavior.

H7. 

Trust is positively associated with sustainable consumption behavior.

2.7. Integrated Model and Hypothesis Development

The foregoing discussion suggests that prior research has generated substantial insights into online booking behavior, digital trust, sustainability signaling, eco-labels, green hospitality, and digital nudging. However, these strands have rarely been integrated into a single process-oriented structural model for digital accommodation platforms. Specifically, existing studies have not adequately explained how sustainability-related platform information is associated with sustainable consumption behavior through value interpretation and trust formation.

The integrated model proposed here addresses that gap. It conceptualizes sustainable informativeness as a form of digitally embedded sustainability-related choice architecture. It further argues that the relationships associated with this construct unfold through two distinct evaluative pathways—sustainable functional value and ethical–emotional value—and through trust. This model is particularly appropriate for accommodation platforms, where information does not merely describe alternatives but structures attention, comparison, and inference.

The proposed model is process-oriented, but its empirical interpretation is bounded by the cross-sectional survey design. Therefore, the hypothesized paths are specified as theoretically grounded structural associations rather than as definitive evidence of temporal or causal ordering. The sequence from sustainable informativeness to perceived value, trust, and sustainable consumption behavior is based on the logic that consumers first interpret sustainability-related platform information in value terms, then evaluate its credibility and trustworthiness, and subsequently report sustainable consumption tendencies. Nevertheless, alternative orderings cannot be fully ruled out with cross-sectional data, and this issue is acknowledged in the interpretation of the results and limitations.

The model also allows for both direct and indirect associations. Prior digital-nudging research implies that structured information may be associated with consumer choices [45,46,60,61]. At the same time, value and trust research suggests that the relationships between sustainability-related information and behavior are more likely to unfold through psychological interpretation and relational evaluation before being reflected in actual behavior [5,6,20,22,24]. Accordingly, the present study includes a direct path from sustainable informativeness to sustainable consumption behavior, while primarily focusing on indirect paths through value and sequential indirect paths through value and trust. Although the main theoretical emphasis of the model is on indirect pathways through value and trust, a direct path from sustainable informativeness to sustainable consumption behavior was included for both theoretical and empirical reasons. Theoretically, digital nudging and choice-architecture research suggests that structured information environments may be directly associated with consumer choices by increasing the salience, visibility, and evaluability of specific attributes [45,46,60,61]. In digital accommodation platforms, sustainability-related information may therefore be expected to have some direct association with sustainable consumption tendencies when it makes sustainable options easier to notice, compare, and evaluate. Empirically, including this direct path also allows the study to examine whether the relationship between sustainable informativeness and sustainable consumption behavior is direct, primarily mediated, or fully mediated through value and trust. Thus, H8 was included not as a purely exploratory path, but as a conservative test of whether sustainable informativeness retains a direct association with sustainable consumption behavior after accounting for the proposed mediating pathways.

H8. 

Sustainable informativeness is positively associated with sustainable consumption behavior.

H9. 

Sustainable functional value mediates the relationship between sustainable informativeness and sustainable consumption behavior.

H10. 

Ethical–emotional value mediates the relationship between sustainable informativeness and sustainable consumption behavior.

H11a. 

The relationship between sustainable informativeness and sustainable consumption behavior is sequentially mediated by sustainable functional value and trust.

H11b. 

The relationship between sustainable informativeness and sustainable consumption behavior is sequentially mediated by ethical–emotional value and trust.

Based on the theoretical framework discussed above, the research model illustrated in Figure 1 was developed. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was employed to examine the proposed structural associations among sustainable informativeness in digital accommodation platforms, sustainable functional value, ethical–emotional value, trust, and sustainable consumption behavior. Specifically, the model tests both the direct association between sustainable informativeness and sustainable consumption behavior and the indirect pathways through which sustainable informativeness is associated with behavioral tendencies via value formation and trust (H1–H11b). In addition, the model assesses the mediating roles of sustainable functional value and ethical–emotional value, as well as the sequential mediating role of trust in combination with these value dimensions, in explaining the theoretically proposed association between sustainability-related information and sustainable consumption behavior.

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Research Design and Sample Characteristics

The participants in this study were Korean adult consumers who had experience using digital accommodation booking platforms. More specifically, the target population consisted of individuals who had searched for or booked accommodation through major digital accommodation platforms, such as Yanolja, YeogiEottae, and Naver Accommodation, within the past 12 months. The Korean context was considered theoretically appropriate for this study because digital accommodation booking platforms are highly embedded in consumers’ travel decision-making processes in Korea. Major domestic platforms such as Yanolja, YeogiEottae, and Naver Accommodation provide consumers with dense information environments in which accommodation options are searched, compared, filtered, reviewed, and booked. This makes the Korean digital accommodation market a relevant empirical setting for examining how sustainability-related platform information is perceived, interpreted, and associated with value, trust, and sustainable consumption tendencies. Thus, the Korean setting was not selected merely for convenience, but because it represents a mature platform-mediated accommodation context in which information structure plays an important role in consumer decision-making. A convenience sampling approach was used because the study targeted consumers who had recent and relevant experience with digital accommodation booking platforms and were therefore able to evaluate sustainability-related information in such environments.

This study collected data through anonymous self-response online questionnaires distributed via Google Forms from 15 January 2026 to 15 February 2026. No professional panel provider was used. Instead, a convenience sampling approach was adopted, and the survey link was distributed through online channels to recruit respondents who had recent experience using digital accommodation booking platforms. Respondents participated voluntarily after confirming their eligibility through screening questions. Eligibility was verified by asking whether respondents had searched for or booked accommodation through digital accommodation booking platforms within the previous 12 months. Respondents were also instructed to answer the questionnaire based on their actual experience with such platforms and to consider sustainability-related information presented in platform environments, including eco-friendly practices, green certifications, sustainability-related accommodation attributes, and other sustainability cues. Although no separate attention-check item was included, responses were reviewed for completeness and obvious invalidity before analysis. Therefore, data-quality screening relied on completeness checks and the identification of clearly invalid responses rather than on a formal attention-check item. Participation was entirely voluntary, and informed consent was obtained from all respondents through the first item of the questionnaire prior to data collection. Because the survey was distributed through open online channels rather than to a fixed sampling frame, a conventional response rate could not be calculated. A total of 304 responses were obtained. No responses were removed because no incomplete or clearly invalid questionnaires were identified after screening; therefore, all 304 cases were retained for the final analysis. This sample size was considered acceptable for SEM because it exceeded commonly used minimum recommendations for covariance-based SEM and provided a sufficient ratio of cases to observed measurement items. To provide a more explicit sample-size justification, an a priori sample-size assessment was conducted using Soper’s SEM sample-size calculator. The assessment was based on five latent variables, 25 observed variables, α = 0.05, desired statistical power = 0.80, and an anticipated small-to-medium effect size of 0.20. The recommended minimum sample size was approximately 200, indicating that the final sample size of 304 exceeded the minimum requirement for estimating the proposed SEM. Therefore, the sample size was considered adequate for testing the main structural model, including the hypothesized indirect pathways through sustainable functional value, ethical–emotional value, and trust. However, because the detection of small direct effects may require larger samples, small or non-significant direct paths were interpreted cautiously. Nevertheless, the sample remains relatively modest, particularly for broader generalization across different consumer groups or national contexts. The use of screening questions helped ensure that all retained respondents had used digital accommodation booking platforms within the previous 12 months.

The survey focused on respondents’ perceptions of sustainable informativeness, value formation, trust, and sustainable consumption behavior in the context of digital accommodation booking platforms, rather than on their general attitudes toward specific brands or firms. Accordingly, the study examined consumers’ general perceptions of sustainability-related information in digital accommodation booking platforms rather than differences among specific platforms. Platform-specific characteristics and broader cultural factors were therefore not included as control variables in the main structural model, although demographic characteristics were additionally considered in a robustness analysis. This choice reflects the study’s focus on the proposed psychological and relational process, but it also limits the generalizability of the findings and is acknowledged as a limitation.

Because this study employed an anonymous and non-invasive survey design, no personally identifiable information was collected, and the questionnaire did not involve sensitive personal data beyond basic demographic characteristics. The collected data were used solely for academic research purposes. The research design was cross-sectional and based on self-reported perceptions. Therefore, the empirical analysis was intended to examine theoretically proposed structural associations among the focal constructs rather than to establish causal effects. The interpretation of the SEM results was accordingly framed in terms of structural relationships and associations.

The proposed structural relationships were analyzed using SPSS 25.0 and AMOS 25.0. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was employed to test the hypothesized relationships among sustainable informativeness, sustainable functional value, ethical–emotional value, trust, and sustainable consumption behavior. The questionnaire also included basic demographic items, including gender, age, and education level. Descriptive statistics and demographic characteristics of the respondents are presented in

Table 1. Demographic characteristics of the participants.

Demographic	Category	Number	Percentage (%)
Gender	Male	132	43.4
	Female	172	56.6
Age	20–29 years	96	31.6
	30–39 years	104	34.2
	40–49 years	62	20.4
	50–59 years	30	9.9
	60 or Above	12	3.9
Educational	High school diploma or below	34	11.2
level	Junior college	46	15.1
	Bachelor’s degree	178	58.6
	Graduate degree or above	46	15.1
Total		304	100.0

.

3.2. Measurement Instruments and Variable Construction

A total of 25 questionnaire items were adapted from previously validated scales and refined to fit the objectives and context of the present study. More specifically, the measurement items were modified to reflect the context of sustainability-related information in digital accommodation booking platforms. In adapting the items, the wording was adjusted to capture platform-based accommodation choices, sustainability-related information, and consumers’ perceptions of value, trust, and sustainable consumption behavior. To ensure transparency and reproducibility, the full wording of all measurement items is provided in Appendix A. All items were measured using a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (“strongly disagree”) to 5 (“strongly agree”). Because the empirical survey was conducted with Korean consumers, the questionnaire was prepared in Korean. Items adapted from English-language prior studies were translated into Korean and reviewed for semantic equivalence with the original meanings. During this adaptation process, the translated items were examined to ensure that the wording preserved the intended conceptual meaning of the original scales while fitting the Korean digital accommodation platform context. Particular attention was given to context-sensitive constructs, such as sustainable informativeness and ethical–emotional value, because these concepts may be interpreted differently across languages and cultural settings. The wording was further refined to ensure clarity, contextual appropriateness, and ease of understanding for respondents with experience using digital accommodation booking platforms.

To reduce conceptual overlap among the constructs, each variable was operationalized according to its specific theoretical domain. Sustainable informativeness captured the perceived visibility, interpretability, relevance, comparability, and decision-facilitating role of sustainability-related platform information. Sustainable functional value captured the practical and utilitarian value of such information, whereas ethical–emotional value captured its moral and emotional meaning. Trust reflected confidence in the credibility, reliability, and integrity of sustainability-related information, and sustainable consumption behavior reflected respondents’ tendency to choose, support, or engage in sustainability-oriented accommodation behavior.

The measurement instruments for each construct were operationalized as follows. First, sustainable informativeness was conceptualized as the extent to which a digital accommodation booking platform provides sustainability-related information in a clear, useful, understandable, and decision-facilitating manner. This construct was measured using five items adapted and refined from prior studies on digital nudging, information helpfulness, online review evaluation, and sustainability-related information cues [2,37,39,51,61]. These items assessed the degree to which respondents perceived that the platform effectively presented sustainability-related information, such as eco-friendly practices, green certifications, and sustainability-related accommodation attributes. Second, sustainable functional value was defined as the perceived practical and utilitarian benefits derived from sustainability-related information available on the platform. This construct was measured using five items adapted from prior research on perceived value and online booking behavior [5,6,64,66,67]. The items captured the extent to which sustainability-related information helped respondents make accommodation choices in a more efficient, useful, rational, and practically beneficial manner. Third, ethical–emotional value was conceptualized as the positive moral and emotional meaning consumers attach to using sustainability-related information in the accommodation booking process. This construct was measured using five items developed on the basis of prior studies on emotional value, sustainable consumption value, and moral or affective responses in hospitality and sustainability contexts [30,58,65,68]. These items assessed the extent to which respondents felt that considering sustainability-related information was meaningful, responsible, worthwhile, and emotionally positive. Fourth, trust was defined as consumers’ confidence in the credibility, reliability, and integrity of the sustainability-related information provided by the platform. Trust was measured using five items adapted from prior studies on e-commerce trust, online booking trust, review credibility, and green trust [1,3,50,58,71]. These items captured respondents’ overall confidence in the truthfulness, reliability, and trustworthiness of the platform’s sustainability-related information. Fifth, sustainable consumption behavior was defined as the degree to which consumers were willing to choose, support, or engage in accommodation-related behaviors consistent with sustainability principles. This construct was measured using five items adapted from prior studies on green hotel choice, sustainable consumption behavior, and green consumer behavior in hospitality and tourism contexts [20,25,26,29,30]. The items assessed respondents’ tendency to prefer sustainable accommodation options, consider sustainability-related information in booking decisions, and support environmentally responsible hospitality practices. Because these items captured respondents’ willingness, preference, and self-reported tendency rather than observed booking behavior, sustainable consumption behavior in this study should be interpreted as self-reported sustainable consumption behavior or sustainable consumption tendency.

Several procedural remedies were also used to reduce the potential risk of common method bias. The survey was anonymous, participation was voluntary, and respondents were informed that there were no right or wrong answers. In addition, the questionnaire items were worded as clearly as possible to reduce ambiguity and evaluation apprehension. Statistical assessments of common method variance are reported in the measurement model assessment section.

Respondents’ demographic characteristics, including gender, age, and education level, were recorded using nominal items. In addition, screening questions were included to confirm that respondents had prior experience using digital accommodation booking platforms within the past 12 months. Detailed measurement items for all constructs are provided in Appendix A.

4. Analysis and Results

4.1. Measurement Model Assessment

4.1.1. Confirmatory Factor Analysis

A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted using AMOS 25.0 to assess the reliability and validity of the measurement model prior to hypothesis testing. The measurement model demonstrated an acceptable fit to the data, with all goodness-of-fit indices meeting commonly recommended thresholds (χ² = 421.368, df = 265, p < 0.001; CFI = 0.956; IFI = 0.956; TLI = 0.949; RMSEA = 0.044; SRMR = 0.048), indicating that the proposed factor structure adequately represented the observed data.

As reported in

Table 2. Results of Confirmatory Factor Analysis.

Variables	Items	Standardized Loadings	Composite Reliability	AVE	Cronbach’s α
Sustainable Informativeness	SI1	0.790
	SI2	0.832
	SI3	0.808	0.902	0.648	0.889
	SI4	0.771
	SI5	0.801
Sustainable Functional Value	SFV1	0.821
	SFV2	0.853
	SFV3	0.838	0.911	0.671	0.901
	SFV4	0.781
	SFV5	0.794
Ethical–Emotional Value	EEV1	0.742
	EEV2	0.781
	EEV3	0.804	0.879	0.592	0.872
	EEV4	0.759
	EEV5	0.768
Trust	TR1	0.812
	TR2	0.844
	TR3	0.801	0.901	0.645	0.888
	TR4	0.773
	TR5	0.786
Sustainable Consumption Behavior	SCB1	0.731
	SCB2	0.764
	SCB3	0.791	0.873	0.579	0.861
	SCB4	0.748
	SCB5	0.772

, all standardized factor loadings were statistically significant (p < 0.001) and exceeded the recommended threshold of 0.700, supporting indicator reliability. Specifically, the standardized loadings ranged from 0.731 to 0.853. Composite reliability (CR) values ranged from 0.873 to 0.911, exceeding the suggested minimum of 0.700 and demonstrating satisfactory internal consistency across all constructs. In addition, the average variance extracted (AVE) values ranged from 0.579 to 0.671, all of which were above the recommended cutoff of 0.500, thereby confirming convergent validity. Cronbach’s alpha coefficients ranged from 0.861 to 0.901, further indicating acceptable reliability of the measurement scales.

Taken together, these results indicate that the measurement model possesses adequate reliability and convergent validity and is therefore suitable for subsequent structural analyses.

4.1.2. Discriminant Validity and Common Method Variance

Discriminant validity was assessed using the Fornell–Larcker criterion. As shown in

Table 3. Discriminant validity of the variables.

Factor	SI	SFV	EEV	TR	SCB
SI	0.648
SFV	0.464 (0.681)	0.671
EEV	0.364 (0.603)	0.381 (0.617)	0.592
TR	0.305 (0.552)	0.482 (0.694)	0.411 (0.641)	0.645
SCB	0.177 (0.421)	0.287 (0.536)	0.248 (0.498)	0.433 (0.658)	0.579

Note: Diagonal values are AVE; off-diagonal elements represent squared correlations (r²), with correlations (r) shown in parentheses. Discriminant validity is supported as all AVE values exceed the corresponding r² values. SI = Sustainable Informativeness; SFV = Sustainable Functional Value; EEV = Ethical–Emotional Value; TR = Trust; SCB = Sustainable Consumption Behavior.

, the AVE values for all constructs were greater than the corresponding squared inter-construct correlations, indicating that each latent construct was empirically distinct from the others. In addition, the heterotrait–monotrait (HTMT) ratios were examined as an additional test of discriminant validity. As reported in Appendix B, all HTMT values ranged from 0.438 to 0.721, which were below the recommended threshold of 0.850. Taken together, these results indicate that discriminant validity was statistically supported. However, because some constructs were conceptually related, additional clarification of their theoretical and operational distinctions was provided in the measurement section.

Given that sustainable functional value and trust showed the highest inter-construct correlation, an additional competing-model CFA was conducted to further assess their empirical distinctiveness. Specifically, the hypothesized five-factor model was compared with a four-factor model in which sustainable functional value and trust were collapsed into a single factor. As shown in

Table 4. Competing measurement model results.

Model	Description	χ2	df	χ2/df	CFI	TLI	IFI	RMSEA	SRMR	Δχ2	Δdf
Five-factor model	SI, SFV, EEV, TR, and SCB as separate factors	421.368	265	1.590	0.956	0.949	0.956	0.044	0.048	-	-
Four-factor model	SFV and TR collapsed into one factor	512.740	269	1.906	0.932	0.921	0.933	0.055	0.064	91.372 ***	4
Single-factor model	All items loaded onto one factor	1286.500	275	4.678	0.716	0.690	0.718	0.110	0.109	865.132 ***	10

Note: Construct abbreviations follow those defined in the main text. *** p < 0.001.

, the hypothesized five-factor model demonstrated a better fit to the data than the competing four-factor model. The four-factor model showed a noticeable deterioration in model fit, with lower CFI, TLI, and IFI values and higher RMSEA and SRMR values. In addition, the chi-square difference test indicated that the five-factor model fit the data significantly better than the four-factor model, Δχ²(4) = 91.372, p < 0.001. These results provide additional evidence that sustainable functional value and trust are empirically related but distinguishable constructs.

Given that the data were collected through a self-reported online survey, the potential influence of common method variance (CMV) was also examined. Both procedural and statistical approaches were considered. Procedurally, the survey was anonymous, participation was voluntary, respondents were informed that there were no right or wrong answers, and the items were worded as clearly as possible to reduce ambiguity and evaluation apprehension. However, because the data were collected from a single source at a single point in time, CMV could not be completely ruled out.

First, as a preliminary diagnostic test, Harman’s single-factor test was conducted, and the results showed that the first unrotated factor accounted for 34.216% of the total variance, which is below the commonly accepted threshold of 50.0%. This result suggests that a single dominant factor was unlikely to account for most of the covariance among the measures. However, Harman’s test was interpreted only as an initial diagnostic rather than as conclusive evidence against CMV.

Second, a CFA model including a latent common method factor was estimated and compared with the baseline measurement model. The inclusion of the method factor did not produce a meaningful improvement in model fit, and the overall pattern of standardized loadings and structural relationships remained substantively unchanged. This comparison provided additional evidence that the measurement structure was not materially dominated by a common method factor. Nevertheless, these results should be interpreted cautiously because the common latent factor approach does not completely eliminate the possibility of CMV.

Collectively, the findings support the discriminant validity of the constructs and suggest that common method variance was unlikely to be severe enough to invalidate the findings. Nevertheless, given the single-source and cross-sectional nature of the data, CMV remains a potential limitation and is acknowledged in the limitations section. Future research should employ stronger procedural remedies, such as temporal separation, multiple data sources, or behavioral data, to further reduce common method bias.

4.1.3. Preliminary Checks and Robustness Analysis

Before estimating the structural model, preliminary checks were conducted to assess normality, multicollinearity, and potential outliers. The CFA and SEM analyses were conducted in AMOS 25.0 using maximum likelihood estimation. Because all retained questionnaires were complete, no missing-data imputation was required. Normality was examined using skewness and kurtosis values for the observed variables. Multivariate normality was also reviewed before SEM estimation. The results indicated that the absolute values of skewness and kurtosis were within commonly accepted ranges, suggesting no serious violation of univariate normality. Although multivariate normality in survey-based SEM can rarely be assumed perfectly, the preliminary screening did not indicate severe distributional problems that would invalidate the use of maximum likelihood estimation. Potential multivariate outliers were also assessed before SEM estimation, and no cases were found to materially distort the results.

Multicollinearity was assessed using inter-construct correlations and variance inflation factors. As shown in Table 3, the highest inter-construct correlation was 0.694 between sustainable functional value and trust, which was below the commonly used threshold of 0.850. In addition, VIF values calculated from the latent construct correlation matrix ranged from approximately 2.05 to 2.62, indicating that multicollinearity was not a serious concern.

To address the possibility that demographic characteristics could confound the structural relationships, gender, age, and education level were additionally considered as control variables in a robustness analysis. To improve transparency and replicability, the path coefficients, standard errors, and p-values from the controls-included model are now reported alongside the main model in

Table A3. Robustness check with demographic controls.

Path	Main Model β	Main Model SE	Main Model p	Controls- Included β	Controls- Included SE	Controls- Included p
SI → SFV	0.682	0.076	<0.001	0.676	0.077	<0.001
SI → EEV	0.541	0.075	<0.001	0.536	0.075	<0.001
SFV → TR	0.436	0.073	<0.001	0.429	0.073	<0.001
EEV → TR	0.287	0.070	<0.001	0.281	0.070	<0.001
SFV → SCB	0.214	0.073	0.003	0.207	0.073	0.005
EEV → SCB	0.176	0.070	0.014	0.169	0.070	0.016
TR → SCB	0.471	0.074	<0.001	0.459	0.075	<0.001
SI → SCB	0.067	0.059	0.259	0.061	0.060	0.311
Gender → SCB	-	-	-	0.034	0.050	0.496
Age → SCB	-	-	-	0.058	0.049	0.241
Educational level → SCB	-	-	-	0.041	0.049	0.407

Note: Standardized coefficients are reported. Gender, age, and education level were included as demographic controls in the controls-included model.

in Appendix C. The inclusion of demographic controls did not materially alter the interpretation of the main structural relationships. The direct association between sustainable informativeness and sustainable consumption behavior remained non-significant, while the key association pattern through value dimensions and trust remained consistent with the hypothesized model. Therefore, the main findings appear unlikely to be substantially driven by demographic characteristics.

Given the complexity of the hypothesized model, theoretically plausible alternative specifications were also considered. In particular, an alternative model including a direct path from sustainable informativeness to trust was examined to assess whether sustainability-related information was directly associated with trust beyond the value-mediated pathways. Although this alternative specification was theoretically plausible, the hypothesized model was retained because it was more consistent with the proposed theoretical logic that consumers first interpret sustainability-related information in value terms and then evaluate its trustworthiness before reporting sustainable consumption tendencies.

In addition, a more parsimonious fully mediated specification excluding the direct path from sustainable informativeness to sustainable consumption behavior was considered. The hypothesized partial mediation model was retained because the inclusion of the direct path provided a more conservative test of whether sustainable informativeness had any remaining direct association with sustainable consumption behavior after accounting for value and trust pathways. As reported in the structural model, this direct path was not statistically significant, which further supports the interpretation that the relationship is primarily indirect rather than direct.

Because the data were cross-sectional, the mediation and sequential mediation results were interpreted as theoretically proposed indirect associations rather than definitive evidence of temporal or causal mechanisms.

4.2. Structural Model and Hypothesis Testing

The proposed structural model was tested using structural equation modeling (SEM) with AMOS 25.0. The overall model exhibited an acceptable fit to the data (χ² = 438.517, df = 269, p < 0.001; SRMR = 0.051; RMSEA = 0.046; CFI = 0.952; IFI = 0.953; TLI = 0.945), indicating that the hypothesized structural relationships adequately represented the observed data.

The path analysis results, as presented in

Table 5. Results of structural equation model analysis.

Hypothesis	Path	S. Estimate	C.R.	p	Result
H1	SI → SFV	0.682	8.947	<0.001 ***	Supported
H2	SI → EEV	0.541	7.216	<0.001 ***	Supported
H3	SFV → TR	0.436	5.984	<0.001 ***	Supported
H4	EEV → TR	0.287	4.102	<0.001 ***	Supported
H5	SFV → SCB	0.214	2.937	0.003 **	Supported
H6	EEV → SCB	0.176	2.521	0.014 *	Supported
H7	TR → SCB	0.471	6.388	<0.001 ***	Supported
H8	SI → SCB	0.067	1.128	0.259	Not supported

Note: * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.

, provided support for most of the hypothesized structural relationships. The coefficients reported in Table 4 are standardized estimates. Specifically, sustainable informativeness was positively associated with sustainable functional value (H1: β = 0.682, p < 0.001) and ethical–emotional value (H2: β = 0.541, p < 0.001). Sustainable functional value (H3: β = 0.436, p < 0.001) and ethical–emotional value (H4: β = 0.287, p < 0.001) were both positively associated with trust. In addition, sustainable functional value (H5: β = 0.214, p = 0.003), ethical–emotional value (H6: β = 0.176, p = 0.012), and trust (H7: β = 0.471, p < 0.001) were positively associated with sustainable consumption behavior.

However, the direct path from sustainable informativeness to sustainable consumption behavior was not statistically significant (H8: β = 0.067, p = 0.259). Thus, H1 through H7 were supported, whereas H8 was not supported. To provide a clearer visual summary of these structural results, Figure 2 presents the final SEM model with standardized path coefficients.

Overall, these findings suggest that sustainable informativeness is associated with sustainable consumption behavior primarily through value formation and trust rather than through a direct behavioral pathway. Notably, the association between sustainable informativeness and sustainable functional value was relatively strong (β = 0.682), and its association with ethical–emotional value was also substantial (β = 0.541). Among the direct predictors of sustainable consumption behavior, trust showed the strongest association (β = 0.471), followed by sustainable functional value (β = 0.214) and ethical–emotional value (β = 0.176). These coefficient patterns indicate that trust has the greatest practical relevance among the immediate predictors of sustainable consumption behavior in the model.

The model explained 51.7% of the variance in sustainable consumption behavior, indicating substantial explanatory power. However, this R² value should be interpreted cautiously because the data were self-reported and cross-sectional. Thus, the relatively high explained variance should not be taken as evidence of causal explanatory power, and the possibility of model overfitting cannot be completely ruled out.

The non-significant direct path from sustainable informativeness to sustainable consumption behavior may indicate that sustainability-related information is more closely associated with behavior when it is interpreted through value and trust. However, alternative explanations are also possible. In accommodation booking contexts, sustainability-related information may be too weak to show a direct association with self-reported sustainable consumption behavior because consumers also evaluate price, location, ratings, convenience, room availability, and overall service quality. Consumers may also distrust sustainability claims, perceive them as greenwashing, or lack sufficient environmental motivation to act on sustainability-related information alone. In addition, the direct association may have been weakened by measurement limitations, omitted variables such as environmental concern, platform familiarity, and skepticism toward green claims, or the distinction between self-reported behavioral tendencies and actual booking behavior. Therefore, the non-significant direct effect is interpreted cautiously as supporting an indirect association pattern rather than as definitive evidence of a single theoretical mechanism.

As reported in the preliminary robustness analysis, demographic characteristics were additionally considered as control variables to address the possibility of confounding effects. The controls-included results, reported in Table A3 in Appendix C, showed that the inclusion of gender, age, and education level did not materially alter the interpretation of the main structural relationships. Therefore, the hypothesized model was retained as the main model because it provided a parsimonious test of the theoretically derived relationships among the focal constructs.

4.3. Mediation Effect Analysis

To examine the mediating effects proposed in Hypotheses 9–11b, bootstrapping analysis was conducted in AMOS with 5000 resamples and bias-corrected 95% confidence intervals. An indirect effect was considered significant when the confidence interval did not include zero. Given the cross-sectional design, the mediation results were interpreted as theoretically proposed indirect associations rather than as definitive evidence of temporal or causal mediation.

As presented in

Table 6. Results of bootstrap mediation analysis.

H.	Indirect Path	Indirect Effect	S.E.	95% Boot LLCI	95% Boot ULCI	Result
H9	SI → SFV → SCB	0.146	0.041	0.074	0.234	Supported
H10	SI → EEV → SCB	0.095	0.033	0.036	0.166	Supported
H11a	SI → SFV → TR → SCB	0.140	0.037	0.078	0.224	Supported
H11b	SI → EEV → TR → SCB	0.073	0.026	0.031	0.133	Supported
	Total indirect effect: SI → SCB	0.454	0.068	0.334	0.592	Supported

Note: Bootstrap resampling = 5000.

, the indirect association of sustainable informativeness with sustainable consumption behavior through sustainable functional value was positive and statistically significant (H9: indirect effect = 0.146, 95% CI [0.074, 0.234]). Likewise, the indirect association through ethical–emotional value was also significant (H10: indirect effect = 0.095, 95% CI [0.036, 0.166]). In addition, the sequential indirect association of sustainable informativeness with sustainable consumption behavior through sustainable functional value and trust was significant (H11a: indirect effect = 0.140, 95% CI [0.078, 0.224]), as was the sequential indirect association through ethical–emotional value and trust (H11b: indirect effect = 0.073, 95% CI [0.031, 0.133]). The total indirect association of sustainable informativeness with sustainable consumption behavior was also positive and significant (indirect effect = 0.454, 95% CI [0.334, 0.592]).

These findings suggest that sustainable informativeness is indirectly associated with sustainable consumption behavior primarily through value formation and trust rather than through a direct behavioral pathway. This interpretation is consistent with the structural model results reported in Table 5, where the direct association between sustainable informativeness and sustainable consumption behavior was not statistically significant (H8: β = 0.067, p = 0.259). Taken together, the results suggest that sustainability-related information embedded in digital accommodation platforms is more closely related to sustainable consumption tendencies when such information is interpreted as functionally useful, ethically or emotionally meaningful, and trustworthy.

Table 7. Direct, indirect, total effects and explained variance.

Endogenous Variable	Predictor	Direct Effect	Indirect Effect	Total Effect	R2
Sustainable Functional Value	SI	0.682	-	0.682	0.465
Ethical–Emotional Value	SI	0.541	-	0.541	0.293
Trust	SFV	0.436	-	0.436	0.392
	EEV	0.287	-	0.287
Sustainable Consumption Behavior	SI	0.067	0.454	0.521	0.517
	SFV	0	0.205	0.419
	EEV	0.176	0.135	0.311
	TR	0.471	-	0.471

further supports this interpretation. Although the direct association between sustainable informativeness and sustainable consumption behavior was weak (direct effect = 0.067), its indirect association was substantial (indirect effect = 0.454), yielding a meaningful total association (total effect = 0.521). Similarly, sustainable functional value showed both a direct association (0.214) and an indirect association through trust (0.205), resulting in a relatively strong total association with sustainable consumption behavior (0.419). Ethical–emotional value showed a smaller but still meaningful direct association (0.176) and indirect association (0.135), producing a total association of 0.311. Trust had the strongest direct association with sustainable consumption behavior (0.471), supporting its central role in the indirect association pattern linking sustainability-related platform information to sustainable consumption tendencies.

Overall, the mediation analysis supports the presence of significant indirect associations linking sustainable informativeness to sustainable consumption behavior through sustainable functional value, ethical–emotional value, and trust. The key finding is that sustainable informativeness was not directly associated with sustainable consumption behavior, whereas the indirect associations through perceived value and trust were statistically significant and substantively stronger. In particular, the non-significant direct path and the significant total indirect effect suggest that the relationship between sustainable informativeness and sustainable consumption behavior is more consistent with an indirect association pattern through value formation and trust than with a simple direct information–behavior link. However, because the data are cross-sectional, these mediation results should be interpreted as theoretically proposed indirect pathways rather than as definitive evidence of temporal or causal mediation.

5. Discussion

This study examined how sustainability-related information embedded in digital accommodation booking platforms is structurally associated with sustainable consumption behavior through value formation and trust. By integrating the perspectives of digital choice architecture, perceived value, and trust, the findings provide a more refined association-based account of how sustainability-related information in platform environments is linked to sustainable consumption tendencies. Rather than treating sustainability-related information as a passive informational attribute or assuming that it directly stimulates sustainable behavior, the present study conceptualized such information as a structured decision cue whose relationship with behavior appears to operate through distinct evaluative and relational pathways. It should also be noted that the outcome variable reflects self-reported sustainable consumption tendencies rather than directly observed booking behavior. Therefore, the findings should be interpreted as explaining consumers’ reported sustainable accommodation-related tendencies, not actual platform behavior.

First, the significant positive relationships between sustainable informativeness and both sustainable functional value and ethical–emotional value suggest that sustainability-related information on digital accommodation platforms is not processed through a single evaluative route. Existing research on online booking has emphasized the importance of website quality, information helpfulness, review usefulness, and online trustworthiness in shaping booking decisions [1,2,11,51]. However, the present findings suggest that sustainability-related information does more than increase informational utility. It is also associated with ethical and emotional meaning. This finding is theoretically important because it suggests that consumers do not interpret sustainability-related information merely as a functional decision aid; they also interpret it as a cue associated with responsibility, meaningfulness, and moral appropriateness. In this sense, the study extends prior hospitality and tourism research by suggesting that sustainability-related information simultaneously activates practical evaluation and ethical–emotional appraisal.

Second, the findings confirm that value formation functions as a crucial interpretive layer between sustainable informativeness and trust. Prior studies often examined trust as a direct consequence of website quality, review credibility, or platform reliability [3,4,12]. By contrast, the present results suggest that trust is associated not simply with the presence of sustainability information, but with consumers’ interpretation of that information as useful and meaningful. Sustainable functional value was positively associated with trust, and ethical–emotional value also showed a significant association with trust. These results imply that trust in digital accommodation platforms may be jointly shaped by rational evaluation and value-based resonance. In other words, consumers appear to trust sustainability-related platform information when they perceive it as both decision-helping and normatively meaningful.

Third, the relative pattern of coefficients provides useful theoretical nuance regarding how trust is associated with value perceptions in sustainability-oriented platform environments. The association of sustainable functional value with trust was stronger than that of ethical–emotional value, suggesting that in digital booking contexts the practical utility of sustainability-related information remains a central basis for trust perceptions. This does not mean that ethical or emotional meaning is unimportant. Rather, it suggests that, within accommodation booking decisions, where uncertainty, comparability, and perceived decision quality remain highly salient, functional usefulness may be especially influential in strengthening trust. This pattern adds specificity to prior sustainability-oriented consumption research, which has often highlighted moral resonance, emotional identification, or value congruence without clearly distinguishing their relative strength from more instrumental evaluation processes.

Fourth, the results show that sustainable functional value, ethical–emotional value, and trust were all positively associated with sustainable consumption behavior, but that trust was the strongest direct predictor of behavior. This finding aligns with earlier hospitality studies emphasizing the role of green trust, eco-label credibility, and perceived authenticity in linking sustainability-related evaluations with actual behavior [22,23,24]. It also helps explain why sustainability information may not be strongly related to behavioral tendencies on its own. The results suggest that information alone may be insufficient. Rather, sustainable consumption tendencies appear to be stronger when consumers perceive the information as useful and meaningful and when they trust it. This pattern helps address the long-standing attitude–behavior gap in sustainable consumption research by suggesting that information-based interventions may be more closely associated with behavior when they are accompanied by interpretive and relational mediation.

Fifth, the non-significant direct effect of sustainable informativeness on sustainable consumption behavior provides one of the important insights of the study. At first glance, one might expect sustainability-related information on digital accommodation platforms to be directly associated with sustainable choices. However, the findings suggest that such information is not automatically associated with sustainable behavior. Instead, its relationship with behavior appears to be indirect, operating through value formation and trust. This pattern is consistent with the theoretical argument of the study. It indicates that sustainability-related information embedded in digital accommodation platforms functions less as an immediate behavioral trigger and more as an interpretive stimulus whose meaning appears to be cognitively and relationally processed before it is associated with behavior. In practical terms, simply increasing the visibility of sustainability-related cues may not be sufficient unless those cues are also perceived as useful, ethically or emotionally meaningful, and trustworthy.

Finally, the significant indirect effects observed through sustainable functional value, ethical–emotional value, and trust support the interpretation that the relationship between sustainable informativeness and sustainable consumption behavior is more consistent with an indirect association pattern than with a simple direct relationship. In particular, the total indirect effect was substantial, while the direct path was not significant. This pattern suggests that digital accommodation platforms may be associated with sustainable behavior not by directly “pushing” consumers toward sustainable choice, but by being linked to how consumers interpret, value, and trust sustainability-related information during the decision-making process. Accordingly, the findings support a process-based view of sustainable digital consumption in hospitality, one that emphasizes cognitive interpretation, value differentiation, and trust-based behavioral association rather than simple exposure effects.

At the same time, the findings should be interpreted in light of the study design. Because the data were cross-sectional and self-reported, the observed relationships should not be interpreted as definitive evidence of causal mechanisms or temporal ordering. The proposed sequence from sustainable informativeness to value, trust, and sustainable consumption behavior is theoretically grounded, but alternative orderings and omitted variables cannot be fully ruled out. In addition, the relatively high explained variance in sustainable consumption behavior may partly reflect the use of perceptual measures collected from the same respondents. Therefore, the findings are best understood as evidence of theoretically proposed structural associations rather than as conclusive proof of causal behavioral processes.

These findings can be further interpreted in relation to three theoretical streams. First, from the perspective of the Theory of Planned Behavior, the results suggest that sustainable consumption behavior in digital accommodation platforms cannot be fully understood through favorable attitudes or sustainability intentions alone. Instead, platform-based information environments may provide contextual cues that help consumers evaluate whether sustainable choices are useful, meaningful, and trustworthy. Second, the findings extend value- and trust-based models by showing that value perceptions and trust are not isolated predictors, but are linked in an indirect association pattern. Sustainable functional value reflects the practical usefulness of sustainability-related information, while ethical–emotional value reflects its moral and affective meaning; both are associated with trust, which shows the strongest direct association with sustainable consumption behavior. Third, the findings contribute to digital nudging and choice-architecture literature by suggesting that sustainability-related platform cues may not operate as simple behavioral triggers. Rather, they appear to be associated with sustainable consumption tendencies through consumers’ interpretation, valuation, and trust in the information. This theoretical integration helps explain why the direct path from sustainable informativeness to sustainable consumption behavior was not significant, while the indirect paths through value and trust were significant.

5.1. Theoretical Implications

This study provides several theoretical implications for the literature on digital hospitality, sustainable consumption, value and trust formation, and digital choice architecture, although these implications should be interpreted in light of the cross-sectional and self-reported research design.

First, the study contributes to hospitality and tourism sustainability research by further conceptualizing sustainable informativeness as a distinct construct in digital accommodation platform contexts. Previous studies have examined website quality, review helpfulness, information credibility, green trust, eco-label credibility, and sustainable platform cues, but these variables have generally been treated separately. The present study integrates these strands and conceptualizes sustainable informativeness as a broader construct that captures not only the presence of sustainability-related information but also its visibility, usefulness, interpretability, and decision-supporting role. In doing so, the study moves beyond generic information-quality approaches and offers a more sustainability-specific and platform-relevant conceptualization.

Second, the study advances value theory by providing evidence consistent with the view that sustainability-related information in digital platform environments is associated with dual-path value formation. Existing perceived value research has often treated value as either a general construct or as a basic functional–emotional distinction. The present findings suggest that, in sustainable digital hospitality settings, value formation can be understood as occurring through sustainable functional value and ethical–emotional value, each of which plays a distinct role in subsequent trust and behavior formation. This helps refine the value literature by suggesting that sustainability-related meaning is not processed through a single undifferentiated value route.

Third, the study contributes to trust theory in digital hospitality contexts by suggesting that trust is not merely a direct consequence of information credibility or platform quality. Instead, trust appears to be associated with consumers’ interpretations of sustainability-related information as practically useful and morally or emotionally meaningful. This finding provides a more layered understanding of trust formation and suggests that trust in sustainability-oriented platform environments is simultaneously cognitive, evaluative, and affective in nature. By showing significant associations between sustainable functional value, ethical–emotional value, and trust, the study helps clarify how trust is relationally constructed in digital accommodation contexts. At the same time, the relationship between sustainable functional value and trust should be interpreted with conceptual caution. Although their empirical distinctiveness was supported by the Fornell–Larcker assessment, HTMT analysis, and competing-model CFA, the two constructs remain conceptually adjacent. Sustainable functional value reflects consumers’ perceived practical usefulness of sustainability-related platform information, whereas trust reflects confidence in the credibility, reliability, and integrity of such information. Future research should therefore re-examine their separability and ordering using experimental or longitudinal data.

Fourth, the study contributes to sustainable consumption research by offering a more process-oriented account of how sustainability-related information is associated with behavior. A great deal of prior work has documented sustainable attitudes, preferences, intentions, and green trust. However, less attention has been given to how sustainability-related information embedded in digital booking platforms is linked to behavior. The finding that the direct path from sustainable informativeness to sustainable consumption behavior was not significant, while indirect effects through value and trust were significant, provides a theoretically important refinement. It suggests that sustainability-related platform information may be associated with behavior not through direct persuasion, but through a chain of interpretation, valuation, and relational assurance.

Fifth, the study enriches digital choice architecture and digital nudging research by suggesting that sustainability-related information on digital accommodation platforms can function as a structured decision cue without necessarily showing a direct behavioral association. Much digital nudging research emphasizes direct changes in user choice. The present findings suggest a more nuanced pathway in which sustainability-oriented cues operate through users’ perceived value and trust. This extends nudging-related thinking beyond interface effects and supports a richer interpretation of how digital information design may be linked to sustainable platform-mediated consumption.

Taken together, these implications deepen understanding of how sustainability-related cues in digital hospitality platforms are psychologically interpreted and relationally associated with sustainable consumption behavior. The study therefore provides a theoretical bridge between digital platform research and sustainable hospitality research, while recognizing that further longitudinal or experimental research is needed to verify the causal ordering of the proposed relationships.

5.2. Practical Implications

The findings also provide several practical implications for platform operators, accommodation providers, and marketing managers in the hospitality industry, although these implications should be interpreted cautiously given the cross-sectional and self-reported nature of the data.

First, digital accommodation platforms may need to recognize that merely displaying sustainability-related labels or badges is not enough. Since sustainable informativeness was not directly associated with sustainable consumption behavior, the practical implication is that sustainability-related information may need to be made not only visible but also useful, understandable, and decision-relevant. However, this non-significant direct association should be interpreted cautiously because the data are also consistent with a small direct effect that the present sample may have been underpowered to detect after accounting for the two value mediators and trust; therefore, stronger claims about the absence of a direct effect should depend on future larger-sample replications. Platforms should therefore avoid treating sustainability cues as decorative or symbolic additions. Instead, they may benefit from presenting such information in formats that facilitate comparison, interpretation, and concrete decision making. For example, sustainability-related information could be organized through clearer labels, filter functions, side-by-side comparisons, concise explanatory text, or standardized sustainability indicators.

Second, platform managers should recognize that sustainability-related information is associated with value through two distinct pathways. One pathway is practical and utilitarian; the other is ethical and emotional. Platform communication should therefore be designed to satisfy both. On the one hand, consumers need concrete information about eco-friendly practices, green certifications, energy-saving systems, waste reduction efforts, or other sustainability-related accommodation attributes. On the other hand, consumers also respond to messages that make sustainable choice feel meaningful, responsible, and worthwhile. This implies that sustainability communication should combine factual clarity with emotionally resonant and normatively relevant framing.

Third, trust should be treated as an important managerial consideration linking sustainability-related platform information to sustainable consumption tendencies. Since trust had the strongest direct association with sustainable consumption behavior, sustainable platform strategies should not focus solely on information volume, but also on information credibility and interpretability. Platforms and accommodation providers should present sustainability claims in a consistent and verifiable manner, ideally supported by recognized certifications, transparent descriptions, or evidence-based indicators. This is especially important in light of previous findings that greenwashing can undermine trust and behavioral outcomes. Building trust is therefore not merely a communication issue but a strategic requirement for sustainable consumer engagement.

Fourth, accommodation providers should understand that sustainability-related information may be more effective when it is integrated into the consumer’s overall decision experience. Sustainability should not be communicated as a detached moral appeal or as a promotional afterthought. Instead, it should be embedded in the ordinary logic of booking decisions. This includes integrating sustainability information into price–value comparisons, room descriptions, amenity details, and service quality cues. When sustainability is presented as part of the practical and meaningful value of the accommodation option, it may be more likely to be associated with sustainable consumption tendencies.

Fifth, the findings suggest that digital hospitality platforms may help reduce the sustainable consumption attitude–behavior gap by designing better information environments. Because consumers do not automatically act on positive sustainability attitudes, platforms can help bridge this gap by improving how sustainability-related information is structured, framed, and communicated. In this sense, digital accommodation platforms are not merely passive intermediaries; they can serve as potential facilitators of sustainable choice through the ways in which they structure, frame, and communicate sustainability-related information.

Overall, the study suggests that managers should shift attention from simply “adding” sustainability cues to strategically designing sustainability-related information environments that are associated with stronger value formation and trust. In digital hospitality settings, sustainable consumer behavior may be more closely linked to meaningful and trusted information structures than to information exposure alone. Because the outcome variable reflects self-reported sustainable consumption tendencies rather than observed booking behavior, these practical implications should be interpreted as guidance for improving consumers’ sustainability-related evaluations and intentions, rather than as direct evidence of actual booking conversion.

5.3. Limitations and Future Research Directions

Despite its theoretical and practical contributions, this study has several limitations that should be acknowledged.

First, the data were collected from Korean consumers with prior experience using digital accommodation booking platforms. Although this context is appropriate for the present study, the findings may not be fully generalizable to other countries or institutional settings. In addition, although the sample size of 304 respondents was sufficient for the SEM analysis conducted in this study, it remains relatively modest for drawing broad generalizations across diverse consumer populations. Digital platform usage patterns, consumer responses to sustainability-related information, and trust formation processes may vary depending on cultural norms, platform ecosystems, and market conditions. Future research should therefore test the proposed model in other national and cultural contexts to examine its broader applicability. Future studies could also use larger and more diverse samples to improve the stability and generalizability of the findings. In addition, although respondents were screened based on their recent experience with digital accommodation booking platforms, this study did not separately measure detailed platform-use characteristics, such as platform-use frequency, the most frequently used platform, whether respondents had only searched for accommodation or completed actual bookings, or the extent to which they had directly encountered sustainability-related information during a specific booking episode. Future research should collect these more fine-grained platform-use variables to better assess respondents’ familiarity with the phenomenon and to examine whether the proposed relationships differ across user segments and platform-use patterns.

Second, this study employed a cross-sectional survey design. While the proposed relationships were theoretically grounded and empirically supported, causal interpretation should still be made with caution. The results indicate structured associations among sustainable informativeness, value, trust, and behavior, but they do not provide definitive evidence of temporal causality. Future studies could employ longitudinal or experimental designs to strengthen causal inference. For example, experiments manipulating the visibility, format, or type of sustainability-related information on mock accommodation platforms could help clarify how different informational configurations affect value formation and trust. Such designs would be especially useful for testing whether the proposed sequence from sustainable informativeness to value, trust, and sustainable consumption behavior reflects a causal process.

Third, the study relied on self-reported survey data. Although common method variance was assessed through both procedural and statistical approaches, self-reported responses may still involve perceptual bias or socially desirable responding. Relatedly, the outcome variable was labeled sustainable consumption behavior, but the measurement items captured self-reported willingness, preference, and behavioral tendency rather than actual observed booking behavior. Because the data were collected from a single source at a single point in time, common method bias cannot be completely ruled out. In addition, although responses were screened for completeness and obvious invalidity, no separate attention-check item was included. This remains a residual data-quality concern, particularly because the survey addressed a relatively abstract topic involving sustainability-related information on digital accommodation platforms. Future replications should include attention-check items and, where possible, use panel-verified screening procedures to further improve data quality and respondent eligibility verification. Future research could improve methodological robustness by combining perceptual data with behavioral indicators, such as actual booking choices, clickstream data, platform interaction logs, or observed engagement with sustainability-related filters and labels. Future studies could also use temporal separation or multiple data sources to reduce common method bias more effectively.

Fourth, the present study focused on a specific mediation structure centered on value and trust. While this was theoretically appropriate, additional mechanisms may also be relevant. Future studies could examine whether other variables, such as platform familiarity, environmental concern, skepticism toward green claims, perceived greenwashing risk, or digital literacy, shape the relationship between sustainable informativeness and sustainable consumption behavior. Such extensions would allow for a more nuanced understanding of boundary conditions and heterogeneous consumer responses. In addition, although preliminary checks and robustness analyses were added in the revised manuscript, further robustness testing would strengthen future research. Future studies could compare additional alternative structural models and examine whether the proposed relationships differ across consumer segments or platform types.

Fifth, the study treated sustainable consumption behavior as a broad outcome variable. While this approach was useful for capturing overall sustainable behavioral tendencies, future research could differentiate more clearly among specific forms of behavior, such as sustainable accommodation choice, green WOM, green revisit intention, willingness to pay a premium, or active support for sustainability-certified providers. Such differentiation may reveal whether sustainable informativeness is associated with some forms of sustainable behavior more strongly than others.

Finally, the present model conceptualized sustainable informativeness as a platform-level consumer perception. Future research could examine the construct at a more disaggregated level by distinguishing among different types of sustainability-related information, such as certification-based information, user-generated sustainability reviews, green practice descriptions, or technology-related sustainability cues. Doing so would help identify which types of sustainability-related information are most effective in producing functional value, ethical–emotional value, and trust. Relatedly, although the present study clarified the theoretical distinction between sustainable informativeness and adjacent constructs such as information quality and perceived usefulness, some degree of conceptual overlap may remain. Future research should further validate the sustainable informativeness construct by comparing it with established information-quality and usefulness measures, testing its incremental validity, and refining its measurement items across different digital platform contexts.

In addition, this study used digital choice architecture as a theoretical lens but did not experimentally manipulate specific platform design elements, such as labels, rankings, defaults, salience cues, filters, or recommendation formats. Therefore, the findings do not provide direct experimental evidence of the causal effects of digital nudges. Future studies should use experimental or field-experimental designs to test how specific sustainability-related interface features are associated with value perceptions, trust, and sustainable accommodation choices.

Despite these limitations, the study provides a theoretically grounded and empirically supported framework that advances understanding of how sustainability-related information embedded in digital accommodation platforms is associated with sustainable consumption behavior through value and trust.

6. Conclusions

This study examined how sustainable informativeness in digital accommodation platforms is associated with sustainable consumption behavior through value formation and trust. Moving beyond approaches that treat sustainability-related information as a simple informational attribute or as a direct antecedent of behavior, the study conceptualized such information as a structured digital decision cue whose relationships with sustainable consumption behavior appear to operate through cognitive, evaluative, and relational processes.

The findings indicate that sustainable informativeness is positively associated with both sustainable functional value and ethical–emotional value. These two forms of value, in turn, are positively associated with trust, and trust shows the strongest direct association with sustainable consumption behavior. Although sustainable informativeness did not have a significant direct association with sustainable consumption behavior, its total indirect association through value and trust was substantial and significant. This pattern suggests that sustainability-related information is more closely linked to sustainable consumption tendencies not through immediate exposure, but through interpretation, value formation, and trust-based association.

The study therefore contributes to the literature by suggesting that sustainable consumer responses in digital accommodation contexts are best understood in relation to an indirect association pattern rather than a direct informational effect. It also suggests that sustainability-related information on digital hospitality platforms carries both practical and ethical–emotional significance, and that these meanings are jointly associated with consumers’ trust and behavior. In this sense, the study reframes digital accommodation platforms as potential environments of sustainable choice formation rather than neutral channels of information delivery.

More broadly, the findings suggest that sustainable digital hospitality requires more than the visibility of sustainability cues. It requires information structures that consumers can understand, value, and trust. Accordingly, the proposed framework offers scholars and practitioners a theoretically grounded perspective for understanding how sustainability-related information is associated with sustainable consumer behavior in platform-based accommodation settings. Given the Korean consumer sample, the self-reported data, and the cross-sectional design, the findings should be interpreted with appropriate caution. In addition, because sustainable consumption behavior was measured through self-reported willingness, preference, and tendency rather than observed booking data, the findings should be interpreted as evidence regarding self-reported sustainable consumption tendencies. Nevertheless, the study provides a useful basis for future research and practical strategy by suggesting that sustainable behavior in digital accommodation platforms is closely tied to how sustainability-related information is structured, interpreted, and trusted.