When choosing an Airbnb, reviews play a far greater role than many travellers might assume. A new study conducted in collaboration with the Binghamton University School of Management has revealed that even a small number of reviews highlighting safety concerns—particularly about a property’s surrounding neighbourhood—can significantly affect bookings, nightly rates, and guest loyalty. The research found that these reviews, though they make up only a fraction of total feedback, carry a disproportionate weight in shaping customer perceptions. A single mention of safety issues can cause guests to look elsewhere, lower the price a host can charge, and make visitors less inclined to return, no matter how many other glowing reviews a listing might have.
The study, co-authored by Assistant Professor Yidan Sun, delves into the tension between transparency and profit on digital platforms. Companies such as Airbnb face an inherent dilemma: while complete transparency about safety issues may deter potential customers in the short term, suppressing such information could undermine user trust and harm long-term growth. The findings suggest that encouraging open discussion of both positive and negative safety experiences is ultimately beneficial for the platform, its users, and its hosts. “Travellers should treat safety-related reviews as meaningful signals when choosing where to stay,” Sun explained. “Guests who personally encounter neighbourhood-safety issues are more likely to leave the platform or choose a different area in future.” For hosts, safety problems within the property itself—such as broken locks or poor lighting—had a more severe impact on occupancy than concerns about the surrounding area, particularly for newer listings still building a reputation.
To arrive at these conclusions, the researchers analysed a massive dataset of 4.8 million Airbnb guest reviews from five major U.S. cities—New York City, Atlanta, Chicago, Los Angeles, and New Orleans—spanning the years 2015 to 2019. The team sorted safety-related comments into two broad categories: listing safety reviews, which mentioned issues directly tied to the property (such as faulty locks, poor maintenance, or unsafe interiors); and vicinity safety reviews, which referred to the external environment (such as crime, noise, or general feelings of insecurity). Interestingly, only about 0.5% of all reviews mentioned safety concerns, yet nearly half of those were focused on the neighbourhood rather than the listing itself. When a property received a safety-related comment, its occupancy rate dropped between 1.5% and 2.4%, and its average nightly rate decreased by roughly 1.5%. These seemingly small percentages represent a significant loss of revenue when applied across the thousands of listings active on the platform.
The researchers also discovered that personal experience with safety issues has a much stronger influence on behaviour than merely reading about them. Travellers who directly encountered neighbourhood-related safety problems were 60% less likely to book again through Airbnb. This suggests that bad experiences, rather than bad publicity alone, drive customers away from the platform. The study further reinforced the reliability of safety-related reviews by comparing them with official crime data from the five cities studied. It found that the geographic distribution of vicinity safety reviews closely mirrored patterns in reported crime, particularly in lower-income areas. This alignment suggests that guests’ perceptions of safety often reflect real-world risks rather than subjective unease or bias, giving their reviews an added layer of credibility.
Ultimately, the research underscores a persistent and delicate trade-off between consumer welfare and corporate revenue. Platforms like Airbnb must navigate competing interests: guests value transparency and trustworthiness, while companies may feel pressured to minimise the visibility of negative feedback that could harm bookings. As Sun and her co-authors note, suppressing vicinity-safety reviews might boost short-term profits, but it comes at the expense of consumer trust and overall satisfaction. In contrast, embracing transparency—even when it reveals uncomfortable truths—helps build a more reliable marketplace where guests can make informed choices and hosts are incentivised to maintain both property and neighbourhood standards. The findings make a compelling case for a more open review ecosystem —one that acknowledges that long-term success in the sharing economy depends not only on positive ratings but also on honesty and accountability.
More information: Yidan Sun et al, Safety Reviews on Airbnb: An Information Tale, Marketing Science. DOI: 10.1287/mksc.2023.0552
Journal information: Marketing Science Provided by Binghamton University