The More Information, the Harder to Choose in the Era of Verification

The first change is visible in where consumers look for information. A Jakpat survey of 2,125 respondents in the second half of 2025 shows that e-commerce remains the primary reference for window shopping, used by 86% of respondents, although down from 90% the previous year. Its position has not been displaced, because that is where prices, product choices, and transactions come together.

What is moving quickly is the second channel. As many as 53% of respondents now do window shopping on brands’ social media, up 10 percentage points from the previous year, mainly on Instagram and TikTok. Jakpat reads this increase as a sign that social media is playing a growing role as a channel for information seeking and deeper product exploration, while transactions still take place on e-commerce.

This means consumers are not simply moving from one channel to another. They are adding points of search. Marketplaces are used to see prices and options, while social media is used to dig deeper into products. The process of finding out before buying no longer takes place in a single location.

There is also an economic factor behind this. Jakpat links the shift to incomes that tend to be stagnant or declining amid rising living costs. Under such conditions, consumers do more thorough research to make sure of a product’s value and quality and to reduce the risk of a wrong purchase.

However, the growing number of places to search is only half the story. What is more interesting is what consumers do after they find the information.

Other data shows what happens after information is found. Research by Lazada together with e-commerce intelligence firm Cube, The 2026 ECommerce Savvy Shopper Report, treats verification as one dimension of the smart consumer: the ability to assess products, reviews, sellers, and authenticity indicators before buying. As reported by Katadata, Indonesian consumers are relatively unwilling to sacrifice trust for a lower price. Only 9% of respondents are willing to shop when there are fewer product authenticity indicators, and only 15% are willing to buy from lesser-known sellers, both below the Southeast Asian average. At the same time, a Jakpat survey on live shopping found that Gen Z tends to pay more attention to product reviews, tips, or comparisons than previous generations.

These two findings point in the same direction. Jakpat Lead Researcher Farida Hasna also noted that some live shopping consumers come to gather more complete information before buying. Information that is already available, whether in a product description or in the live broadcast itself, is not necessarily accepted at face value. Consumers still want to confirm unclear details, hear other people’s experiences, and set one product side by side with another before deciding.

At this point, the shopping flow is no longer as simple as search, then buy. There are additional stages in between: asking, comparing, and testing whether the information found can truly be relied on. The more active this research is, the more important it becomes to ensure that the information gathered genuinely helps in choosing, rather than merely adding to the list of things to consider.

So what happens when the information gathered does not align?

The answer is quite plain in the health and wellness category, where decisions concern one’s own body. The PwC Voice of the Consumer 2026 survey of 503 Indonesian respondents found that 42% of consumers feel overwhelmed by the sheer amount of health information available, or by information that contradicts itself.

This is an important turning point. For more than four in ten of these consumers, the problem lies in information that is either too abundant or inconsistent. Although this data is specific to health information, it gives a clear picture of the consequences when consumers face too many sources of information.

When searching is done across more channels, by asking sellers, reading reviews, and comparing options, each source arrives with its own version. One source may make a certain claim, while reviews, other content, or a seller’s explanation present different information. All of this information may be equally available, but not all of it carries the same weight.

This is where the consumer’s work changes as well. As information becomes more abundant, the consumer’s task shifts from merely finding information to determining which information can be trusted and is relevant to their decision. Adding sources does not automatically resolve the sorting process. Each new piece of information still has to be placed in context and compared with what has already been found.

This sorting process is not about to end, because sources of information keep multiplying. PwC notes that consumers are increasingly turning to AI and digital devices to find health information, while the Lazada and Cube research includes proficiency with technology, including AI, as one dimension of the smart consumer. Answers can now be obtained far faster and with far less effort.

But if answers can be obtained ever faster, are consumers automatically more confident? Not necessarily. Sasanka Dutta, Advisor at PwC Indonesia, cautions that not all content available online is accurate and trustworthy. He also says that retailers, brands, and healthcare providers have a role in helping consumers recognize misinformation and misleading health claims. A fast answer still leaves the same questions: Is this true? Is this credible? Is this relevant to my needs?

From here, the answer to the question posed at the beginning of the article becomes clearer. Consumers still need to do a great deal of research before feeling confident because having more information is not the same as having more certainty, especially when economic pressure makes the risk of a wrong purchase feel greater. The more information is available, the greater the need to make sure that the choice made is indeed the right one.

The consumer journey, too, does not end at discovery. Verification has become part of the process of choosing.

For this reason, the challenge for brands now goes beyond winning discovery: it is to help consumers understand and check information until they feel confident in the decision they make.

This condition changes how we view the role of brands. If consumers are accustomed to searching for information themselves from many sources, providing ever more information alone does not automatically make a brand more convincing. Additional information from a brand can end up as just one more source to be compared.

The same PwC survey offers clues about what is really being sought. To feel confident about a health product or service, 78% of consumers want clear information about the product and how it works. What they are looking for is clarity, more than additional information.

Trust in the brand still plays a role. In the same survey, a trusted brand was cited by 49% of respondents as something that builds confidence, below clear information (78%). A brand name alone is not enough. Amid information full of claims, what makes consumers confident is information they can understand and check.

This means a brand’s value lies not only in how much information it can provide. It also lies in how far the brand helps consumers understand that information, know which parts are relevant to their needs, compare options more easily, and feel confident that what they read can be trusted. In other words, brands can shift from being an information provider to being a decision simplifier.

This shift does not mean reducing information. What changes is the yardstick: from how completely information is delivered, to how far that information helps consumers arrive at a decision.

A similar view comes from the industry side. As reported by Katadata, Lazada Indonesia CEO Carlos Otermin Barrera said that the next growth phase of Southeast Asian e-commerce will be determined by platforms’ ability to help consumers shop with more confidence and direction.

One question brands need to ask: at what points do our consumers still have to verify things on their own?

The answer can be seen in the questions that keep recurring in comment sections, live shopping sessions, or customer service, as well as in how many sources consumers check before buying. Every recurring question marks information that is not yet clear enough, and that is where brands have room to simplify decisions.

Data Sources

Jakpat. (2026, February 18). Stagnant income, rising costs: Double checking on social media. Jakpat Insight. Accessed October 6, 2026, from https://insight.jakpat.net/stagnant-income-rising-costs-double-checking-on-social-media/

Jakpat. (2026, July 13). Live shopping vs affiliate links: Which wins consumers? Jakpat Insight. Accessed October 6, 2026, from https://insight.jakpat.net/live-shopping-vs-affiliate-links-which-wins-consumers/

PwC Indonesia. (2026). Voice of the Consumer 2026 survey: Indonesia survey result. Accessed October 6, 2026, from https://www.pwc.com/id/en/publications/consumer-markets/pwc-voice-of-the-consumer-2026-indonesia.pdf

PwC Indonesia. (2026, September 3). Wellness is no longer occasional: Indonesians seek healthier lives through technology, trust and community, PwC survey finds [Press release]. Accessed October 6, 2026, from https://www.pwc.com/id/en/media-centre/press-release/2026/english/voice-of-the-consumer-2026-survey.html

Setyowati, D. (2026, September 30). Riset Lazada: Konsumen kian selektif, selisih belanja online Rp 65 triliun [Lazada research: Consumers increasingly selective, online spending gap of Rp 65 trillion]. Katadata.co.id. Accessed October 6, 2026, from https://katadata.co.id/digital/e-commerce/6abcd47ef0052/riset-lazada-konsumen-kian-selektif-selisih-belanja-online-rp-65-triliun