A systematic review evaluates how agentic AI impacts consumer decisions and experiences, suggesting key areas for improvement.
Agentic AI is increasingly framed as enabling consumers to delegate commerce decisions and actions to digital assistants, yet consumer-facing evidence still centers on assistive chatbots and recommender-like systems, with scarce evaluation of execution-level delegation. This study provides an evidence-mapping review of empirical work on agentic commerce and synthesizes determinants and outcomes of delegation across three questions: (RQ1) how systems are operationalized (autonomy, task scope, interaction mode, and transaction capability/evidence realism), (RQ2) what facilitates or inhibits delegation, and (RQ3) what downstream outcomes follow for marketing performance and consumer experience. We searched Scopus and Web of Science for English-language, peer-reviewed primary studies (2015–2026) and applied conservative coding rules that distinguish claimed capability from simulated or demonstrated execution. The mapped literature is concentrated in text-based, low-autonomy assistants focused on recommendation and post-purchase support; coverage drops sharply for workflow-level autonomy, cart building, checkout/payment execution, and negotiation. Across studies, findings cluster into two motifs: a utility/assurance pathway in which performance cues and interaction quality increase perceived usefulness, satisfaction, and trust, and a governance pathway in which autonomy cues and system-initiated control trigger reactance/powerlessness and reduce acceptance unless mitigated by safeguards; urgency can attenuate governance resistance. Because most outcomes are intention- or vignette-based, calibration, verification, and error-recovery behaviors remain under-measured. Overall, delegation appears to depend less on maximizing autonomy than on coupling capability with user governance (consent, oversight, recourse, accountability), and we outline measurement priorities for evaluating execution-capable agents.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Stefanos Balaskas (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: