# 24 User-Generated Content Statistics for 2026: What Shoppers Need to See

> Reviews, customer visuals, conversion observations and production costs, with the populations and dates that change what each figure means.

- Author: Rishikesh Ranjan · Published: Oct 14, 2026
- Type: Essay
- Tags: Metrics, Acquisition, GTM
- Growth levers: Revenue (primary), also Acquisition
- ~2338 words

---

Customer content earns its place when it answers a purchase question. A photo can show how a jacket fits; a review can explain what happened after washing it. Build your user-generated content program around those questions, then measure whether the answers help shoppers buy with confidence.

User-generated content (UGC) here means customer reviews, questions and answers, and photos or videos made by shoppers. A paid creator can also make a useful demonstration, but a commissioned ad should be evaluated as paid creative. Its economics and incentives differ from a customer volunteering an account of their purchase.

These 24 user-generated content statistics bring together research available in October 2026. Each section names the actual survey or traffic period, including older studies that remain useful for understanding a specific question. Read a stated preference as a preference, an observed conversion difference as an association, and a marketer’s cost opinion as an opinion.

![Illustrative comparison of a plain product photo with the same item shown in everyday use, explaining why customer context helps a buyer judge fit.](https://www.productgrowth.blog/media/posts/user-generated-content-statistics/00-customer-context.webp)
*Customer context turns a product image into a practical answer. Illustrative diagram.*

## How much do shoppers depend on reviews?

Start with the decision your product page needs to support. People who already like a product still need to judge whether it will work for them. Reviews give them another person’s experience to inspect, including details a brand description may leave unresolved.

PowerReviews’ guide reports two June 2025 surveys: 21,279 consumers on review influence, and more than 19,000 on volume and recency. These figures describe those respondents; the recency result comes from the separate survey.

### 1. 95% regularly read product reviews

In the June 2025 review-influence survey, 95% said they regularly read product reviews while shopping. [PowerReviews research](https://www.powerreviews.com/the-complete-guide-to-ratings-reviews/).

Treat the review area as part of the buying journey. Make it easy to reach from the product summary and easy to search for a specific concern.

### 2. 43% would buy a product with zero ratings or reviews

The same survey found 43% would buy a product with no ratings or reviews. [PowerReviews research](https://www.powerreviews.com/the-complete-guide-to-ratings-reviews/).

A new product needs a route to its first credible customer accounts. Ask after someone has had enough time to use it; a launch-day request may produce little useful detail.

### 3. 90% regularly consider review recency

In the separate June 2025 volume-and-recency survey, 90% at least regularly considered when a review was written. [PowerReviews research](https://www.powerreviews.com/the-complete-guide-to-ratings-reviews/).

Keep current feedback visible when a product changes. An old review about a discontinued version can confuse a shopper even if its author described that version accurately.

## What do customer photos actually explain?

The practical job of a customer photo is easy to miss when a team talks only about authenticity. A polished image can show a product clearly while leaving scale, texture, or use in an ordinary room unanswered. Ask for the context a shopper needs, rather than another picture of the packaging.

PowerReviews’ 2024 visual-content report surveyed 15,870 U.S. consumers in December 2023. Its sample was 88% women and 55% millennials, so treat these as preferences in that sample. Respondents could select multiple reasons for valuing customer visuals.

### 4. 89% value seeing a product in real life

Seeing how a product looks in real life was a reason selected by 89% of respondents. [PowerReviews research](https://www.powerreviews.com/research/ugc-visual-content-shopper-behavior-survey/why-consumers-value-user-generated-visual-content/).

For a furniture item, a customer’s room gives the dimensions a reference point. Encourage context that helps someone imagine the product in their own setting.

### 5. 72% value a better sense of size or sizing

A better understanding of size or sizing was selected by 72%. [PowerReviews research](https://www.powerreviews.com/research/ugc-visual-content-shopper-behavior-survey/why-consumers-value-user-generated-visual-content/).

Give contributors a useful prompt: show the garment worn, or place the object beside a familiar item. The prompt should invite honest detail rather than a positive verdict.

### 6. 46% say customer visuals create trust

Trust in the product or brand was selected by 46% as a reason to value customer visuals. [PowerReviews research](https://www.powerreviews.com/research/ugc-visual-content-shopper-behavior-survey/why-consumers-value-user-generated-visual-content/).

Trust is one job among several. A useful brief can ask what the product looks like during use, then let the customer explain what worked and what disappointed them.

![PowerReviews December 2023 survey: real-life appearance 89%, sizing 72%, quality/performance 70%, authenticity 68%, personal fit 56%, trust 46%. Multiple answers allowed.](https://www.productgrowth.blog/media/posts/user-generated-content-statistics/01-why-visuals-matter.webp)
*Customer visuals answer practical product questions. PowerReviews, December 2023 survey.*

| Reason selected | Share |
| --- | --- |
| Real-life appearance | 89% |
| Size or sizing | 72% |
| Quality or performance | 70% |
| Authenticity | 68% |
| Personal fit | 56% |
| Product or brand trust | 46% |
*Reasons may overlap; PowerReviews visual-content survey.*

## Whose photos and videos do shoppers value?

A brand photo and a customer photo can serve different purposes on the same page. Keep the clear packshot, then add an honest view of use. The following results come from the same December 2023 survey, but the photo and video questions were separate.

### 7. 78% most value a photo from another customer

A customer’s product photo was the most valuable photo type for 78% of respondents; 17% chose brand or retailer photos and 5% influencer photos. [PowerReviews research](https://www.powerreviews.com/research/ugc-visual-content-shopper-behavior-survey/consumers-growing-reliance-on-visual-content/).

Make customer imagery identifiable as customer imagery. A gallery that strips away all context can leave shoppers unsure whether they’re seeing an advert or another buyer’s experience.

### 8. 74% most value a video from another customer

For videos, 74% chose customer content as most valuable, versus 20% brand or retailer video and 6% influencer video. [PowerReviews research](https://www.powerreviews.com/research/ugc-visual-content-shopper-behavior-survey/consumers-growing-reliance-on-visual-content/).

Use video when movement or operation matters: a fastening, a sound, or how an item behaves during use. Keep the original account’s meaning when editing for length.

![Most valuable authorship, PowerReviews December 2023: photos customer 78%, brand/retailer 17%, influencer 5%; videos customer 74%, brand/retailer 20%, influencer 6%. Separate questions.](https://www.productgrowth.blog/media/posts/user-generated-content-statistics/02-photo-video-preference.webp)
*Customer content leads these preference questions; photo and video responses are separate.*

## Where should customer visuals appear?

Useful content has to be near the decision it supports. A social post may introduce an item, while its product page must answer the doubts that remain. PowerReviews asked the same visual-content survey where shoppers wanted to find customer imagery; these options overlap.

### 9. 84% want customer visuals on product pages

Product pages were a desired location for customer photos or videos for 84% of respondents. [PowerReviews research](https://www.powerreviews.com/research/ugc-visual-content-shopper-behavior-survey/where-shoppers-want-to-find-user-generated-visual-content/).

Place relevant customer content beside the item it describes. Help shoppers connect the image to the version, size, or use case they’re considering.

### 10. 54% want customer visuals on category or search pages

Category or search pages were selected by 54%. [PowerReviews research](https://www.powerreviews.com/research/ugc-visual-content-shopper-behavior-survey/where-shoppers-want-to-find-user-generated-visual-content/).

A small preview can help a shopper decide which product to investigate. Preserve enough context to avoid presenting one customer’s result as a promise for everyone.

### 11. 25% want customer visuals in promotional emails

Promotional emails were selected by 25%; the same question also recorded social posts at 51% and homepages at 36%. [PowerReviews research](https://www.powerreviews.com/research/ugc-visual-content-shopper-behavior-survey/where-shoppers-want-to-find-user-generated-visual-content/).

Give the image a destination where the shopper can inspect the full account. Choose a customer detail that answers a real question about the item being promoted.

![PowerReviews December 2023 preferred locations: product pages 84%, category/search 54%, social posts 51%, homepage 36%, promotional emails 25%. Multiple selections allowed.](https://www.productgrowth.blog/media/posts/user-generated-content-statistics/03-placement.webp)
*Place customer content where shoppers want to inspect it. Options overlap.*

## What happens when product pages lack useful evidence?

Preference is a reason to improve a page, but it cannot tell you how many sales a change will recover. Salsify’s 2025 report provides another view: 1,910 U.S. and U.K. shoppers surveyed on October 10, 2024. It asked about purchase importance and past abandonment separately.

### 12. 71% rate ratings, reviews and UGC as important

Ratings, reviews and UGC were very or extremely important to completing a purchase for 71% of respondents. [Salsify research](https://www.salsify.com/hubfs/2025/Salsify%202025%20Consumer%20Research%20Report.pdf).

Keep this evidence alongside accurate descriptions and clear product imagery. Customer content can answer experiential questions while the product listing supplies the specifications.

### 13. 48% have abandoned a purchase over review problems

No or low customer ratings, or negative reviews, were an abandonment reason selected by 48%. [Salsify research](https://www.salsify.com/hubfs/2025/Salsify%202025%20Consumer%20Research%20Report.pdf).

This is a combined answer option. It includes poor feedback as well as too little feedback, so adding review volume alone cannot be assumed to solve the whole problem.

### 14. 17% have abandoned over missing customer visuals

No customer-generated content such as images or videos was an abandonment reason selected by 17%. [Salsify research](https://www.salsify.com/hubfs/2025/Salsify%202025%20Consumer%20Research%20Report.pdf).

The gap from review problems is 31 percentage points, calculated as 48 minus 17 within the same question. It compares stated reasons, not the sales return from fixing either one.

![Salsify October 2024 survey, 1,910 U.S./U.K. shoppers: review problems 48%, missing customer images/videos 17%, a calculated 31 percentage point gap. Reasons overlap.](https://www.productgrowth.blog/media/posts/user-generated-content-statistics/04-abandonment.webp)
*Two reported abandonment reasons, not predicted gains from a redesign.*

For the denominator behind a page experiment, use the [conversion rate calculator](https://www.productgrowth.blog/calculators/conversion-rate). Define the visitor population and purchase window before comparing versions.

## How does UGC relate to observed conversion?

The conversion figures below are historical evidence from PowerReviews’ 2022 report, covering 2021 traffic on 1.5 million product pages across more than 1,200 sites. They compare visitors who interacted with content against the report’s baseline visitor conversion rate. They are relative differences, not percentage point changes.

People who choose to inspect reviews or ask questions may already have stronger purchase intent. That makes these observations useful for choosing what to investigate, while a controlled page experiment is needed to estimate what the content itself changes. Do not put an observational lift straight into your revenue forecast.

### 15. Review interactors converted 108.3% above average

PowerReviews reported a 108.3% relative conversion difference for visitors who interacted with ratings and reviews in its 2021 dataset. [PowerReviews research](https://www.powerreviews.com/conversion-impact-ugc-2022/).

Make the review experience useful, then test the change on a defined visitor group. Measure purchases as well as review interactions, so a busier gallery does not become the success criterion by itself.

### 16. Visual-content interactors converted 106.3% above average

Visitors interacting with customer photos or videos had a reported 106.3% relative conversion difference. [PowerReviews research](https://www.powerreviews.com/conversion-impact-ugc-2022/).

Use this to motivate an experiment about your product’s uncertainty. Keep the offer and acquisition mix comparable between variants so the creative question remains interpretable.

### 17. Q&A interactors converted 194.2% above average

Visitors interacting with questions and answers had a reported 194.2% relative conversion difference. [PowerReviews research](https://www.powerreviews.com/conversion-impact-ugc-2022/).

Look for recurring questions that the page leaves unanswered. A searchable answer about compatibility or care can be a useful intervention even when it looks less impressive than a video gallery.

![PowerReviews 2021 traffic: relative conversion differences vs report baseline: review interaction 108.3%, imagery interaction 106.3%, Q&A interaction 194.2%. Observational, no randomized assignment.](https://www.productgrowth.blog/media/posts/user-generated-content-statistics/05-conversion-association.webp)
*Historical associations among visitors who chose to interact. PowerReviews 2022 report.*

## Does UGC reduce content costs?

Cost claims need a different denominator: usable assets, rather than files collected. Ask how much it costs to obtain permission, review the content, edit it, and place it where it can help a buyer. Include work on submissions that never become publishable.

Nosto commissioned Censuswide to survey 202 ecommerce marketers in July 2023. All worked with visual UGC at retailers earning at least $50 million annually in the U.K. and North America. These agreement shares describe experienced marketers’ opinions, not a measured budget reduction or a current market price.

### 18. 85% agreed visual UGC minimizes costs

Visual UGC minimized costs versus professional photography or influencer content, according to 85% of the surveyed marketers. [Nosto / Censuswide research](https://www.nosto.com/blog/new-research-brands-prefer-ugc-for-diversity//).

Write a cost per usable asset estimate for your own team. Include contributor payments or incentives when present, plus the internal time needed to clear and prepare the asset.

### 19. 84% found sourcing visual UGC challenging

Identifying and sourcing visual UGC was challenging for 84% of the same sample. [Nosto / Censuswide research](https://www.nosto.com/blog/new-research-brands-prefer-ugc-for-diversity//).

Collection needs ownership. Give someone responsibility for the request, customer context and permission record; a folder of attractive images is not yet a reusable content library.

### 20. 87% found fresh imagery difficult to maintain

Maintaining a constant flow of fresh marketing imagery was difficult for 87% of respondents. [Nosto / Censuswide research](https://www.nosto.com/blog/new-research-brands-prefer-ugc-for-diversity//).

Plan collection around product use rather than a quota of positive posts. Ask what new uncertainty a submission answers before spending time adapting it for another channel.

![Nosto/Censuswide July 2023, 202 marketers already using UGC at $50m+ retailers: 85% agree visual UGC minimizes costs; 84% find sourcing challenging; 87% find maintaining fresh imagery challenging. Separate questions, opinions.](https://www.productgrowth.blog/media/posts/user-generated-content-statistics/06-cost-operations.webp)
*Cost optimism and production challenges coexist in this selected marketer sample.*

If commissioned videos are part of your budget, compare the questions in these [video marketing statistics](https://www.productgrowth.blog/p/video-marketing-statistics) before deciding which outcome to track. A delivery count and a purchase result answer different questions.

## What does AI shopping change about customer proof?

An AI recommendation introduces another place where a shopper may encounter an unfamiliar item. The need to inspect another customer’s experience remains a useful planning question. Bazaarvoice’s September 2026 Brand Equity Survey covered more than 3,600 Influenster community members in the U.S. and EMEA, a selected customer community rather than all shoppers.

### 21. 76% require visuals for unfamiliar AI recommendations

Customer photos or videos were required before buying an unfamiliar AI recommendation by 76% of those surveyed. [Bazaarvoice / Kiri Masters research](https://www.bazaarvoice.com/press/joint-bazaarvoice-kiri-masters-research-press-release/).

Keep the underlying product evidence available on the destination page. A recommendation can bring someone to the item while still leaving them with practical doubts to resolve.

### 22. 75% require written reviews for unfamiliar AI recommendations

Written user reviews were required by 75% in the same survey. [Bazaarvoice / Kiri Masters research](https://www.bazaarvoice.com/press/joint-bazaarvoice-kiri-masters-research-press-release/).

Give customers room to describe their use case and limitations. Text can answer a precise concern that a photo leaves open; preserve both when the product calls for them.

![Bazaarvoice Brand Equity Survey, September 2026 publication, 3,600+ Influenster community members U.S./EMEA: visual reviews required 76%, written reviews required 75% before an unfamiliar AI recommendation purchase. Requirements overlap.](https://www.productgrowth.blog/media/posts/user-generated-content-statistics/07-ai-validation.webp)
*Customer visuals and written reviews answer complementary validation needs.*

A separate September 2026 Bazaarvoice survey screened more than 1,700 active AI users across the U.S., APAC and EMEA. It asked what makes an AI recommendation trustworthy. These responses describe the surveyed active AI users.

### 23. 57% name reviews and ratings as the top trust source

Authentic reviews and star ratings were the strongest trust source for an AI product recommendation for 57% of surveyed active AI users. [Bazaarvoice / Bluefish research](https://www.bazaarvoice.com/press/bazaarvoice-and-bluefish-partnership/).

A recommendation should lead to evidence the buyer can inspect. Keep review meaning intact when creating summaries, including qualifications that explain who a product fits.

### 24. 90% want to know recommendations use customer evidence

Knowing an AI tool sourced its recommendation from real customer reviews and photos was very important for 57% and somewhat important for 33%, totaling 90%. [Bazaarvoice / Bluefish research](https://www.bazaarvoice.com/press/bazaarvoice-and-bluefish-partnership/).

This is our sum of two exclusive answer shares from one question. It describes stated importance among active AI users; it does not measure how often AI tools use those sources.

![Bazaarvoice September 2026 active-AI-user survey: recommendation sourcing from real customer reviews/photos very important 57%, somewhat important 33%, remaining responses 10%. Calculated important total 90%.](https://www.productgrowth.blog/media/posts/user-generated-content-statistics/08-ai-source-importance.webp)
*Most surveyed active AI users want customer evidence behind the recommendation.*

## Build a program around the doubt you can resolve

Choose a product with an obvious unanswered purchase question. Ask recent buyers for a useful account of how they used it, retain their context, and place the relevant evidence beside that product. Start with a manageable set of items so the team can keep feedback current and handle corrections.

Use a [simple A/B test](https://www.productgrowth.blog/p/a-b-testing-a-product-feature-straight-forward) to compare the page change with the existing experience. Define the audience, success event and observation period before reviewing the result.

Then separate the work into two checks. For customer content, track whether the page answers the question and whether a controlled change improves purchases for the defined audience. For production, track the full cost of obtaining a usable asset. A favorable opinion about UGC costs cannot substitute for your own operating numbers.

The statistics support a concrete place to start: help shoppers see what they’re buying and understand another customer’s experience. Keep the material easy to find, preserve the parts that describe a poor fit, and let an experiment establish what changes for your business.

**Next job: Choose the purchase question your page leaves open.** Pick one product, identify a recurring doubt, and collect customer evidence that answers it before testing the page change. Write the unanswered question and the purchase outcome you will measure.

---

All posts: https://www.productgrowth.blog/archive · Site: https://www.productgrowth.blog