Review usefulness represents a vital indicator for evaluating the quality of online reviews in the tourism industry, and various heuristic cues have been recognized as determinants of this indicator. This study constructs a comprehensive conceptual framework based on the heuristic-systematic model to observe how two systematic cues, namely, review novelty and inconsistency, shape the perceived usefulness of reviews. Through an empirical analysis based on 1,744,693 reviews of 62,543 restaurants in the United States, we unveil a positive effect of review novelty on review usefulness but a negative effect of review inconsistency. We also underscore the moderating effects of several heuristic cues in the model, including review valence, reviewer expertise, and restaurant popularity. These results indicate that systematic and heuristic cues simultaneously and interactively determine review usefulness. The findings present theoretical implications to the literature and practical implications to hospitality professionals and designers/managers of review platforms.