Parasocial relations and social media influencers' persuasive power. Exploring the moderating role of product involvement

(1)

Acta Psychologica 230 (2022) 103731

Available online 31 August 2022

Parasocial relations and social media influencers' persuasive power.

Exploring the moderating role of product involvement

Delia Cristina Balaban

^*

, Julia Szambolics, Mihai Chiric ˘ a

Faculty of Political, Administrative and Communication Sciences, Department of Communication, Public Relations and Advertising, Babeș-Bolyai University, str. Traian Moșoiu 71, Cluj-Napoca, Romania

A R T I C L E I N F O Keywords:

Source credibility Parasocial relations Social influence Social media Social media influencers

A B S T R A C T

Aiming to explore the process of social influence in the social media environment, this study addresses consumers' complex psychological processes, attitudes, and behaviors when interacting with social media influencers (SMIs). Our main objective is to explore the impact of follower status on parasocial relations (PSRs) with SMIs considering the moderating role of the involvement with the product the SMI is advertising on Instagram.

Furthermore, we investigate how follower status, mediated by PSRs and the SMI's credibility, has an impact on the effectiveness of the persuasive process and contributes to SMIs' social influence in online environments. We worked together with an actual female SMI with 12,000 followers who posts content on Instagram. Contrary to our predictions, our results showed that being a follower on Instagram does not necessarily mean having a PSR with an SMI. Product involvement has a moderating role in the sense that only those followers who report having high involvement have a strong PSR with the SMI. Moreover, a PSR positively impacts the SMI's credibility, leading to positive attitudes toward the brand and increased intentions to purchase the advertised products and spread the content created by the SMI on social media.

1. Introduction

Social influence is a concept that includes a wide range of phenom- ena such as socialization, obedience, compliance, conformity, and persuasion (Cialdini, 2001; Cialdini & Goldstein, 2004; Kelman, 1958).

It refers to the process of changing opinions, attitudes, and behaviors due to interactions with the people around us. Currently, a large part of social interactions take place in online environments where social influence processes occur (Sirola et al., 2021). The convergence of mass and interpersonal communication characterized by online and, in particular, social media communication contributes to the increasing complexity of social influence processes (L´opez & Sicilia, 2014). Tech- nological affordances have dramatically changed the traditional communication approach in terms of message control, audience scale, source ambiguity, receiver ambiguity, and temporal ambiguity, and have consequently affected the social influence process (Flanagin, 2017).

A robust scholarship on the persuasive power of social media influencers (SMIs) as relevant actors of influence in online environments has been developed in recent years (Hudders et al., 2021; Vrontis et al.,

2021). SMIs are content creators who enjoy fame and influence on their social media channels (Marwick, 2013), where they publish content in exchange for compensation (Campbell & Grimm, 2019). As digital opinion leaders, moderators, and strategic communication actors (Enke

& Borchers, 2019), SMIs engage in self-presentation on various social

media platforms such as Instagram, YouTube, Twitter, and TikTok (Abidin, 2016; Dhanesh & Duthler, 2019). SMIs' embedded advertising messages are often perceived as honest opinions and therefore have strong persuasive power (Boerman & van Reijmersdal, 2020; Campbell

& Farrell, 2020; De Veirman et al., 2017). However, the influence of

SMIs goes beyond promoting products and services for advertising purposes (Vrontis et al., 2021), considering, for instance, their impact on the health-related attitudes and behavior of their followers (Folkvord et al., 2020), as well as on political attitudes and behavior (Naderer, 2022; Zimmermann et al., 2020). Moreover, SMIs and their audience groups are engaged in a mediated relationship, and there is evidence that the quality of this relationship influences the effectiveness of SMIs' advertising messages (Breves et al., 2021; Hudders & De Jans, 2022;

Lou, 2021). Thus, in the present study we focus on the relationship between SMIs and their followers.

* Corresponding author.

E-mail addresses: [email protected] (D.C. Balaban), [email protected] (J. Szambolics), [email protected] (M. Chiric˘a).

URL: https://fspac.ubbcluj.ro/ro (D.C. Balaban), https://fspac.ubbcluj.ro/ro (J. Szambolics), https://fspac.ubbcluj.ro/ro (M. Chiric˘a).

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Acta Psychologica

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/actpsy

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2022.103731

Received 31 January 2022; Received in revised form 25 April 2022; Accepted 25 August 2022

(2)

Rosengren and Campbell (2021) posit that scholarship on SMIs should take into account factors that moderate the effectiveness of influencer advertising. In line with this idea, our main objective is to explore the impact of follower status on parasocial relations (PSRs) with an SMI considering the moderator role of the involvement with the product the SMI is advertising on Instagram. Furthermore, we investigate how follower status mediated by parasocial relations and SMIs' credibility has an impact on the effectiveness of the persuasive process and contributes to SMIs' social influence in online environments. Pre- vious research highlighted the positive role of PSRs and parasocial interaction (PSI) in affective and behavioral outcomes in the case of SMI advertising (Boerman & van Reijmersdal, 2020; Breves et al., 2021;

Reinikainen et al., 2020). Considering the complexity of the SMI advertising ecosystem, there is still a need for an in-depth understanding of PSRs between real followers and SMIs (Rosengren & Campbell, 2021) and of how advertising outcomes are affected by these relationships (Hudders et al., 2021). Thus far, research on PSRs with SMIs has applied study designs that approximate consumers' social media environments and used fictitious SMIs. In contrast, our study design involves an actual SMI. The procedure allowed us to observe the PSRs of real SMI followers and of non-followers who have encountered SMI-generated content for the first time, as well as to explore the moderating role of product involvement on PSRs in the case of followers and non-followers.

1.1. Parasocial engagement and SMIs' communication

Interactions between media users and traditional media celebrities such as moderators, actors, and so forth lead to the development of PSRs (Horton & Wohl, 1956). Thus, like in non-mediated interactions, a celebrity is perceived as a companion or friend. This type of relationship emerges from the deeply altruistic human instinct to develop connections with other human beings despite physical distance (Rubin & Perse, 1987). The previous literature distinguishes between PSI and PSRs, the former being associated with users' spontaneous responses to a media persona during media exposure, whereas the latter represents a long- lasting relationship that could occur outside an exposure situation as a result of previous media exposure (Eyal & Dailey, 2012; Klimmt et al., 2006). In addition, parasocial identification, the imagined interaction between a media viewer and a media character, contributes to the development of a PSR (Rubin & Perse, 1987; Shan et al., 2019).

Recently, a new category was added to the parasocial theory, parasocial attachment (PSA), referring to individuals' behavior to seek comfort in difficult times by consuming media featuring their favorite celebrity or character (Stever, 2013). Parasocial engagement (PSE) is often used as a collective term for PSI, PSA, and PSR (Tukachinsky & Stever, 2018).

The concept of PSR was initially developed in the context of cinema and television (Rubin et al., 1985; Russell & Stern, 2006), and the in- tensity of PSRs was linked in previous research to the age, gender, and education of media users, as well as the type of media in which the celebrity appeared (Giles, 2002). A PSR is the result of the generalized involvement of a user with a media celebrity at the cognitive, affective, and behavioral levels (Schramm & Hartmann, 2008). As users similarly evaluate traditional media celebrities the way they evaluate the people they meet in everyday life, PSIs are largely similar to ordinary social interactions (Giles, 2002).

Based on Knapp's interpersonal relationship models (Knapp, 1978;

Knapp et al., 2014), Tukachinsky and Stever (2018), in their theory of PSE development, dynamically conceptualized PSR as a staged process.

The initiation stage of a PSR is generated by a first encounter with a traditional media celebrity, and is followed by experimentation, intensification, and integration stages. The initial stage of PSE is characterized by impression formation and disposition. At the cognitive level, the viewer is attentive and expresses curiosity toward the media character.

At the affective level, there is a certain attraction toward the media character and at the behavioral level, there is an intention to view more media content featuring that media persona. At the next level, that of

experimentation, the main objective of the viewer is to reduce uncer- tainty in the relationship by developing a degree of predictability of possible relational outcomes. At the cognitive level, this is the stage where the media user learns more about the media character, and at the affective level, certain feelings (which could be positive or negative) about the media character are developed. In terms of behavior, the viewer is looking for exposure to additional content in which the media celebrity is featured. The objective of the next stage, the intensification stage, is seeking intimacy. At the cognitive level, the viewer has the impression that they already know the celebrity well and think about them outside the media exposure process. A sense of companionship develops, and the viewer shows empathy toward the celebrity. Finally, in the integration stage, the viewer defines himself or herself, and is seen by peers, as a fan of the media celebrity and is less critical of the celebrity. Feelings of intimacy and devotion already exist at this last stage, and the viewer changes in line with the celebrity's attitudes and behavior (Tukachinsky & Stever, 2018).

Previous research highlighted the relevance of PSE, mostly in the form of PSI and PSRs, for SMI communication (Boerman, 2020; Breves et al., 2021; Enke & Borchers, 2019; Hudders et al., 2021). Even though PSRs with traditional celebrities and with SMIs develop along similar trajectories, platform affordances, as well as the particularities of SMI- generated content, bring new elements that affect the development of such relationships (Lou, 2021). First, the nature of their activities enables SMIs, who usually disclose aspects of their daily lives on various online social media platforms, to frequently interact with social media users (Carter, 2016). Thus, followers get the impression they know SMIs well (Hudders & De Jans, 2022). SMIs also often use methods to address their audience directly in their posts or videos, giving the impression of engaging in a personal conversation with their audience. Followers, in turn, respond to the interaction initiated by SMIs by more than just passive observation; they engage in digital behavior such as liking, commenting, or even sending direct messages (Hoos, 2019). Second, according to studies conducted on traditional media, similarity between audience members and media celebrities is an important element that enhances PSR (Tsai & Men, 2013), and SMIs have that peer element (Campbell & Farrell, 2020) as followers identify even more with SMIs and perceive SMIs to be more accessible and believable than traditional celebrities (Balaban & Must˘ațea, 2019; Djafarova & Rushworth, 2017).

Third, the episodic nature of SMIs' media presence contributes to the development of a sense of greater connection between them and their followers, compared to traditional media celebrities and their fans (Lou, 2021). Individuals who interact regularly strengthen their intimacy, a phenomenon observed across traditional media settings (Altman &

Taylor, 1973; Rubin, 2002).

Studies conducted on traditional media positively associate individual media consumption practices (e.g., watching a movie alone) with the development of PSRs (Horton & Wohl, 1956; Klimmt et al., 2006).

Social media usage is an individual media consumption act per se, and therefore, this is an additional argument in favor of an intense PSR between social media audiences and SMIs. PSRs with SMIs develop over time, and they are progressive relationships to which both parties contribute: the SMIs by posting daily information about themselves, and the public by constantly following them (Lou, 2021).

Even if platform affordances (e.g., direct messages on Instagram) enable direct communication between SMIs and their followers, the relationships between them do not mutually develop and are therefore one-sided (Lou, 2021). Even if, as a follower, one has exchanged messages several times with an SMI, the relationship still does not develop on even terms (Breves et al., 2021; Chung & Cho, 2017). In the context of the existing direct channel for communication between SMIs and their followers (e.g., comments on posts, direct messages on Instagram, etc.), Lou (2021) argues that the relationship is a trans-parasocial one. Even though the possibility of direct interaction is present, and social media users can directly address SMIs, the relationship remains unbalanced.

Thus, each follower's relationship with an SMI is an individual one,

(3)

whereas the SMI's relationship is more with their entire audience than with individuals. The trans-parasocial relation is synchronously interactive, in the sense that interaction can be synchronous or not, but the possibility of direct messaging provided by social media platforms allows a high level of interaction compared to what traditional media allows in developing PSRs with celebrities. PSRs contribute to the persuasive power of SMIs' messages. The model of trans-parasocial relations lends weight to the idea that followers are more accepting of advertising messages from SMIs (Lou, 2021).

In the context of curated flows on social media, where algorithms decide what content users get on their feeds (Thorson & Wells, 2016), being the follower of a particular SMI is a relevant factor that enables users holding this status to frequently see content generated by that SMI.

Furthermore, prior research highlighted that follower status affects the strength of the PSR. Thus, Breves et al. (2021) stressed that Tukachinsky and Stever's (2018) model of the development of PSE can aptly describe the evolution of the relationship between an SMI and a member of their audience. Thus, when a non-follower comes across an SMI's content, it corresponds to the stage of initiation, but when a follower encounters such content, it occurs at the levels of experimentation, intensification, and integration. The latter two stages apply mainly to the relationships of long-time followers. Breves et al. (2021) found evidence that followers report stronger PSRs with SMIs than non-followers and are less skeptical of the SMIs' advertising posts. Furthermore, follower status has a positive impact on attitudes toward promoted brands and on purchase intentions.

One of the factors determining the persuasive power of an SMI is his or her perceived credibility (Chu & Kamal, 2008; Munnukka et al., 2016;

Nafees et al., 2021). As communicators, SMIs have a wide reach and engaged audiences whose decision-making they influence (Hudders et al., 2021). They seek message attention, aim to attract new followers, and generate engagement with their existing followers (Campbell &

Farrell, 2020). Source credibility is a relevant asset in the context of online media environments characterized by source ambiguity. Greater source credibility contributes to communicators' persuasive power (Flanagin, 2017). An SMI's perceived credibility is important particularly when, apart from the advertising message, the viewers have little or no information about the source, which is often the case of an initial encounter with content produced by SMIs (Jain & Posavac, 2001). The perceived credibility of SMIs, like that of traditional celebrities (Oha- nian, 1990), is based on trustworthiness, expertise, similarity, and attractiveness (Amos et al., 2008; Munnukka et al., 2016). Trustwor- thiness refers to an SMI's ability to convey truthful information. Exper- tise defines the extent to which a communicator is considered to be a source of reliable information. This is relevant when one reviews products and gives advice daily, as SMIs often do. Hence, the high perceived trustworthiness of SMIs contributes to the persuasiveness of their messages (Lou & Yuan, 2019).

SMIs are often seen as peers by their followers, and therefore perceived similarity contributes to their persuasive power, as well as their attractiveness (Campbell & Farrell, 2020). Furthermore, since SMIs cultivate credible and appealing social media personas, SMIs' trustworthiness, attractiveness, and perceived similarity positively influence their followers' trust in their branded posts (Lou & Yuan, 2019). Trust developed in social media interactions can be both need- and personality-based (Shareef et al., 2020), and similarity with the SMI is not only limited to being ego-relevant, but it is also story-relevant (Cohen et al., 2018). Strong peer-endorser credibility has an impact on the effectiveness of advertising (Breves et al., 2019; Lee & Koo, 2015;

Munnukka et al., 2016; Nafees et al., 2021).

Recent studies have examined the development of PSRs with SMIs and highlighted that a strong PSR impacts the perceived credibility of SMIs, which, in turn, positively translates into advertising outcomes (Breves et al., 2021; Labrecque, 2014; Nafees et al., 2021; Reinikainen et al., 2020; Sokolova & Kefi, 2020). Strong PSRs make SMIs' brand endorsements more effective (Balaban & Must˘ațea, 2019; Ballantine &

Yeung, 2015; Chung & Cho, 2017; Munnukka et al., 2016). Most studies focused on the effects on brand attitude and purchase intention (Breves et al., 2021).

The intention to spread SMI-generated content, also known as elec- tronic word of mouth (eWOM), by social media users reflects the potential of a message to reach audiences outside an SMI's community (Evans et al., 2017). This type of digital behavior represents a source of influence in online communities (Lopez ´ & Sicilia, 2014). Moreover, empirical evidence suggests that brand-related messages shared by friends on social media are rated better than those posted by brands (Johnson et al., 2019). Therefore, we consider it relevant to explore to what extent follower status contributes to an increase in eWOM.

Overall, we predict that SMIs' existing followers will report stronger PSRs compared to non-followers. SMIs' expertise in the field in which they generate content is relevant for their followers as social media users look for content that matches up with their areas of interest (Balaban &

Must˘ațea, 2019). Therefore, we assume that product involvement (Choo et al., 2014; O'Cass, 2000), the relevance for the audience of the product an SMI is advertising, plays a moderating role in strengthening PSRs, in the sense that an influencer's existing followers who report high levels of product involvement will also have stronger PSRs. Furthermore, PSRs will have a positive impact on SMIs' credibility, which in turn will have a positive impact on brand attitude, purchase intention, and eWOM. Fig. 1 represents our hypothesized model.

2. Materials and methods 2.1. Participants

To explore the impact of follower status moderated by product involvement via PSR and SMIs' credibility on brand attitude, purchase intention, and intention to spread SMI content, we collaborated with an actual female SMI from Romania with 12,000 followers who posts content in the Romanian language on Instagram. Prior to our quasi- experiment, the SMI focused on hairstyle how-to videos, a popular type of content on social media (Purcariu, 2019). We recruited participants via Instagram for both the follower and non-follower groups as follows: An announcement was posted on the Instagram account of the said SMI to recruit her existing followers to participate in our study. We recruited participants from Romania for the non-follower group through an announcement in the Romanian language posted on Instagram. To do so, we first created an Instagram account for the specific purposes of our research and published the recruitment announcement in Instagram stories. According to the information provided by the SMI we worked with, 98 % of her followers are women, aged 18 to 45, and from Romania. Therefore, we advertised the announcement targeting Romanian female Instagram users the same age of the followers of the SMI we worked with. Familiarity with Instagram was required for participation; the recruitment method ensured that this condition was met. The initial sample consisted of 217 volunteers (N =217), and after excluding from the non-follower group social media users who were already followers of our SMI and incomplete cases, our final sample comprised 190 female participants, aged 18 to 41 (N =190, Mage = 24.90, SD =5.60). Considering that a large majority of the SMI's followers were female, our sampling strategy focused exclusively on women. In terms of education level, 41.1 % of participants hold a high school degree and 58.5 % hold a college degree or higher. A large majority of participants use Instagram several times a day (80 %), and 61 % declared that they have experience in following SMIs in general for at least three years. We identified two group based on follower status: the follower group (n₁=106), and the non-follower group (n₂=84).

2.2. Study materials

The stimuli were developed based on careful observation of the advertising activity of similar SMI accounts and on the expertise of the

(4)

SMI who contributed to the quasi-experiment. Being accessed by 500 million users each day, Instagram stories are not only very popular in terms of usage, but they are an important channel for brand advertising (Newberry, 2021). Instagram stories are photos or brief videos that typically last 15 s and are of an ephemeral nature, as they are available to be seen on the platform for only 24 h. The stimulus materials consisted of a screenshot of the account information of the SMI, followed by an Instagram story in the form of a dynamic video demonstrating how to use a branded hairstyling product. The short video had music in the background. The selected brand was Moroccanoil, a brand that the SMI had not advertised before this quasi-experiment and with which the SMI would start a collaboration. In line with the European Advertising Standards Alliance (EASA)'s (2018) recommendations, an advertising disclosure was placed on the top of the Instagram stories; it came in the Instagram-standardized form of “paid partnership with BRAND.” Ap- pendix 1 contains additional information about the stimulus materials.

2.3. Pre-test of the study materials

According to Campbell and Farrell's (2020) classification system, the SMI who participated in this quasi-experiment is a micro-influencer (10,000− 100,000), an SMI with a relatively small community of followers who develops content in a specific field of interest: hairstyling.

Therefore, we measured how non-followers rate some of the SMI's persuasive-relevant characteristics such as the SMI's likeability, the intention toward the SMI, and product fit (De Veirman et al., 2017;

Naderer et al., 2021; Schouten et al., 2020). We aimed to evaluate these features outside the SMI's audience. We pre-tested the stimulus materials on 82 women, a sample similar to the one applied in the main study in terms of age, education, Instagram use, and experience in following SMIs. Participants were also recruited via social media. They were prompted to view a screenshot of the SMI's account followed by the branded Instagram story and then to answer some questions. The like- ability of the SMI was measured using 5-point semantic differential scales anchored with adjectives that best describe the SMI: “cold-warm,”

“unlikable-likable,” “unfriendly-friendly” (α =0.826, M =4.47, SD = 0.64; De Veirman et al., 2017; Dimofte et al., 2003). Intention toward the SMI was measured using three statements (e.g., “I would follow the Instagram account of the SMI.”) on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree; α =0.952, M =3.93, SD =1.86;

Liljander et al., 2015). Product fit was measured using 7-point semantic differential scales using three statements that best describe the partici- pant's opinion of the SMI and the brand: “they do not fit-they fit well,”

“they are not a good match-they are a good match,” “they are incompatible-they are compatible” (α =0.923, M =5.93, SD =1.01;

Rifon et al., 2004). In addition, 65.9 % of the participants declared that they were familiar with the brand Moroccanoil. As the SMI was assessed as highly likable by the respondents, who also expressed intentions to follow her, and the match between the SMI and the advertised brand was also ranked highly, we deemed the stimulus materials to be appropriate for this study.

2.4. Procedure

To explore the effect of follower status via PSR and the SMI's credibility on brand attitude and purchase intention, a survey-based online quasi-experiment was conducted in March 2021. Social curation (Thorson & Wells, 2016) enables the followers of an SMI to receive the SMI's daily-generated content on their feeds and in their stories sections.

Non-followers can occasionally come across a particular SMI's content while scrolling through their feeds or looking at Instagram stories (Breves et al., 2021: Lee & Eastin, 2020). Through our quasi-experiment, we aimed to simulate these particular situations. In the case of the follower group, participants were first exposed to a message on Instagram stories that instructed them to watch the next story as they usually would. A screenshot with the SMI's account information was posted, followed by the Instagram story with the SMI's advertising content. After the participants viewed it, a new message followed in the stories asking them to complete a questionnaire, accessible via a link posted there. The non-followers received the link with the stimulus material and the questionnaire as a direct Instagram message from a non-SMI account opened for the purpose of this research. They were instructed to view a screenshot with the SMI's account information, followed by the Insta- gram story with the SMI's advertising content, as they usually would when encountering an SMI's content on Instagram for the first time. The non-follower group had to fill in the same questionnaire.

2.5. Measures 2.5.1. Moderator

Product involvement was measured using five statements (e.g., “I am interested in hairstyling.”) on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree; α =0.893, M =5.08, SD =1.34;

adapted after Choo et al., 2014; O'Cass, 2000).

2.5.2. Mediators

Parasocial relations were measured using seven statements (e.g.,

“Occasionally, I wondered if the influencer was similar to me or not.”) on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree; α = 0.713, M = 4.66, SD = 0.99; adapted after Schramm &

Hartmann, 2008). The SMI's credibility was measured using nine statements (e.g., “Please tell us to what extent you agree with the following statement: In my opinion, the SMI is attractive.”) on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree; α =0.911, M

=6.03, SD =0.91; Russell & Rasolofoarison, 2017).

2.5.3. Dependent variables

Brand attitude was measured using 7-point semantic differential scales anchored with the adjective pairs “unattractive-attractive,”

“negative-positive,” “boring-interesting,” “unlikable-likable” (α = 0.943, M = 5.99, SD = 1.09; Matthes & Naderer, 2016). Purchase intention was measured using four statements (e.g., “I will buy a product from Puma.”) on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) Fig. 1. Hypothesized model of the current study.

Note. +: The association was hypothesized to be positive.

(5)

to 7 (strongly agree; α =0.939, M =5.26, SD =1.54; van Reijmersdal et al., 2016). Intention to spread (eWOM) was measured using five statements (e.g., “I am interested in sharing these stories with my friends on Instagram.”) on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree; α =0.943, M =4.12 SD = 1.83; Sohn, 2009).

2.6. Data analysis/results

A series of appropriate confound tests for age (t (188) =14.22, p <

.001), education (χ²(3) =47.49, p < .001), and familiarity with SMIs in general (χ²(5) =2.742, p =.740) indicated the necessity to consider age and education as covariates for further analysis.

We computed bivariate correlations for the moderator, mediators, and dependent variables as shown in Table 1.

A MANCOVA was performed with the follower and non-follower conditions as the independent factor, and product involvement, PSR, the SMI's credibility, brand attitude, purchase intention, and eWOM as dependent variables. We observed follower status to have a significant main effect on product involvement, the PSR, the SMI's credibility, brand attitude, purchase intention, and eWOM (Wilks' Lambda =0.74, F (6, 190) =10.74, p < .001, ηp²=0.26). Age (Wilks' Lambda =0.96, F(6, 190) =191 p =.282, ηp²=0.04) did not have a significant effect, nor did education (Wilks' Lambda =0.94, F(6, 190) =2.08, p =.058, ηp²= 0.06). The MANCOVA results are shown in Table 2.

To test the proposed hypothesized model of moderated mediation with brand attitude, purchase intention, and eWOM as dependent variables, we used Model 83, PROCESS macro 3 in SPSS (Hayes, 2018), employing 5000 boot-strap samples. The PSR and the SMI's credibility were treated as serial mediators and product involvement as a moderator. We ran a separate analysis for each dependent variable. The follower group was used as a reference group, and included age and education as covariates.

We posited that followers would report stronger PSRs than non- followers. Contrary to our predictions, the findings indicate that follower status had no significant direct impact on PSRs (b =0.88, SE = 0.54, 95 % BCBCI =[− 0.1732, 1.9384], p =.10), nor did age (b =0.03, SE =0.01, 95 % BCBCI =[− 0.0053, 0.0689], p =.09) or education (b =

− 0.16, SE =0.11, 95 % BCBCI =[− 0.3862, 0.0633], p =.16). There- fore, we did not find support for our hypothesis.

We posited that PSRs positively affect the SMI's credibility. Our analysis showed that PSRs had a positive significant impact on the SMI's credibility (b =0.24, SE =0.05, 95 % BCBCI =[0.1380, 0.3479], p <

.001). Furthermore, non-followers reported significantly lower levels of the SMIs' credibility than followers (b = − 0.89, SE =0.14, 95 % BCBCI

= [− 1.1682, − 0.6079], p < .001). Age (b = 0.02, SE =0.01, 95 % BCBCI =[− 0.0042, 0.0527], p =.094) and education (b = − 0.15, SE = 0.09, 95 % BCBCI =[− 0.3166, 0.0242], p =.092) have no significant impact on the SMI's credibility. Thus, we found evidence for our hypothesis.

We posited that the SMI's credibility would positively affect brand attitude. Results showed that the SMI's credibility (b =0.30, SE =0.11, 95 % BCBCI =[0.0769, 0.5165], p =.008), as well as PSR (b =0.17, SE

=0.08, 95 % BCBCI =[0.0029, 0.3372], p =.046), had direct significant impact on brand attitude. Being a follower does not have a direct significant impact on brand attitude (b = − 0.31, SE =0.24, 95 % BCBCI = [− 0.7723, 0.1620], p =.20). Age (b =0.003, SE =0.02, 95 % BCBCI = [− 0.0403, 0.0464], p =.89) and education (b = − 0.18, SE =0.14, 95 % BCBCI =[− 0.4413, 0.0791], p =.171) are not significant covariates.

Our hypothesis was supported. See Fig. 2.

We posited that the SMI's credibility would positively affect purchase intention. Our results show that the SMI's credibility (b =0.43, SE = 0.15, 95 % BCBCI =[0.1313, 0.7238], p =.004), as well as PSRs (b = 0.34, SE =0.11, 95 % BCBCI =[0.1140, 0.5646], p =.003), have a direct significant impact on purchase intention. Being a follower does not have a direct significant impact on purchase intention (b = − 0.42, SE =0.32, 95 % BCBCI =[− 1.0513, 0.2081], p =.188). Age (b =0.01, SE =0.03, 95 % BCBCI =[− 0.0470, 0.0699], p =.699) and education (b

= − 0.18, SE =0.18, 95 % BCBCI =[− 0.5348, 0.1667], p =.302) are not significant covariates. Our hypothesis was supported. See Fig. 3.

We posited that the SMI's credibility would positively affect eWOM.

Our results show that the SMI's credibility (b =0.64, SE =0.15, 95 % BCBCI =[0.3370, 0.9379], p < .001), as well as PSRs (b =0.53, SE = 0.12, 95 % BCBCI =[0.3041, 0.7612], p < .001), have a direct significant impact on eWOM. Being a follower has a direct significant impact on eWOM (b = − 0.99, SE =0.32, 95 % BCBCI =[− 1.6353, − 0.3578], p

= .0024). Age (b = − 0.0035, SE = 0.03, 95 % BCBCI = [− 0.0628, 0.0557], p =.906) and education (b = − 0.33, SE =0.18, 95 % BCBCI = [− 0.6886, 0.0229], p =.067) are not significant covariates. Our hypothesis was supported. See Fig. 4.

We posited that followers reporting high levels of product involvement would have stronger PSRs. We found evidence supporting the moderating role of product involvement. Product involvement had a direct significant impact on the PSR (b =0.59, SE =0.16, 95 % BCBCI = [0.2778, 0.9050], p =.003), and the interaction effect between follower status and product involvement was found to be statistically significant as well (b = − 0.25, SE =0.10, 95 % BCBCI =[− 0.4538, − 0.0533], p = .013). Our findings indicate the following: at low levels of product involvement =3.73 (Effect = − 0.010, 95 % BootBCBCI =[− 0.0834, 0.0506], p =.96), at medium levels of product involvement =5.08 (Effect = − 0.062, 95 % BootBCBCI =[− 0.1483, − 0.0073], p =.048), and at high levels of product involvement =6.42 (Effect = − 0.116, 95 % BootBCBCI =[− 0.2443,-0.0298], p =.002). The conditional effect of follower status mediated by PSR and the SMI's credibility on brand attitude (Index = − 0.018, BootSE =0.011, 95 % BootBCBCI =[− 0.0442,

− 0.0016]), purchase intention (Index = − 0.0264, BootSE =0.017, 95 % BootBCBCI = [− 0.0675, − 0.0023]), and eWOM (Index = − 0.039, BootSE =0.021, 95 % BootBCBCI =[− 0.0868, − 0.0059]) was found to be significant. Interaction effects are depicted in Fig. 5.

Table 1

Bivariate correlations.

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

1. Product

involvement 1

2. PSR 0.393** 1

3. SMI's credibility 0.367** 0.482** 1 4. Brand attitude 0.395** 0.318** 0.389** 1 5. Purchase

intention 0.499** 0.396** 0.445** 0.771** 1 6. eWOM 0.501** 0.524** 0.590** 0.488** 0.607** 1 N =190; *p <.05, **p <.01, **p <.001.

Table 2

Results of MANCOVA.

Follower group M(SD)

Non-follower group M(SD)

F-test

Product

involvement 5.51 (1.20)^b 4.53 (1.32)^a F(6, 190) =15.56, p <

.001, η_p²=0.08 PSR 4.98 (0.92)^b 4.24 (0.92)^a F(6, 190) =9.30, p =.003,

η_p²=0.05

SMI's credibility 6.54(0.63) ^b 5.38 (0.78)^a F(6, 190) =49.89, p <

.001, ηp²=0.21 Brand attitude 6.29 (0.98) ^b 5.62 (1.18)^a F(6, 190) =10.64, p =

.001, η_p²=0.05 Purchase

intention 5.75 (1.29) ^b 4.63 (1.59)^a F(6, 190) =12.50, p = .001, η_p²=0.06 eWOM 4.94 (1.63) ^b 3.08 (1.52)^a F(6, 190) =36.19, p <

.001, ηp²=0.16 N =190; ^abgroup differences, p <.050.

(6)

3. Discussion

Despite our predictions, followers did not report stronger PSRs with the SMI than non-followers. In this sense our findings are not consistent with previous research (Breves et al., 2021). However, product involvement plays a moderating role in the relationship between follower status and the PSR, in the sense that those followers that reported high values of product involvement, an indicator of interest in the field in which the SMI is generating content, have strong PSRs with the SMI.

When searching for the reasons people follow SMIs, Lee et al. (2022) highlighted the preoccupation with acquiring consumer goods as a key motivation. We found evidence that the relevance of the products SMIs advertise plays an important role in their followers' PSRs with them.

Previous literature highlighted that micro-influencers have strong

ties with their communities of followers (Kay et al., 2020). Based on our results, we argue that micro-influencers do not necessarily have strong connections with the members of their virtual communities in the form of strong PSRs. People follow SMIs because they can provide useful information about distinct areas of interest (Lee et al., 2022) and information about products that their followers have high levels of involvement with. Especially for SMIs that publish specific content, the congruence between their content and the area of interest of their followers is vital, as previous literature has shown that prior topic interest plays a relevant role when choosing to follow an SMI (Coco & Eckert, 2020).

Contrary to previous research (Breves et al., 2021), we did not find evidence that followers report more positive brand attitude and purchase intention that non-followers. Hence, being a follower is not Fig. 2. Moderated mediation model 1.

Note. N =190. The figure shows the indirect effect of follower status on brand attitude through PSR and the SMI's credibility. Unstandardized effects are presented.

The follower group was used as a reference group; age and education were used as control variables but are not shown above. *p <.05; **p <.01; ***p <.001.

Fig. 3. Moderated mediation model 2.

Note. N =190. The figure shows the indirect effect of follower status on purchase intention through PSR and the SMI's credibility. Unstandardized effects are presented. The follower group was used as a reference group; age and education were used as control variables but are not shown above. *p <.05; **p <.01; ***p

<.001.

Fig. 4. Moderated mediation model 3.

Note. N =190. The figure shows the indirect effect of follower status on eWOM through PSR and the SMI's credibility. Unstandardized effects are presented. The follower group was used as a reference group; age and education were used as controls variable but are not shown above. *p <.05; **p <.01; ***p <.001.

(7)

directly associated with higher advertising outcomes than a social media user that comes across the SMI's advertising content for the first time.

However, the intention to spread SMI-generated content, eWOM, is significantly higher in the case of followers. According to the PSE development theory, discussing a (social) media figure with others occurs at the intensification stage of a PSR (Tukachinsky & Stever, 2018), which only long-term followers reach (Breves et al., 2021). Thus, the SMI's followers will be more likely to disseminate the SMI's Instagram stories featuring advertising. The explanation for this behavioral intention lies in the fact that followers in general have a history of viewing the content published on Instagram by the particular SMI they follow. This is the stage of PSRs where, according to Tukachinsky and Stever (2018), such media users feel they know the media persona better. Therefore, in traditional media settings they feel confident to talk about the media persona with others. In social media environments that translates into sharing SMI-generated content. By doing so, additional social media users outside the reach of the SMI will be able to see the content due to social curation based on being a follower (Thorson &

Wells, 2016). Having followers that engage in eWOM can potentially contribute to the influence of an SMI (Lopez ´ & Sicilia, 2014) outside the already established audience, and, as previous research highlighted, advertising content disseminated by friends on social media also has stronger persuasive power (Johnson et al., 2019).

Our findings are in line with previous research on the impact of PSRs on SMI credibility (Breves et al., 2021; Chu & Kamal, 2008; Munnukka et al., 2016; Nafees et al., 2021). Thus, followers tend to assess SMIs as credible sources. However, in the case of non-followers that report a strong PSR after a single encounter with an SMI, we observed higher levels of credibility of the SMI. Therefore, we argue that the nature of Instagram users' PSRs with the SMIs they follow is not only person-based but also need-based, a perspective that was highlighted by Shareef et al.

(2020).

Similar to previous studies (Breves et al., 2021; Labrecque, 2014;

Reinikainen et al., 2020), we observed that an SMI's credibility positively influences affective and behavioral advertising outcomes such as brand attitude and purchase intention. Moreover, higher levels of SMIs' credibility reported by both followers and non-followers are associated with high levels of intention to spread the SMI's advertising message on Instagram. This shared content contributes to the celebrity capital of SMIs, a relevant asset for their work (Brooks et al., 2021).

4. Conclusion

SMIs aim to develop their communities of followers to grow their social influence (Campbell & Farrell, 2020). This study shed light on the role follower status plays in the development of PSRs with SMIs.

Moreover, we explored the persuasive power of SMIs translated into advertising outcomes and the intention to spread an SMI's content. By analyzing the moderating role of product involvement in PSRs with a micro-influencer in the case of followers and non-followers, we contributed to the existing literature on PSRs with SMIs. Working with the actual followers of an SMI who evaluated influencer-generated content from the SMI's actual Instagram account allowed us to gain insights into the process of social influence in social media environments.

This study has implications for SMIs and brands. Expanding SMIs' networks by attracting additional followers remains important, but the congruence between the type of content produced by the SMI and the followers' area of interest is particularly relevant for micro-influencers.

As for managerial implications, the findings of our study can be used to argue in favor of working with micro-influencers because of the strong ties they maintain with their audiences. However, the potential product involvement of their audiences must be considered when making decisions about advertising channels. Furthermore, our study is also relevant for media literacy when developing critical consumption programs, especially for adolescents and young adults who usually include SMI content in their media diet.

4.1. Limitations and prospects for future research

The limitations of this study need to be addressed. First, we did not consider how long the participants from the follower group have held follower status nor did we account for their history of engagement with the existing SMI. This information is relevant when applying Tuka- chinsky and Stever's (2018) staged model of PSE development. Second, our study is a one-time measurement study. In the future, researchers should consider a longitudinal approach and observe how PSRs develop in SMIs' environments. Third, although the study was conducted in collaboration with a micro-influencer, which contributed to the external validity of our research, the fact that participants received the survey link directly from this SMI's Instagram account may have generated some social pressure on followers, a factor that that we could not control for. Fourth, we conducted our study exclusively on female participants.

Fig. 5. Interaction effects of follower status on product involvement.

(8)

Hudders and De Jans (2022) highlighted that gender is a possible explanatory factor for influencer marketing efficacy as the match between SMIs and their followers positively affects the persuasive power of SMIs in the case of women. Therefore, in the future, similar research would have to also consider other types of SMIs (macro- or mega- influencers) and gender-diverse samples. Fifth, the level of product involvement was a self-reported measure and was not considered in the experimental design. Sixth, the complexity of the tested model for such a small sample size is also a limitation.

Previous studies have focused on how PSRs with SMIs are built. To our knowledge, no study to date has focused on how this kind of relationship deteriorates or even ends. Future research should address why people unfollow SMIs and the effects of losing followers on SMIs in terms of social influence. Moreover, a longitudinal approach that enables researchers to observe how PSRs between SMIs and their followers develop over time and their impact on advertising outcomes is highly needed.

Declaration of competing interest There is no interest to be declared.

Appendices. Supplementary data

Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.

org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2022.103731.

References

Abidin, C. (2016). “Aren’t these just young, rich women doing vain things online?”:

Influencer selfies as subversive frivolity. Social Media +Society, 2(2), 1–17. https://

doi.org/10.1177/2056305116641342

Altman, I., & Taylor, D. A. (1973). Social penetration: The development of interpersonal relationships. Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

Amos, C., Holmes, G., & Strutton, D. (2008). Exploring the relationship between celebrity endorser effects and advertising effectiveness. International Journal of Advertising, 27 (2), 209–234. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650487.2008.11073052

Balaban, D. C., & Must˘ațea, M. (2019). Users’ perspective on the credibility of social media influencers in Romania and Germany. Romanian Journal of Communication and Public Relations, 21(1), 31–46. https://doi.org/10.21018/rjcpr.2019.1.269 Ballantine, P. W., & Yeung, A. C. (2015). The effects of review valence in organic versus

sponsored blog sites on perceived credibility, brand attitude, and behavioural intentions. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 33(4), 508–521. https://doi.org/

10.1108/mip-03-2014-0044

Boerman, S. C. (2020). The effects of the standardized instagram disclosure for micro- and meso-influencers. Computers in Human Behavior, 103, 199–207. https://doi.org/

10.1016/j.chb.2019.09.015

Boerman, S. C., & van Reijmersdal, E. A. (2020). Disclosing influencer marketing on YouTube to children: The moderating role of Para-social relationship. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 3042. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03042

Breves, P., Amrehn, J., Heidenreich, A., Liebers, N., & Schramm, H. (2021). Blind trust?

The importance and interplay of parasocial relationships and advertising disclosures in explaining influencers’ persuasive effects on their followers. International Journal of Advertising, 40(7), 1209–1229. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650487.2021.1881237 Breves, P. L., Liebers, N., Abt, M., & Kunze, A. (2019). The perceived fit between

instagram influencers and the endorsed brand: How influencer-brand fit affects source credibility and persuasive effectiveness. Journal of Advertising Research, 59(4), 440–454. https://doi.org/10.2501/jar-2019-030

Brooks, G., Drenten, J., & Piskorsi, M. J. (2021). Influencer celebrification: How social media influencers acquire celebrity capital. Journal of Advertising, 50(5), 528–547.

https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2021.1977737

Campbell, C., & Farrell, J. R. (2020). More than meets the eye: The functional components underlying influencer marketing. Business Horizons, 63(4), 469–479.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2020.03.003

Campbell, C., & Grimm, P. E. (2019). The challenges native advertising poses: Exploring potential federal trade commission responses and identifying research needs. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 38(1), 110–123. https://doi.org/10.1177/

0743915618818576

Carter, D. (2016). Hustle and brand: The sociotechnical shaping of influence. Social Media +Society, 2(3), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305116666305 Choo, H. J., Sim, S. Y., Lee, H. K., & Kim, H. B. (2014). The effect of consumers’

involvement and innovativeness on the utilization of fashion wardrobe: The utilization of fashion wardrobe. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 38(2), 175–182. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12078

Chu, S.-C., & Kamal, S. (2008). The effect of perceived blogger credibility and argument quality on message elaboration and brand attitudes: An exploratory study. Journal of

Interactive Advertising, 8(2), 26–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/

15252019.2008.10722140

Chung, S., & Cho, H. (2017). Fostering parasocial relationships with celebrities on social media: Implications for celebrity endorsement: Celebrity parasocial relationships on social media. Psychology & Marketing, 34(4), 481–495. https://doi.org/10.1002/

mar.21001

Cialdini, R. B. (2001). Influence: Science and practice (4th ed.). Allyn & Bacon.

Cialdini, R. B., & Goldstein, N. J. (2004). Social influence: Compliance and conformity.

Annual Review of Psychology, 55(1), 591–621. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.

psych.55.090902.142015

Coco, S. L., & Eckert, S. (2020). #sponsored: Consumer insights on social media influencer marketing. Public Relations Inquiry, 9(2), 177–194. https://doi.org/

10.1177/2046147X20920816

Cohen, J., Weimann-Saks, D., & Mazor-Tregerman, M. (2018). Does character similarity increase identification and persuasion? Media Psychology, 21(3), 506–528. https://

doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2017.1302344

De Veirman, M., Cauberghe, V., & Hudders, L. (2017). Marketing through instagram influencers: The impact of number of followers and product divergence on brand attitude. International Journal of Advertising, 36(5), 798–828. https://doi.org/

10.1080/02650487.2017.1348035

Dhanesh, G. S., & Duthler, G. (2019). Relationship management through social media influencers: Effects of followers’ awareness of paid endorsement. Public Relations Review, 45(3), Article 101765. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2019.03.002 Dimofte, C. V., Forehand, M. R., & Deshpand´e, R. (2003). Ad schema incongruity as

elicitor of ethnic self-awareness and differential advertising response. Journal of Advertising, 32(4), 7–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2003.10639142 Djafarova, E., & Rushworth, C. (2017). Exploring the credibility of online celebrities’

instagram profiles in influencing the purchase decisions of young female users.

Computers in Human Behavior, 68, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.11.009 Enke, N., & Borchers, N. S. (2019). Social media influencers in strategic communication:

A conceptual framework for strategic social media influencer communication.

International Journal of Strategic Communication, 13(4), 261–277. https://doi.org/

10.1080/1553118x.2019.1620234

European Advertising Standards Alliance (EASA). (2018). EASA best practices recommendation on influencer marketing. https://www.easa-alliance.org/sites/de fault/files/EASA%20BEST%20PRACTICE%20RECOMMENDATION%20ON%20I NFLUENCER%20MARKETING_2020_0.pdf.

Evans, N. J., Phua, J., Lim, J., & Jun, H. (2017). Disclosing instagram influencer advertising: The effects of disclosure language on advertising recognition, attitudes, and behavioral intent. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 17(2), 138–149. https://doi.

org/10.1080/15252019.2017.1366885

Eyal, K., & Dailey, R. M. (2012). Examining relational maintenance in parasocial relationships. Mass Communication & Society, 15(5), 758–781. https://doi.org/

10.1080/15205436.2011.616276

Flanagin, A. J. (2017). Online social influence and the convergence of mass and interpersonal communication: Online social influence. Human Communication Research, 43(4), 450–463. https://doi.org/10.1111/hcre.12116

Folkvord, F., Roes, E., & Bevelander, K. (2020). Promoting healthy foods in the new digital era on instagram: An experimental study on the effect of a popular real versus fictitious fit influencer on brand attitude and purchase intentions. BMC Public Health, 20(1), 1677. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-020-09779-y

Giles, D. C. (2002). Parasocial interaction: A review of the literature and a model for future research. Media Psychology, 4(3), 279–305. https://doi.org/10.1207/

s1532785xmep0403_04

Hayes, A. F. (2018). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis:

A regression-based approach (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.

Hoos, B. (2019, August 22). The psychology of influencer marketing. Forbes. https://www.

forbes.com/sites/forbesagencycouncil/2019/08/22/the-psychology-of-influence r-marketing/?sh=14fea204e1be.

Horton, D., & Wohl, R. R. (1956). Mass communication and Para-social interaction;

observations on intimacy at a distance. Psychiatry, 19(3), 215–229. https://doi.org/

10.1080/00332747.1956.11023049

Hudders, L., & De Jans, S. (2022). Gender effects in influencer marketing: An experimental study on the efficacy of endorsements by same- vs. other- gender social media influencers on Instagram. International Journal of Advertising, 41(1), 128–149.

https://doi.org/10.1080/02650487.2021.1997455

Hudders, L., De Jans, S., & De Veirman, M. (2021). The commercialization of social media stars: A literature review and conceptual framework on the strategic use of social media influencers. International Journal of Advertising, 40(3), 327–375. https://

doi.org/10.1080/02650487.2020.1836925

Jain, S. P., & Posavac, S. S. (2001). Prepurchase attribute verifiability, source credibility, and persuasion. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 10(3), 169–180. https://doi.org/

10.1207/S15327663JCP1103_03

Johnson, B. K., Potocki, B., & Veldhuis, J. (2019). Is that my friend or an advert? The effectiveness of Instagram native advertisements posing as social posts. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 24(3), 108–125. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/

zmz003

Kay, S., Mulcahy, R., & Parkinson, J. (2020). When less is more: The impact of macro and micro social media influencers’ disclosure. Journal of Marketing Management, 36(3/

4), 248–278. https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257x.2020.1718740

Kelman, H. C. (1958). Compliance, identification, and internalization three processes of attitude change. The Journal of Conflict Resolution, 2(1), 51–60. https://doi.org/

10.1177/002200275800200106

Klimmt, C., Hartmann, T., & Schramm, H. (2006). Parasocial interactions and relationships. In J. Bryant, & P. Vorderer (Eds.), Psychology of entertainment (pp.

291–313). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.