ArticlePDF Available

Social Media Influencers and Followers: Theorization of a Trans-Parasocial Relation and Explication of Its Implications for Influencer Advertising View supplementary material

Journal of Advertising

March 2021
51(1)

DOI:10.1080/00913367.2021.1880345

Authors:

Chen Lou

Nanyang Technological University

Afforded by new digital technologies, consumer interactions are breaking the boundaries of basic assumptions about interpersonal communication, mass communication, and the concepts arising from the two. By looking into social media influencer–follower relations, this study suggests that the long-held conventional concept of parasocial relation no longer fully encompasses the evolving contemporary human interactions and related relations. The current analysis recommends an updated notion and theorization—a trans-parasocial relation—to capture a collectively reciprocal, (a)synchronously interactive, and co-created relation between influencers and their captive followers. This trans-parasocial relation concept offers a foundation on which new communicative and advertising theories can be developed to explicate new forms of social interactions and consumer behavior. More importantly, in view of this trans-parasocial relation, assumptions of the existing persuasion theory—that is, the persuasion knowledge model—need to be reassessed. The current findings demonstrate that persuasion knowledge does not always negatively affect advertising outcomes. Instead, followers indicate mostly benign attitudes toward influencer-sponsored posts, interpret influencers’ sponsorship disclosures as genuine and transparent, and internalize disclosure actions as inspiring and admirable. This study further identifies and elucidates several psychological mechanisms that account for followers’ overall appreciation of influencer-sponsored posts: positive bias, verification by cross-validation, and inspirational internalization.

The key characteristics of parasocial relation and trans-parasocial relation.

…

The processes through which followers react to influencer-sponsored content in view of the trans-parasocial relation and default expectations.

…

Figures - uploaded by Chen Lou

Content may be subject to copyright.

Content uploaded by Chen Lou

Content may be subject to copyright.

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ujoa20

Journal of Advertising

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ujoa20

Social Media Influencers and Followers:

Theorization of a Trans-Parasocial Relation and

Explication of Its Implications for Influencer

Advertising

Chen Lou

To cite this article: Chen Lou (2021): Social Media Influencers and Followers: Theorization of a

Trans-Parasocial Relation and Explication of Its Implications for Influencer Advertising, Journal of

Advertising, DOI: 10.1080/00913367.2021.1880345

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2021.1880345

View supplementary material

Published online: 05 Mar 2021.

Submit your article to this journal

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Social Media Influencers and Followers: Theorization of a Trans-Parasocial

Relation and Explication of Its Implications for Influencer Advertising

Chen Lou

Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore

ABSTRACT

Afforded by new digital technologies, consumer interactions are breaking the boundaries of

basic assumptions about interpersonal communication, mass communication, and the con-

cepts arising from the two. By looking into social media influencer–follower relations, this

study suggests that the long-held conventional concept of parasocial relation no longer fully

encompasses the evolving contemporary human interactions and related relations. The cur-

rent analysis recommends an updated notion and theorization—atrans-parasocial relation—

to capture a collectively reciprocal,(a)synchronously interactive, and co-created relation

between influencers and their captive followers. This trans-parasocial relation concept offers

a foundation on which new communicative and advertising theories can be developed to

explicate new forms of social interactions and consumer behavior. More importantly, in

view of this trans-parasocial relation, assumptions of the existing persuasion theory—that is,

the persuasion knowledge model—need to be reassessed. The current findings demonstrate

that persuasion knowledge does not always negatively affect advertising outcomes. Instead,

followers indicate mostly benign attitudes toward influencer-sponsored posts, interpret influ-

encers’sponsorship disclosures as genuine and transparent, and internalize disclosure

actions as inspiring and admirable. This study further identifies and elucidates several psy-

chological mechanisms that account for followers’overall appreciation of influencer-spon-

sored posts: positive bias,verification by cross-validation, and inspirational internalization.

Checking out the latest updates of Instagrammers and

watching new videos of YouTubers have become a

staple leisure activity for many (Leskin 2020). For

instance, YouTube boasts 50 million content creators

and two billion monthly active users on its platform,

and YouTube users watch one billion hours of videos

on a daily basis (Omnicore 2020). In particular, the

most often watched YouTube content by millennials

and generation Z is how-to videos or tutorials, fol-

lowed by vlogs and unboxing videos (Influencer

Marketing Hub 2020). More importantly, users of

these social networking sites not only engage with

content that is generated by online personalities but

also make purchase decisions based on the recom-

mendations of these online personae (Mohsin 2020).

Popular online personalities, often being content gen-

erators—including Instagrammers, YouTubers, and—

who attract a large number of followers and have a

significant impact on followers’purchase behavior, are

recognized as social media influencers (De Veirman,

Cauberghe, and Hudders 2017; Lou and Yuan 2019).

Prior research has delineated a fine line between influ-

encers and celebrities by arguing that influencers are

those who constantly create useful content to attract a

following via interactive social media platforms (Lou

and Kim 2019), whereas celebrities who are famous for

theatrical talents, such as acting, singing, or sports,

often have gained their fame through traditional media,

such as movies, TV, and radio (Escalas and Bettman

2017). Furthermore, some argue that influencers are

regarded as more credible than celebrities in terms of

influencing followers’purchasing behavior, because the

former define themselves as ordinary people with a pas-

sion for life and their product reviews are considered

more authentic and relatable by their followers

(Djafarova and Rushworth 2017;Weinswig2016).

CONTACT Chen Lou chenlou@ntu.edu.sg 31 Nanyang Link, 03-13, Wee Kim Wee School of Communication and Information, Nanyang

Technological University, 637718 Singapore.

Chen Lou (PhD, Michigan State University) is Assistant Professor of Integrated Marketing Communication, Wee Kim Wee School of Communication

and Information, Nanyang Technological University.

Supplemental data for this article is available online at https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2021.1880345.

JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING

https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2021.1880345

Among the mechanisms that explain the appeal of

influencers among followers, the parasocial relation

between influencers and their followers has been

found to account for the heightened materialistic

views and purchase intentions among adolescents, as

well as the increased product interests among adult

followers (Lou and Kim 2019; Yuan and Lou 2020).

Parasocial relation herein refers to the perceived

“connectedness that audiences have with media per-

sonae beyond momentary exposure”(Bond 2018,p.

459), which is “a more enduring relation that a media

user forms with a mediated performer (Dibble,

Hartmann, and Rosaen 2016, p. 21). Parasocial rela-

tion differs from a closely related term, parasocial

interaction, as the latter describes audiences’moment-

ary engagement with media personae through episodic

media exposure (Horton and Wohl 1956). Parasocial

relation is often considered as one-sided or non-recip-

rocal between the two involved parties, with one (the

audience) knowing more about and being more

involved with the other (TV and radio personalities)

(Horton and Wohl 1956). However, recent research

has also challenged this notion by describing the

bidirectional and intimate relation between influencers

and followers as “perceived interconnectedness,”

which is differentiated from the unidirectional paraso-

cial relation concept that was coined in the era of TV

and radio (Abidin 2015). Influencer–follower relations

are indeed more interactive and reciprocal than what

parasocial relation entails (Lou and Kim 2019).

Nonetheless, the latest theorization of this influencer–-

follower relation is grounded and materialized from

the perspective of influencers (e.g., Abidin 2015).

Therefore, a lucid theoretical explication of this new

relational form between influencers and followers that

is based in empirical investigation, from the perspec-

tive of followers, is greatly needed.

More importantly, given that influencers are, more

or less, driven by “underlying commercial interests,”

namely, sponsorships or endorsement deals (Abidin

and Thompson 2012, p. 472), how this new form of

relation configures or explicates consumers’reactions

to influencers’sponsored activities is still inconclusive.

Prior literature has ascertained that the inclusion of

sponsorship disclosures in influencer-sponsored posts

helps consumers recognize them as advertising—the

activation of cognitive persuasion knowledge—and,

thus, cope with persuasive intents through developing

skepticism or negative attitudes toward the sponsored

posts or influencers (e.g., De Jans and Hudders 2020;

Evans et al. 2017). However, some recent studies

revealed that influencers’sponsorship disclosures,

which signal “honesty, openness and transparency of

the influencers,”actually bolstered followers’trust in

and satisfaction with influencers (Dhanesh and

Duthler 2019, p. 10). Furthermore, Lou and colleagues

(Lou, Tan, and Chen 2019) analyzed a large collection

of influencer-sponsored posts on Instagram and found

that the inclusion of disclosures (i.e., no disclosure

versus clear or ambiguous disclosure) did not affect

followers’liking of the posts, commenting on the

posts, or negative sentiment manifested in the com-

ments. The inconsistency regarding how followers

react to influencer-sponsored posts (with or without

disclosure) reveals an evident research gap, thus call-

ing for new inquiries and explications in this area.

Collectively, there are notable gaps in the extant lit-

erature on influencer advertising and influencer–fol-

lower relation that warrants more in-depth and

nuanced explication. First, there is a lack of a thor-

ough and systematic theorization of this new rela-

tional form between influencers and followers from

the followers’perspective (e.g., Abidin 2015). Second,

recent research shows that this influencer–follower

relation can mitigate the negative effect of advertising

literacy—activated by sponsorship disclosure—on

advertising effectiveness (e.g., Boerman and Van

Reijmersdal 2020). Furthermore, as mentioned above,

followers’overall tolerance toward influencer-spon-

sored posts has challenged the assumptions of the per-

suasion knowledge model (PKM) (e.g., Dhanesh and

Duthler 2019; Lou, Tan, and Chen 2019). It is thus

imperative to untangle the underlying psychological

processes that expound followers’reactions to influen-

cer-sponsored posts. Therefore, this study seeks to

revisit and redefine the parasocial relation in the

influencer context and explicates how it informs fol-

lowers’reactions to influencer-sponsored content. As

one of the most technologically developed nations and

with a 75% social media penetration rate (M€

uller

2020), Singapore offers an ideal venue to answer these

research inquiries. Influencers in Singapore are play-

ing an increasing role in followers’purchase behavior,

with the 18- to 34-year-old group being influenced

the most (M€

uller 2019). Since Singapore is a devel-

oped city-state that has been greatly influenced by the

Western modernization and related concepts (Chang

2003), research on influencer practices in Singapore

context are never unique to the local context and has

been widely applied to varied cultural sites (e.g.,

Abidin 2015,2016) work on influencers in Singapore).

Through a series of in-depth interviews involving

social media users who are following influencers in

Singapore and guided by the concept of parasocial

2 C. LOU

relation and PKM, this study proposes that a new

conceptualization of trans-parasocial relation, marked

by influencers who engage followers through collect-

ively reciprocal,(a)synchronously interactive, and co-

created interactions and relation development.

Moreover, this study shows that followers respond to

influencer-sponsored posts with overall benign and

appreciative attitudes through the following psycho-

logical mechanisms: positive bias,verification by cross-

validation, and inspirational internalization. This

research yields significant theoretical contributions by

offering theorization of this new and evolving influen-

cer–follower relation and delineating the implications

of this relation for future research on influencer

advertising. Furthermore, the current findings offer

actionable recommendations for influencers in terms

of building organic and cordial relations with their

followers and also crafting a validated checklist that

guides brands in conducting efficient influen-

cer campaigns.

Literature Review

Social Media Influencer and Influencer Marketing

The use of celebrities in marketing communications

has persisted over the past few decades (Kaikati 1987).

Brands and firms invest in employing celebrities to

promote products or brands—namely celebrity

endorsement—in the hope of transferring the desir-

able qualities of celebrities (e.g., attractiveness, like-

ability, trustworthiness) to generate favorable

campaign outcomes (Erdogan 1999). In recent years, a

new type of “online celebrity,”who is popular and

influential among online and social media platforms,

has been gaining increasing traction with brand

endorsement and sponsorship (Djafarova and

Rushworth 2017). These “online celebrities,”termed

as social media influencers, are often popular social

media personalities who constantly create and dissem-

inate useful and organic content within a knowledge

domain, project authentic personae, curate intimate

relations with a large following, and thus wield influ-

ence over followers’purchases and decision making

(Campbell and Farrell 2020; Lou and Yuan 2019).

Adopting the categorization of influencers proposed

by Campbell and Farrell (2020)—including celebrity

influencer and mega-, macro-, micro- and nano-influ-

encer, this study focuses on the self-made “bottom-up,

grass-roots”influencers “who have gained fame as

content generators”(Lou and Yuan 2019, p. 60),

excluding the “celebrity influencers”—those who

“experienced fame and notoriety prior to or

independent from the evolution of social media”

(Campbell and Farrell 2020, p. 3). Expenditure on

influencer marketing has been skyrocketing and is

expected to reach $15 billion by 2022 (Schomer 2019).

More importantly, a survey conducted by Google

showed that 7 in 10 teens mentioned that they feel

closer to YouTubers more than traditional celebrities

and 4 out of 10 millennials believe that their favorite

YouTuber “understands them better than their

friends”(O’Neil-Hart and Blumenstein 2016).

Influencer endorsement, or influencer marketing, may

serve just as well as, or even better than, celebrity

endorsement in driving desirable campaign results.

Recent research on influencer marketing has docu-

mented the appeal of influencers among certain age

groups (e.g., adolescents) (Boerman and Van

Reijmersdal 2020; De Veirman, Hudders and Nelson

2019). Also explored are the roles of source credibility,

content value, parasocial interaction/relationship, and

congruity in the effectiveness of influencer campaigns

(Boerman and Van Reijmersdal 2020; De Veirman,

Cauberghe, and Hudders 2017; Lou and Yuan 2019;

Schouten, Janssen, and Verspaget 2020). Studies have

further examined the agency perspective on influencer

campaigns (Childers, Lemon, and Hoy 2019), as well

as the effect of sponsorship disclosure on consumer

reactions (e.g., De Veirman and Hudders 2020; Evans,

Hoy, and Childers 2018; Lou, Tan, and Chen 2019;

Van Reijmersdal et al. 2020). Among these studies,

those who have examined the relation between influ-

encers and followers often applied the parasocial

interaction or parasocial relation paradigm to theorize

and explicate the relation between influencers and

their followers and its effect on downstream consumer

behaviors (e.g., Boerman and Van Reijmersdal 2020;

Hwang and Zhang 2018; Yuan and Lou 2020). Yet,

the relation between influencers and followers may

deviate from that of TV/radio personae and audien-

ces—on which the term parasocial relation/interaction

has been premised (Horton and Wohl 1956).

In particular, many influencers actively reply to fol-

lowers’coveted comments and arrange offline meet-

ups or live-streaming sessions to facilitate more inter-

active communications (Abidin 2015). Influencers also

purposely disclose intimate personal stories or life epi-

sodes to project commonality and manifest authenti-

city (P€

oyry et al. 2019). More importantly, influencers

communicate “reciprocal intimacies”with their fol-

lowers to signal appreciation and acknowledge fol-

lowers’support, including liking or retweeting

followers’mentions or comments and featuring fol-

lowers’posts or stories (Abidin 2015). Many

JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING 3

influencers regularly reciprocate with followers with

free endorsed products and other types of support.

Furthermore, influencers often actively solicit feedback

or take account of requests from their followers for

content creation and interaction topics (Abidin 2015).

Collectively, the relation between influencers and fol-

lowers, from the influencers’perspective, have been

found to be more interactive, bidirectional, co-con-

structed, and intimate than what the notion of paraso-

cial relation has originally encompassed (Abidin

2015). Against this backdrop, this study revisits the

parasocial relation below to theorize and materialize

the relation between influencers and followers, from

the followers’perspective.

Parasocial Relation

The concept of parasocial relation, originally intro-

duced by Horton and Wohl (1956), describes an illu-

sory and enduring social relation with media

personae—including celebrities and media figures or

characters—through mediated encounters, which is

often experienced by the audience. At times, paraso-

cial relation and parasocial interaction have been used

interchangeably (e.g., Tsai and Men 2013). Yet, they

are essentially different, as parasocial interaction

describes the short-term and episode-based engage-

ment with media personae whereas parasocial relation

captures the lasting bonds that the audiences have

developed with media personae (Bond 2018).

Parasocial relation is understood as one-sided or non-

reciprocal because the audiences often know the

media personae well, whereas the latter barely knows

the former (Escalas and Bettman 2017; Tsai and Men

2013). Horton and Wohl (1956) coined this term in

the era of TV and radio; however, neither TV nor

radio enables audiences to directly interact with media

personae (e.g., celebrities, characters). Social media,

otherwise, facilitate users to engage in interactions

with their favorite media personalities (e.g., liking,

commenting on, or sharing their posts) and also

enable these media personalities to disclose their life

episodes to followers or personally reply to followers’

comments, which contributes to greater intimacy and

enhanced reciprocity as perceived by the followers

(e.g., Colliander and Dahl

en 2011; Tsai and Men

2013; Yuan and Lou 2020). When it comes to the

interaction between influencers and followers, influ-

encers not only regularly interact with followers and

generate useful content appealing to followers but also

engage followers in the co-creation of their content or

strategies (e.g., creating videos upon the requests of

followers) (Abidin 2015). Through cumulative interac-

tions and/or the process of content co-creation, fol-

lowers can often develop enduring attachment to

influencers (e.g., Abidin 2015; Bond 2016; Chen 2016;

Sokolova and Kefi 2020; Yuan and Lou 2020).

More importantly, the relation between influencers

and followers has been argued to be different from

parasocial relation in multiple ways (Abidin 2015).

Based on observations of and interviews with influ-

encers in Singapore, Abidin (2015) argued that, first,

the parasocial relation is premised on theatrics dis-

played by media personae, whereas the crux of the

relation between influencers and followers is intimacy.

Second, the relation between influencers and followers

is mediated by a more flat and interactive social

media infrastructure, whereas parasocial relation is

often facilitated by top-down, one-to-many mass

media channels. Third, regarding the parasocial rela-

tion context, mediated content disseminated to audi-

ences is often constructed by “producers,”whereas

content propagated by influencers are often co-created

by both influencers and followers. More importantly,

the communication between influencers and followers

are unprecedentedly more interactive than before, and

offline meetup opportunities with influencers further

makes followers believe that they have an interper-

sonal, relatable, and intimate “friendship”with influ-

encers (Abidin 2015;O’Neil-Hart and Blumenstein

2016). However, these conclusions are drawn from the

perspective of influencers. What does the influencer–-

follower relation entail and implicate, from the per-

spective of followers? What are the characteristics of

this relation, and are they distinct from the notion of

parasocial relation? To answer these questions, we for-

mulate the following questions:

RQ1: From the perspective of followers, what are the

characteristics of the relation between influencers

and followers?

RQ2: How does the relation between influencers and

followers differ from the existing notion of parasocial

relation between media personae and audiences?

Recent research that adopts the paradigm of para-

social relation to capture the influencer–follower rela-

tion revealed that parasocial relation moderates the

effect of sponsorship disclosure on brand attitudes

(Boerman and Van Reijmersdal 2020) and the effect

of persuasion knowledge on purchase intentions and

electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM) (Hwang and

Zhang 2018). It is also found to mediate the effect of

influencer source credibility, influencer content fac-

tors, or communication fairness between influencers

and followers on followers’materialistic views,

4 C. LOU

purchase intentions, or product interests in influen-

cer-sponsored posts (Lou and Kim 2019; Yuan and

Lou 2020). In short, regardless of what the relation

between influencers and followers encompasses, this

relation is expected to affect followers’reactions to

influencer-sponsored posts. We draw on the PKM to

further explicate this process.

PKM and Followers’Reactions to Influencer-

Sponsored Posts

According to recent studies on influencer marketing,

followers are likely to activate their persuasion know-

ledge (PK) when being exposed to influencer-spon-

sored posts/videos that include clear disclosures (e.g.,

De Jans and Hudders 2020; Evans et al. 2017). As a

construct that originated from the PKM (Friestad and

Wright 1994), PK explicates how consumers under-

stand the reasons that advertisers try to influence

them within a certain context and thus develop know-

ledge to tackle marketers’persuasive intents and tac-

tics and adjust their product/brand attitudes and

purchase intentions accordingly. PK is two-dimen-

sional, covering both conceptual persuasion know-

ledge (CPK) and attitudinal persuasion knowledge

(APK) (Boerman, Van Reijmersdal, and Neijens

2012). While CPK refers to one’s ability to recognize

a message’s persuasive intent, tactic, and appeal

(Boerman, Van Reijmersdal, and Neijens 2012), APK

denotes an affective dimension describing how one

develops a critical attitude, such as a distrustful belief

or dislike, to tackle persuasive intents (Boerman,

Willemsen, and Van Der Aa 2017).

Prior research demonstrated that recognizing a per-

suasive message as an advertisement (CPK) precedes

consumers’subsequent coping behavior of developing

critical or distrusting beliefs (APK) toward the mes-

sage (Rozendaal et al. 2011). Informed by the PKM, a

multitude of studies have indicated that inclusion of a

clear sponsorship disclosure in sponsored ads activates

followers’CPK and their consequent APK (e.g.,

Boerman, Willemsen, and Van Der Aa 2017; Evans

et al. 2017; Jung and Heo 2019; Wojdynski and Evans

2016). Relevant to the influencer context, one line of

recent research focuses on how advertising recogni-

tion, triggered by sponsorship disclosures, negatively

affects campaign outcomes—including brand attitudes,

attitudes toward the influencer, or purchase inten-

tions—through the generation of ad skepticism (i.e.,

APK) (e.g., De Jans, Cauberghe, and Hudders 2018;

De Veirman and Hudders 2020; Van Reijmersdal and

van Dam 2020; Van Reijmersdal et al. 2020). For

instance, Van Reijmersdal and colleagues (Van

Reijmersdal et al. 2020) found that disclosure dis-

played prior to the start of an influencer-sponsored

video (versus a disclosure shown concurrently when

the video starts playing) led to higher ad recognition

which, in turn, resulted in more critical attitudes

toward the sponsored content and subsequently less

favorable attitudes toward the brand and

the influencer.

However, another line of research reveals that the

activation of PK does not necessarily lead to negative

persuasion outcomes (e.g., De Jans and Hudders 2020;

Dhanesh and Duthler 2019; Kay, Mulcahy, and

Parkinson 2020; Lou, Tan, and Chen 2019; Van Dam

and van Reijmersdal 2019). For instance, De Jans and

Hudders (2020) found that the inclusion of influen-

cer-generated disclosure (versus no disclosure) in

sponsored videos did not decrease followers’admir-

ation toward the influencer or parasocial interaction

intentions with the influencer. Kay and colleagues

(2020) demonstrated that sponsored posts with clear

disclosures that were posted by micro-influencers

actually led to higher purchase intentions than the

same posts without disclosures. Dhanesh and Duthler

(2019) argued that influencers’sponsorship disclosures

could imply honesty and transparency of the influ-

encers, which can further enhance followers’trust in

them. These findings and notions, however, contradict

the basic assumptions regarding the negative effect of

PK on consumer reactions to persuasive messages,

wherein followers are expected to indicate heightened

critical attitudes and increased skepticisms toward

influencer posts or influencers after recognizing their

sponsored posts—indicated by disclosures—as adver-

tising. Collectively, we argue that the inconsistency in

the extant findings regarding followers’reactions to

influencer-sponsored posts can be partially explained

by the dynamic and intimate relation between influ-

encers and their followers (e.g., Boerman and Van

Reijmersdal 2020; Hwang and Zhang 2018) along with

other potential moderators (e.g., influencer–brand

congruity, disclosure memory). This study focuses on

the role of influencer–follower relation and explores

the potential processes through which this intimate

influencer–follower relation shapes follower reactions

to influencer-sponsored posts below.

Influencer–Follower Relation and Followers’

Reactions to Influencer-Sponsored Posts

Past literature has largely agreed that parasocial rela-

tions can enhance persuasion (e.g., Colliander and

JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING 5

Dahl

en 2011; Escalas and Bettman 2017; Russell,

Stern, and Stern 2006). For instance, Escalas and

Bettman (2017) revealed that the parasocial relation

that consumers formed toward celebrity endorsers

mediated the effect of celebrity endorsement on

self–brand connections. Russell and colleagues (2006)

proposed balance theory and argued that consumers’

parasocial attachment to sitcom characters drove them

to align their attitudes toward product placements

with that of the media personae’s attitudes toward

those products. Similarly, Colliander and Dahl

(2011) proposed that parasocial relation formed

between readers and blogs (versus online magazines)

accounted for its greater persuasiveness. In addition,

users’parasocial relation with brands’Facebook repre-

sentatives has been found to boost their engagement

with brand pages on Facebook (Tsai and Men 2013).

Relative to the influencer context, parasocial relation

has been found to decrease the negative effect of per-

suasion knowledge on brand attitudes (Boerman and

Van Reijmersdal 2020) as well as purchase intentions

and eWOM intentions (Hwang and Zhang 2018).

In this research, we argue that due to the intimate,

bidirectional, co-created, and interactive relation

established between influencers and their followers,

the inclusion of disclosure (especially an explicit one)

may activate followers’CPK (i.e., they can recognize

the persuasive nature of the sponsored posts), but it

may neither engender critical and distrusting attitudes

predicted by PKM—namely, the generation of APK—

nor negatively influence followers’downstream con-

sumption intentions (e.g., Dhanesh and Duthler 2019;

Lou, Tan, and Chen 2019). However, how followers

reconcile the persuasive nature of influencer-spon-

sored posts with their attachment to influencers is

unknown; the processes or psychological mechanisms

through which followers balance their reactions to

influencer sponsorships and their experienced intimate

relations with influencers are yet to be examined.

Therefore, this study proposes the following question:

RQ3: How, and through which mechanisms, do

followers react to influencer-sponsored posts in view

of their attachment to influencers?

Method

Participants and Procedure

To answer the research questions, we conducted a ser-

ies of in-depth one-on-one interviews with 26 partici-

pants in Singapore. Recruitment ceased when no new

points or ideas seemed to occur in the conversations

(Corbin and Strauss 2008). The enrolled participants

have to be active social media users who have at least

one favorite influencer whom they have been follow-

ing and checking their updates at least once a week.

They were recruited through both online and offline

advertisements disseminated in a large university cam-

pus and received S$10 each for their participation that

ranged from around half an hour to one hour. We

had 16 female and 10 male participants, who aged

from 22 to 32 years old (M

age

¼24.85, SD ¼2.91).

Among the participants, seven were employed, while

the rest were undergraduate or graduate students (see

Table 1 for demographics). Most of them were

Chinese (69%), with 8% Malay, and 23% Indians. The

ethnicity distribution of the participants broadly paral-

lels the ethnic composition in Singapore (Government

of Singapore 2019). All interviews were conducted in

English, except for one interviewee who spoke mainly

Chinese, with a mixture of both English and Chinese

words. Her responses were all translated into English

and the interviewer is bilingual in English

and Chinese.

Each interview was conducted in a location at the

participant’s convenience, mostly in public places. The

interviews were audio-recorded. Participants were first

asked to read and sign a consent form informing

them that the whole interview would be audio-

recorded. A trained interviewer conducted all the

interviews by following a semi-structured protocol

Table 1. Demographics of the participants.

Pseudonym Age Gender Ethnicity Occupation

Jean 23 Female Chinese Student

Belle 22 Female Chinese Student

Elly 22 Female Chinese Student

Nami 22 Female Chinese Student

Alle 25 Female Chinese UI/UX designer

Ken 24 Male Chinese Audit associate

Sean 25 Male Chinese Student

Roy 22 Male Indian Student

Nina 22 Female Malay Student

Lia 22 Female Chinese Student

Renie 22 Female Malay Student

Jess 25Female Chinese Student

Jun 25Male Chinese Student

Matt 28 Male Chinese Student

Joel 24 Male Indian Student

Yee 24 Male Chinese Student

Leon 25 Male Chinese Student

Dina 24 Female Chinese Student

Juri 27 Female Chinese Student

Wen 27 Female Chinese Senior executive

Zoee 32 Female Chinese Program coordinator

Foo 26 Male Chinese Student

Pavati 25Female Indian Student

Adah 22 Female Indian Marketing analyst

Krisha 29 Female Indian Engineer

Hasim 32 Male Indian Research associate

Note.



Participants who declined to be identified with exact age (replaced

with mean).

6 C. LOU

that covers the research questions and also asked fol-

low-up questions when necessary (see online supple-

ment Appendix A). The interviewer manually

transcribed the recordings verbatim by repeatedly lis-

tening to each of the recordings. The interviewer

spent an average of two hours in transcribing each

recording and made sure that only one recording was

transcribed per day.

Data Analysis

Two coders conducted a three-step analysis of tran-

scripts (Tracy 2013). First, the two coders engaged in

the open/initial-coding stage when they read the tran-

scripts line-by-line several times and assigned initial

codes to the transcripts (e.g., codes like “influencer/

celebrity definition,”“describing influencer-follower

relation”). The transcriptions were analyzed using the

constant comparative method of qualitative analysis

(Glaser 1965). The two coders independently coded all

the transcripts. Second, the two coders discussed the

codes that emerged in their independent analysis and

noted identical codes and underlying concepts rele-

vant to this research. The two coders then initiated

the axial/hierarchical-coding stage, when the coders

individually grouped and organized the initial codes

to second-level analytic or interpretive concepts (e.g.,

the prevailing themes/characteristics of influencer–fol-

lower relation). The existing literature on parasocial

relationship and PKM guided and helped the coders

to broadly categorize codes under each concept. These

second-level codes often “serve[s] to explain, theorize,

and synthesize”transcripts (Tracy 2013, p. 194).

Finally, the two coders discussed the second-level

codes that emerged in each of their analyses and

reached consensus on how they can be merged to

answer the research questions. The principal

researcher, who has the theoretical knowledge, theor-

ized the findings and contrasted them with existing

theories (Tracy 2013).

Furthermore, given that the evaluative criteria of

qualitative research differs from that of quantitative

research (Haley 1996; Lincoln and Guba 1985), to

ensure the rigor and validity of the current analysis,

this study adopted the constructivist or interpretive

paradigm to benchmark the current data analysis

against the primary trustworthiness criteria (i.e., cred-

ibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmabil-

ity) (Chen and Haley 2014; Lincoln and Guba 1985).

In particular, several steps and measures were under-

taken to warrant the trustworthiness of the analysis,

reflected in dimensions like credibility, transferability,

dependability, and confirmability. Credibility herein

refers to the adequate and authentic representations of

multiple realities, making sure that the reconstructions

that arise from the inquiries are credible (Hirschman

1986). To enhance its credibility, the researcher

engaged in the following measures. First, the inter-

viewer has been well trained before data collection,

discussed the issues emerged in the initial process

with expert researchers in this area in a timely man-

ner, and fine-tuned the stance to better understand

the participants. Second, a semi-structured protocol

allowed the interviewer to flexibly follow the discourse

or narrative of the participants and probe for more

information when necessary. Third, all interviews

were audio-recorded for verbatim transcriptions. Last,

the researcher also invited an expert in qualitative

research to assess the data analysis process and pro-

cedure employed in this study, which served as a fur-

ther cross-check of its validity.

Next, as qualitative research is not often concerned

with the generalizability of a specific finding, transfer-

ability herein describes how well one manifestation or

interpretation of a phenomenon in a given context

transfers to a second setting (Hirschman 1986).

Transferability of the analysis can be assessed on a

post hoc basis. We explicated and justified how the

current findings could be transferable to other cultural

sites with existing evidence in the discussion section.

Additionally, dependability criterion is approximately

analogous to the concept of reliability in quantitative

research, which speaks to the consistency and stability

during data handling. To enhance the current analysis’

dependability, as described, this study engaged two

coders in a rigorous three-step procedure and held

discussions intermittently to solve inconsistencies. The

last criterion—confirmability—is “functionally analo-

gous to the notions of neutrality and objectively”

(Hirschman 1986, p. 246), which describes the extent

to which interpretations of the researcher are nonpre-

judiced and supportable from the actual data

(Hirschman 1986). To ensure the confirmability of the

analysis, this study has provided verbatim quotes (all

pseudonymized) or original expressions from the par-

ticipants to support each thematic finding that

emerged in the analysis (Chen and Haley 2014).

Results

The participants described influencers more like regu-

lar people who have a sizable following and who can

influence or shape others’decisions, behaviors, and/or

opinions. The participants also emphasized that

JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING 7

influencers have the capacity to impart useful know-

ledge, including both domain knowledge and product

(usage) information, and that they attract sponsor-

ships from brands because of their organic sharing.

The results showed that followers, indeed, consider

their relations with influencers (versus celebrities) as

more interpersonal, more intimate, and more like

relatable “friendships”(Abidin 2015;O’Neil-Hart and

Blumenstein 2016). The participants assign a high

level of trust toward their favorite influencers.

Regarding their interactions with influencers, most

participants describe influencers as highly responsive

to followers who invest greatly in relation-building

with followers. Most of the participants religiously fol-

low influencers’updates and perceive them as trust-

worthy and genuine. When being asked to name the

platforms through which they follow influencers, most

of them mentioned Instagram and YouTube, and

some listed Facebook, LinkedIn, Snapchat, Weibo, or

WeChat. The participants listed a wide range of influ-

encer types, including those focusing on lifestyle, sci-

ence, politics, sports, tech, live-streaming, fashion,

dancing, and beauty.

Influencer–Follower Relation: Collectively

Reciprocal, (A)synchronously Interactive, and

Co-created

RQ1 and RQ2 asked about the characteristics of the

relation between influencers and followers and how it

differs from the notion of parasocial relation between

media personae and audiences. Three key characteris-

tics of influencer–follower relation emerged from the

analysis and indeed set this relation apart from the

mostly non-reciprocal and one-way nature of paraso-

cial relation. The relation between influencers and fol-

lowers are complex, multifaceted, and dynamic, which

can be reciprocal and interactive, depending on the

contexts. We termed this new updated format of

influencer–follower relation as trans-parasocial rela-

tion, which exhibits the following characteristics: col-

lectively reciprocal,(a)synchronously interactive, and

co-created (see Figure 1). These traits distinguish

influencer–follower relation from the concept of para-

social relation between media personae and audiences.

Collectively Reciprocal

Parasocial relation entails one-way, illusory social rela-

tion in which the audiences often react to, observe, or

know about their favorite media personae well while

the media personae know little about the audiences or

their actions (Bond 2018; Horton and Wohl 1956).

This illusory relation may develop to a profound and

intimate degree from the perspective of audiences

(Horton and Wohl 1956). Parasocial relation, for the

most part, implies reciprocity via imagined intimacy

perceived by the audiences, but it lacks real reci-

procity. Reciprocity herein refers to “users’willingness

to return favors in building mutual interactions”(Li

et al. 2018, p. 1643). In this mass media personae–au-

dience relation, audiences have no way to receive

equal return favors from the media personae for the

level of engagement or obsession that they have forged

with the media personae, over accumulative parasocial

interactions mediated by traditional media. However,

in the current influencer–follower relation, influencers

often do return favors by actively and regularly

responding to representative comments, inquiries, or

requests from the followers. The participants

described their relations with influencers as more par-

tially reciprocal, as the influencers make efforts to

reach out to their followers quite often, try their best

to reply to top comments, feature and cover certain

topics upon the requests of the followers, give away

Figure 1. The key characteristics of parasocial relation and trans-parasocial relation.

8 C. LOU

free publicity products, and organize offline meet-ups.

Renie, a 22-year-old female participant who has been

following a dancer influencer on Instagram, described

the relation among the influencer, herself, and

other followers:

“Quite reciprocal, but not very. Like it’s not very one-

sided also; like she’s not actively replying (to) every

single one (comment), but when she has the time, she

does reply to certain comments.”

Similarly, a male participant who has been follow-

ing a science influencer on YouTube also indicated

that the influencer often attends to what his fol-

lowers need:

“Some comments are suggesting him to explain more

about bitcoin to us, and after a few months he made

a video explaining bitcoin and those

cryptocurrencies.”(Leon, 25, male)

The participants also acknowledged that their rela-

tions with the influencers are not completely recipro-

cal, but they consider that most influencers are very

responsive and make great efforts to reciprocate. This

reciprocity may not be granted to every individual fol-

lower, but more in a collective sense, namely accom-

modating to collective demands from the followers by

replying to a segment of the comments or most often

asked questions. Moreover, Elly, a 22-year-old female

participant, emphasized the importance of this collect-

ive reciprocity when evaluating her attachment to

influencers and indicated that:

“It is important to think that relationships with

influencers are reciprocal, as having one-sided

relationships with influencers is very superficial. …

However, having a reciprocal relationship with

influencers is what followers would want, and is also

why influencers want to be influencers—they want to

inspire people and spread joy to others.”

(A)synchronously Interactive

The parasocial relation between media personae and

audiences used to be a one-way, one-sided communi-

cation broadcast to the audiences, which is often con-

trolled by the performers or the media personae

(Abidin 2015; Horton and Wohl 1956). Recent

research extended this original notion intrinsic to

traditional media like TV/radio to the interactive

social media context (e.g., Colliander and Dahl

2011; Lou and Kim 2019; Tsai and Men 2013). Some

argued that interactive online and social media plat-

forms facilitate stronger parasocial interactions

between media personae and audiences (e.g.,

Colliander and Dahl

en 2011; Tsai and Men 2013), as

audiences can not only observe the actions of media

personae (e.g., bloggers) but also respond to their

messages. Interactivity refers to the extent to which

individuals can communicate directly with each other,

regardless of time or distance (Blattberg and Deighton

1991). Interactivity also describes “the extent to which

users can participate in modifying the format and

content of a mediated environment in real time”

(Steuer 1992, p. 84). Judged from these perspectives,

interactions between media personae and audiences

are not completely interactive. However, with respect

to influencer–follower interaction, this study argues

that it is interactive to a much greater extent, either

synchronously through live-streaming sessions or

meet-ups, or asynchronously through online com-

ments, online polls, or live videos (e.g., Instagram).

For instance, Zoee, a 32-year-old female, described

her asynchronous interaction with one of the

YouTubers whom she is following:

“More on the ground I would think, they will reach

out to their audience far more than celebrities. …

Like if we comment on their YouTube, he will reply.”

Sean, a 25-year-old male, concurred with the per-

ceived largely interactive nature of interactions with

influencers and indicated that:

“I think most of them are responsive, it seems that

the wants of their followers are more important

to them.”

Some participants specified that, for live-streaming

influencers, their interactions with followers are syn-

chronously interactive, real-time, and efficient. They

joined the influencer-initiated live-streaming sessions

a couple times per week and enjoyed interactions with

the influencers. For instance, Jess, a 25-year-old

female participant, mentioned that:

“He does live broadcasting and audience can ask him

questions; we can always get his replies from the

Taobao live broadcasting.”

Co-created

Horton and Wohl (1956) described parasocial relation

as nondialectical, which was largely controlled by the

media personae and did not involve mutual develop-

ment. Either the media personae or the audiences

have the right to withdraw if either finds the interac-

tions unsatisfying, and audiences are often receptive

to media personae’s values and motives without much

say in this process (Horton and Wohl 1956).

However, the influencer–follower relation accommo-

dates a progressive and mutual growth of shared val-

ues and aims involving both influencers and followers,

meaning that followers can participate in the co-

JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING 9

creation process of influencers’values, aims, or

motives. Almost all participants emphasized that influ-

encers crowdsource advice from their followers on

what to offer and also proactively seek followers’sug-

gestions on content creation and topics of interaction.

Adah, a 22-year-old female, reflected on her favorite

YouTuber as follows:

“I do feel that influencers take their followers’

thoughts into account when creating content. They

often read comments and ask for ideas of what

content their followers would like them to produce.”

Also, the products—“performance”or “personae”—

offered by media personae remains standardized and

unchanged, which was often regulated and formulated

by the industry or his/her managers (Horton and

Wohl 1956). Yet, influencers, as content generators,

are constantly adjusting their content offering and

have autonomy over what to offer to their followers

through back-and-forth interactions with followers.

Another participant also concurred with the co-cre-

ation nature of influencer–follower interaction and

relation formation:

“They will look at comments, especially YouTubers,

they will look at comments on their videos and then

create videos to entertain these comments. Influencers

will take the feedback seriously and then curate their

content based on the comments that were given.”

(Sean, 25, male)

In short, this new format of relation between influ-

encers and followers surpasses and extends the extant

assumptions of parasocial relation that center on

media personae and audiences and democratizes the

interaction between followers and influencers. Taking

a step further, how this new relation may affect the

persuasive outcomes of influencer advertising warrants

more profound and granular inquires. Currently, one

line of the extant research focused on how the influ-

encer–follower relation (mostly examined through the

lens of parasocial relation) mitigates the negative

effect of advertising literacy/persuasion knowledge—

activated by sponsorship disclosure—on advertising

outcomes (e.g., Boerman and Van Reijmersdal 2020;

Hwang and Zhang 2018). Furthermore, recent

research has demonstrated that followers will not

necessarily lower their admiration or interaction

intentions toward the influencers if they find out that

the influencers are promoting sponsored products (De

Jans and Hudders 2020), and followers react to influ-

encer-sponsored posts similar as they do with regular

posts (Lou, Tan, and Chen 2019). Collectively, it is

plausible that the enhanced relation between influ-

encers and their followers plays a role in the process

through which followers evaluate and respond to

influencer-sponsored content. More importantly,

recent research has revealed that followers often react

to influencer-sponsored content quite positively—even

when the sponsorship relations were explicitly dis-

closed (e.g., Dhanesh and Duthler 2019; Lou, Tan,

and Chen 2019), which largely challenged the assump-

tions of persuasion knowledge model. Yet, considering

the influence of this intimate, bidirectional, co-created,

and mostly interactive relation with their coveted

influencers, the strategies or underlying mechanisms

through which followers form their overall benign or

positive reactions to influencer-sponsored posts are

unknown. The second aim of this study is to fill in

this gap and shed light on the potential processes.

Strategies to Influencer-Sponsored Posts:

Positively Biased, Normalized, and Rationalized

RQ3 asked how and through which mechanisms fol-

lowers react to influencer-sponsored posts in view of

their attachment to the influencers. This study

revealed that the participants upheld overall benevo-

lent attitudes toward influencers’commercial activ-

ities, including sponsored posts. To account for the

generally positive attitudinal evaluation, this study

found that the participants employed varied psycho-

logical mechanisms or strategies to normalize or

accept the fact that influencers are leveraging their

influence among their followers for commercial gains:

positive bias,verification by cross-validation, and

inspirational internalization.

Positive Bias

Per the assumptions of the persuasion knowledge

model, if consumers recognize a persuasive message

as advertising, they are likely to generate critical atti-

tudes or skepticisms toward the messages and accord-

ingly decrease their attitudes toward the source

(Friestad and Wright 1994). Yet, most of the partici-

pants in this study expressed positive bias toward

their favorite influencers’endorsements or sponsor-

ship activities, regardless of whether those sponsorship

activities have been disclosed or not. For instance,

Sean, a 25-year-old male participant, argued that,

“By being sponsored, it doesn’t undermine the

reliability of the post, like what if the influencer is

saying is the truth, then the fact that it is sponsored

would not make it less true.”

Some participants mentioned that they understood

well that influencers need to somehow make a living

since they are investing their time in creating free

10 C. LOU

content. Wen, a 27-year-old female, revealed that she

is fine with sponsored posts, as long as there is “a bal-

ance of personal and work content (sponsored posts).”

The participants also applaud the transparency of dis-

closing sponsorship deals to followers, as it “shows

(his) honesty”to followers (Yee, a 24-year-old male).

Some also indicated that they simply trust what the

influencers promoted as “they would not want to

bring down their (travel) pros’names”in their

respective domains (Nina, a 22-year-old female).

Another 22-year-old female, Adah, believed in the

benevolent nature of the influencers and held very

positive attitude toward influencer-sponsored posts,

including the nondisclosed ones:

“(For nondisclosed sponsored posts), it doesn’t affect

my attitude personally. I understand that it helps

them to continue to produce the content they do and

like to believe that they wouldn’t actively promote

harmful products to their followers.”

Verification by Cross-Validation

Although most participants expressed positive bias

toward influencer sharing, including sponsored con-

tent, they also indicated that they don’t always readily

take in all sponsored information without their own

background checking. Most of the participants men-

tioned that they have the autonomy to either follow

suit or not when exposed to sponsored posts, which

also explained why they hold a relatively tolerant

stance on sponsored content. Roy, a 22-year-old

male explained:

“(For disclosed sponsorships) I don’t really feel much,

cause he did disclose it; (for those sponsorships that

were not disclosed), not really affected (me) much

because it is still my choice whether I buy the

product or not, and I will cross reference with other

sources before buying.”

Wen, a 27-year-old female, held similar viewpoint

regarding her approach toward influencer-spon-

sored posts:

“I think that sometimes they may forget to include

the sponsor, so for me it doesn’t really matter if it’s

sponsored or not sponsored, it’s for me to judge

whether what they post is good or not.”

Most of the participants, to a large extent, consider

influencers as credible sources and trust what they

share due to their expertise, as a 25-year-old male,

Jun, mentioned, “I trust what he said. He seldom has

any flaws or mistakes in his videos.”Yet, this doesn’t

preclude followers from seeking verifications or cross-

reference from friends, family members, or other

influencers before they decide to make an actual pur-

chase. Zoee, a 32-year-old female, summarized:

“I will take it with a pinch of salt, just for me to gain

awareness of certain products, but I will not entirely

believe what he shares about the good sides of the

product. But rather, I would use this as the first

touchpoint to know about this product, then

subsequently, through word of mouth, through online

reviews, then learn more about these products.”

Inspirational Internalization

One of the major drivers of followers’attachment to

influencers is influencers’inspirational personae (Ki

et al. 2020). Influencers who are inspiring in some

respects—being a domain expert or having aesthetic

taste or appealing style—are likely to draw followers’

liking, following, and affection (Ki et al. 2020), as these

influencers help fulfill followers’need for ideality or

self-enhancement. It is thus not surprising to see that

numerous followers interpreted influencer-sponsored

posts from the perspective of a self-fulfillment narrative,

believing that influencers who are posting sponsored

posts have earned brand endorsement and are thus suc-

cessful individuals. A 22-year-old male, Roy, put it as

follows when being asked how he thinks of his favorite

influencer’s promotion of sponsored products:

“Feeling he is getting more successful and he was

actually the right person to follow. Of course, I will

judge this based on my own results (that) I obtain,

and his advice as well.”

Also, the participants also mentioned that since the

things that influencers have been sharing are inspiring

and useful to followers, they should be rewarded with

monetary incentives such as brand sponsorships. Juri,

a 27-year-old female, explained that:

“If he is putting his knowledge into his sponsored

posts, I will still watch his videos. …If that allows

him to gain monetary incentives, it is

understandable.”

Last, it is also worth noting that almost all partici-

pants revealed that their compassion and appreciation

of influencers’sharing, including sponsored content,

are based on multiple “default”conditions. For

example, they expect that influencers will constantly

produce valuable and relevant content; influencers do

not commit any major blunders and remain constant

sources of inspirations; and/or influencers keep a

well-versed balance between sponsored content and

organic sharing. Nina, a 22-year-old female, described

that she will unfollow her favorite influencer if the

following happens:

JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING 11

“I think it’s the content of their videos, if they get less

interesting or if they have too many sponsorships,

then I will be less inclined to follow them.”

Figure 2 efficiently summarizes the processes

through which followers react to influencer-sponsored

content in view of their trans-parasocial relation with

influencers, as well as the default conditions and

expectations toward influencers.

Discussion

This study reconfigures the conceptualization of para-

social relation in a way that surpasses the limitations

of traditional media (TV and radio; one-to-many), the

previous conversational structure (non-interactive),

and the existing relation construction (created by pro-

ducer) and recognizes the role of new technologies in

social relation building. The trans-parasocial relation

concept offers a foundation on which new communi-

cative and advertising theories can be developed to

explicate new forms of social interactions and con-

sumer behavior. This influencer–follower relation lies

at the intersection of parasocial relation and interper-

sonal relation, combines both one-to-one and one-to-

many interactions, and facilitates collective reciprocity,

(a)synchronous interactivity, and co-created social

relations between social media influencers and their

followers. These findings point to a new theorization

of this updated and evolving format of “parasocial

relation”in the influencer context, which this study

terms as trans-parasocial relation. Subsequently, this

study discusses, in view of this new form of relation,

how followers or consumers react to influencer-spon-

sored posts, regardless of the provision of sponsorship

disclosures, which differs from the predictions of the

persuasion knowledge model. In particular, the find-

ings revealed that followers tend to trust their favorite

influencers and believe their sharing—including both

organic sharing and sponsored posts—to be largely

genuine. Three possible psychological mechanisms

emerged to account for followers’acceptance of and

overall benign attitudes toward influencer-sponsored

posts: positive bias,verification by cross-validation,

and inspirational internalization. Followers largely

believe in the benign intent of the influencers’sharing

and acknowledge the value of those posts despite the

fact that they are being sponsored. Followers also

self-justify that influencer-sponsored posts won’t

negatively influence them as they have autonomy

over what to purchase and will also cross-reference

other information sources before making purchase

decisions. Last, the findings showed that followers

often internalize influencers’sponsorship deals as

inspirational fulfillments and celebrate influ-

encers’success.

Figure 2. The processes through which followers react to influencer-sponsored content in view of the trans-parasocial relation and

default expectations.

12 C. LOU

Theoretical Implications

The first major contribution of this study lies in the

new theorization and explication of the trans-paraso-

cial relation, which advances the current theorization

of the parasocial relation and has implications for

how social media users regard their interactions and

relation formation with influencers and coordinate

their consumption-related behaviors accordingly.

From the very perspective of influencers, Abidin

(2015) theorizes the relation between influencers and

followers and proposes the notion of “perceived inter-

connectedness,”which lists the aspects in which influ-

encer–follower relation differs from the previous

parasocial relation. Yet, no research has offered a

clear, thorough, and granular theorization of this new

relation from the perspective of followers. This study,

corroborated by empirical evidence, filled this research

gap by offering a clear and systematic typology expli-

cating how the trans-parasocial relation advances the

notion of parasocial relation and implicates new prop-

ositions, which, at the same time, validates some find-

ings observed from the perspective of influencers

(Abidin 2015).

This new theorization also broadly corresponds to

what O’Sullivan and Carr (2018) called the

“masspersonal communication”concept, which argues

that new communication technologies challenge the

divide between interpersonal and mass communica-

tion, thus “calling for new frameworks”(p. 1161).

Essentially, afforded by new digital technologies, con-

sumer interactions and communications are breaking

the boundaries of basic assumptions about interper-

sonal communication, mass communication, and the

concepts arising from the two. This study suggests

that the long-held conventional concept—the paraso-

cial relation—no longer fully encompasses all aspects

of the evolving contemporary human interactions and

related associations. Our analysis recommends an

updated notion and theorization—the trans-parasocial

relation—to capture the nuanced yet distinctive devel-

opment of “media personae–audience”(influencer–fol-

lower) relation in the computer-mediated-

communication (CMC)/mobile communication con-

text. What sets this new definition apart from the par-

asocial relation is that it describes a relation that can

be collectively reciprocal, meaning that, in a collective

sense, the interaction between the two entities is

reciprocal. For instance, influencers, as opinion lead-

ers, reciprocate followers’requests purposely and

respond to representative demands by curating con-

tent, replies, or live interactions. Also, this new trans-

parasocial relation can be either synchronously or

asynchronously interactive, meaning that influencers

can interact with followers through real-time live

streaming and offline meet-ups, or they can frequently

interact with followers asynchronously after some

time delay (e.g., replying to comments, shooting Q&A

videos). Additionally, the trans-parasocial relation

between influencers and followers is co-created, mean-

ing that followers play an active role in the co-cre-

ation and development of influencers’offerings,

values, aims, agenda setting, and motives along the

progression of their relation.

The second major contribution of this study relates

to the reconsideration of the predictions derived from

the persuasion knowledge model. In the influencer

context, recent research also found that the inclusion

of sponsorship disclosure activates viewers’conceptual

persuasion knowledge: recognition of advertising (e.g.,

Evans et al. 2017; De Jans and Hudders 2020; Van

Reijmersdal et al. 2020). Some found that consumers’

recognition of sponsored posts as advertising (versus

no disclosure) gave rise to more critical attitudes,

more skepticism, or less favorable outcomes toward

the ads (e.g., Boerman, Van Reijmersdal, and Neijens

2012; Evans et al. 2017), whereas others demonstrated

that persuasion knowledge—triggered by sponsorship

disclosure—does not always bring about negative

advertising outcomes (e.g., De Jans and Hudders

2020; Dhanesh and Duthler 2019; Lou, Tan, and Chen

2019). Contrary to the propositions of the PKM, this

study argues that influencers’sponsorship disclosure

can make them come across as transparent, credible,

and genuine to followers (Dhanesh and Duthler

2019), thus offsetting the negative effect of persuasion

knowledge. This finding also echoed recent literature

on covert advertising. Recent research has found that

perceptions of sponsorship transparency mitigates the

negative effect of advertising recognition of covert ads

on consumer evaluations which, in turn, leads to

increased source credibility, more favorable ad and

brand attitudes, and greater eWOM and purchase

intents (e.g., Campbell and Evans 2018; Evans,

Wojdynski, and Grubbs Hoy 2019; Krouwer, Poels,

and Paulussen 2020).

Previous studies that demonstrated the negative

effect of PK largely followed the mere-exposure effect

paradigm and looked into the effect of a single adver-

tising message on viewers while dismissing the role of

the micro environment—the intimate relation between

viewers and senders (influencer–follower relation)—in

which the advertising message is created and dissemi-

nated. However, in the influencer–follower context,

followers often trust the influencers they follow as

JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING 13

much as they trust their friends (Swant 2016). Against

the backdrop of this overarching relation, it is not

surprising to see that most participants consider their

favorite influencers credible and genuine and that

they hold overall tolerant or benign attitudes—instead

of critical attitudes—toward influencer-sponsored

posts. More importantly, the participants mentioned

that they understand the dynamics and particulars of

the influencer business model and are in favor of

influencers getting paid in sponsorships or other com-

mercial activities to compensate their creation of free

and useful content. Almost all participants acknow-

ledge that a reasonable ratio of organic sharing and

sponsored posts can definitely go hand-in-hand in

sustaining influencers’content creation in the

long run.

Last, this study uncovers the possible psychological

coping mechanisms that expounds why followers react

to influencer-sponsored posts benignly. First, this

study found that followers show positive bias toward

influencers’sponsorship deals. They indicate that they

trust the influencers’ethics in managing sponsored

activities and won’t discount the potential value of

sponsored posts just because the influencers are being

sponsored. This echoes what Lou and colleagues (Lou,

Tan, and Chen 2019) have found, that followers show

“cultlike appreciation for influencers’product sharing”

(p. 169) and actively engaged with influencer-pro-

moted ads on Instagram. Second, it is worth noting

that as much as followers trust their favorite influ-

encers, they seem to be functioning like rational con-

sumers (at least self-reportedly so): Almost all of them

mentioned that they tend to cross-reference other

sources about influencer-promoted products before

making a purchase. This finding doesn’t contradict

their revelation of trust in influencers; instead, it evi-

dences that they indeed take influencer-promoted

products seriously and include them in the evoked set

before making a purchase decision. Additionally, we

found that followers tend to interpret influencer-spon-

sored activities with an inspirational twist. In particu-

lar, they consider influencers with sponsorship deals

successful and inspiring, and they believe that influ-

encers deserve monetary incentive that is commensur-

ate with their inspirational trait and value. This

finding agrees with what Ki and colleagues (2020)

have argued: that influencers’inspiring personality is

one major driver of followers’liking, following, and

attachment. It is understandable that human beings

are driven by self-enhancement goals (Allport 1937),

and influencers, as “someone like me,”serve as attain-

able role models.

Practical Implications

Informed by the current findings, generally speaking,

influencers are advised to always demonstrate integrity

in business handling (e.g., no purposeful deception)

and engage in ethical commercial activities (e.g., no

major blunders). Influencers should also treasure and

grow their core equity through constantly creating

useful and valuable content that satisfies followers’

needs. As most followers see their favorite influencers

as role models and sources of inspirations, influencers

should also keep this in mind when curating their

online personae.

Regarding relationship building between influencers

and followers, our findings show that signaling col-

lective reciprocity (e.g., free giveaways, catering to fol-

lowers’requests), which may not be directed to each

individual follower, can help build intimacy perceived

by the followers. Also, influencers may try to be

responsive, either synchronously or asynchronously,

to followers’interactions to facilitate relation building

with followers. Furthermore, influencers may continue

taking followers’representative requests or demands

into account, which can be reflected in content gener-

ation or the socialization process. Regarding adver-

tisers and marketers who are interested in influencer

campaigns, they are advised to seek influencers who

have strong rapport with their followers and those

who maintain a good reputation and credibility record

among their followers. Advertisers should also assess

the proportion of organic sharing and commercial

posts for a given influencer to estimate his/her long-

term appeal among followers.

Further, in terms of sponsorship activities, given

that followers are largely tolerant and even apprecia-

tive of influencer-sponsored content, influencers

should always ensure transparency with followers

through clear sponsorship disclosures, which can bol-

ster followers’trust in and satisfaction with them

(Dhanesh and Duthler 2019). Influencers should also

be aware of their significant impact on some of their

fervid followers and avoid instigating impulse buying

or blunt consumerism, especially among their adoles-

cent followers or other vulnerable populations (Lou

and Kim 2019). More importantly, in view of this

enhanced and intensified relation between influencers

and followers, current regulations (e.g., Federal Trade

Commission 2017) that focus on enforcing sponsor-

ship disclosures among influencers and brands may

be insufficient. This indeed poses new challenges to

regulatory bodies who oversee influencer marketing

activities. More advanced regulations regarding influ-

encer-sponsored posts (e.g., objective product

14 C. LOU

information, no false or misleading claims) and their

online promoting strategies (e.g., promoting detrimen-

tal beauty ideals or taping into racism) should be

closely scrutinized and supervised.

Limitations and Future Research Directions

This study has its limitations that invite future

research. First, we caution that, due to the self-

reported nature of interview studies, some participants

may have distorted memories of their experiences and

interactions with their favorite influencers. For

example, although most influencers occasionally recip-

rocate or reply to followers’comments, a lot of the

participants perceived a seemingly more intense and

intimate interactions with influencers. This warrants

further investigation into the formation of positive

bias and information processing among followers.

Furthermore, the current qualitative findings from in-

depth interviews did not inform causal relations or

correlations. Future research can invest more in meas-

urement building or causality verifications through

surveys or experiments. In particular, based on the

current qualitative findings, future research can

develop a new scale assessing this trans-parasocial

relation via exploratory factor analysis and confirma-

tory factor analysis. Following this, future research

can accurately pinpoint the antecedents of this rela-

tion and validate how related factors—including the

characteristics of influencer-generated content, influ-

encers’communicative style, or self-disclosure (e.g.,

Abidin 2015; Lou and Yuan 2019)—may affect this

relation. Future research can also compare the pre-

dictive power of this new operationalization with that

of the existing notion of parasocial relation and expli-

cate how well they can predict advertising efficacy and

consumer behavior.

Second, the current findings are based on social

media users in Singapore. Having a diverse social

makeup, a high penetration rate of social media use

(75%), and one of the top economies characterized by

gross domestic product per capita (M€

uller 2020;

Worldometer 2020), Singapore has been recognized as

a cosmopolitan hub that shares a lot of commonalities

with other developed countries. More importantly,

recent research on influencer practices that were con-

ducted in Singapore has been well applied to other

cultural contexts (e.g., Abidin 2015,2016).

Furthermore, a multitude of findings unearthed in

this current study indeed replicate some previous

findings conducted in other cultural sites (e.g., U.S.,

Belgium, Amsterdam) (e.g., Boerman and Van

Reijmersdal 2020; Krouwer, Poels, and Paulussen

2020; Lou, Tan, and Chen 2019). Therefore, we argue

that, regardless of the specific context in which this

study was conducted, the fundamental theoretical

underpinnings and arguments regarding influencer–-

follower relation should remain robust in other cul-

tural sites. Nonetheless, this also calls for testing from

more cultural settings to corroborate the robustness of

the current theoretical building of trans-parasocial

relation. Future research can also test the role of cul-

tural orientation or cultural-level values in the trans-

parasocial relation and influencer advertising.

Third, given that the current findings echo recent

literature on the essential role of influencer authenti-

city in influencer appeal or ethics (e.g., Campbell and

Farrell 2020;P

€

oyry et al. 2019), future research may

offer more in-depth explication of its theoretical

underpinnings and explore its relation to trans-para-

social relation and persuasive outcomes. Furthermore,

the current findings, in alignment with recent findings

in the context of covert advertising, point to how

influencer transparency can mitigate or even offset the

negative effect of PK (e.g., Campbell and Evans 2018;

Evans, Wojdynski, and Grubbs Hoy 2019; Krouwer,

Poels, and Paulussen 2020). This suggests that the

PKM can be expanded or fine-tuned in varied con-

texts. For instance, future research can explore how

trans-parasocial relation moderates the impact of PK

on advertising outcomes and explicate more granular

mechanisms through which the negative impact of PK

can be diminished. More importantly, it is imperative

to examine and ascertain how and to what extent the

current advertising literacy on influencer/covert adver-

tising can inform vulnerable populations (e.g., kids,

adolescents) when they are being exposed to influ-

encers whom they have formed trans-parasocial rela-

tion. Regulatory bodies can subsequently implement

more rigorous and timelier educative curriculum on

influencer–follower relation and advertising literacy.

Future research can also investigate how trans-paraso-

cial relation can be leveraged to influence consumers’

prosocial behaviors and cause marketing efficacy (e.g.,

employing influencers to promote mask wearing dur-

ing the pandemic in Europe and Asia, or preju-

dice reduction).

Acknowledgment

The author would like to thank Shermaine Sng for her

assistance. The author also thanks the reviewers and editors

for their guidance.

JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING 15

Disclosure statement

The funder did not play any role in the entire research pro-

cess. The author has no conflict of interest to disclose.

Funding

This study was supported by a Tier 1 grant from the

Ministry of Education, Singapore (grant number

M4012201.060).

ORCID

Chen Lou http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5506-5835

References

Abidin, C. 2015. Communicative intimacies: Influencers and

perceived interconnectedness. Ada: A Journal of Gender,

New Media, & Technology 8:1–16. http://adanewmedia.

org/2015/11/issue8-abidin/.

Abidin, C. 2016. Aren’t these just young, rich women doing

vain things online?: Influencer selfies as subversive frivol-

ity. Social Media þSociety 2 (2):205630511664134.

doi.org/10.1177/2056305116641342. doi:10.1177/

2056305116641342

Abidin, C., and E. C. Thompson. 2012. Buymylife.com:

Cyberfemininities and commercial intimacy in blog-

shops. Women’s Studies International Forum 35 (6):

467–77. doi:10.1016/j.wsif.2012.10.005

Allport, G. W. 1937. Personality: A psychological interpret-

ation. New York, NY: Holt.

Blattberg, R. C., and J. Deighton. 1991. Interactive market-

ing: Exploiting the age of addressability. Sloan

Management Review 33 (1):5–15.

Boerman, S. C., E. A. Van Reijmersdal, and P. C. Neijens.

2012. Sponsorship disclosure: Effects of duration on per-

suasion knowledge and brand responses. Journal of

Communication 62 (6):1047–64. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.

2012.01677.x

Boerman, S. C., and E. A. Van Reijmersdal. 2020.

Disclosing influencer marketing on YouTube to children:

The moderating role of para-social relationship. Frontiers

in Psychology, 10:3042.

Boerman, S. C., L. M. Willemsen, and E. P. Van Der Aa.

2017. ‘This post is sponsored’: Effects of sponsorship

disclosure on persuasion knowledge and electronic word

of mouth in the context of Facebook. Journal of

Interactive Marketing 38:82–92. doi:10.1016/j.intmar.

2016.12.002

Bond,B.J.2016.Followingyour“friend”: Social media

and the strength of adolescents’parasocial relation-

ships with media personae. Cyberpsychology, Behavior,

and Social Networking 19 (11):656–60. doi:10.1089/

cyber.2016.0355

Bond, B. J. 2018. Parasocial relationships with media per-

sonae: Why they matter and how they differ among het-

erosexual, lesbian, gay, and bisexual adolescents. Media

Psychology 21 (3):457–85. doi:10.1080/15213269.2017.

1416295

Campbell, C., and N. J. Evans. 2018. The role of a compan-

ion banner and sponsorship transparency in recognizing

and evaluating article-style native advertising. Journal of

Interactive Marketing 43:17–32. doi:10.1016/j.intmar.

2018.02.002

Campbell, C., and J. R. Farrell. 2020. More than meets the

eye: The functional components underlying influencer

marketing. Business Horizons 63 (4):469–79. doi.org/

10.1016/j.bushor.2020.03.003. doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2020.

03.003

Chang, J. H.-Y. 2003. Culture, state and economic develop-

ment in Singapore. Journal of Contemporary Asia 33 (1):

85–105. doi:10.1080/00472330380000071

Chen, C.-P. 2016. Forming digital self and parasocial rela-

tionships on YouTube. Journal of Consumer Culture 16

(1):232–54. doi:10.1177/1469540514521081

Chen, H., and E. Haley. 2014. Product placement in social

games: Consumer experiences in China. Journal of

Advertising 43 (3):286–95. doi:10.1080/00913367.2013.

858086

Childers, C., L. L. Lemon, and M. G. Hoy. 2019. #

Sponsored# Ad: Agency perspective on influencer mar-

keting campaigns. Journal of Current Issues & Research

in Advertising 40 (3):258–74.

Colliander, J., and M. Dahl

en. 2011. Following the fashion-

able friend: The power of social media. Journal of

Advertising Research 51 (1):313–20. doi:10.2501/JAR-51-

1-313-320

Corbin, J., and A. Strauss. 2008. Basics of qualitative

research: Techniques and procedures for developing

grounded theory, 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

De Jans, S., V. Cauberghe, and L. Hudders. 2018. How an

advertising disclosure alerts young adolescents to spon-

sored vlogs: The moderating role of a peer-based adver-

tising literacy intervention through an informational

vlog. Journal of Advertising 47 (4):309–25. doi:10.1080/

00913367.2018.1539363

De Jans, S., and L. Hudders. 2020. Disclosure of vlog adver-

tising targeted to children. Journal of Interactive

Marketing 52:1–19. doi:10.1016/j.intmar.2020.03.003

De Veirman, M., V. Cauberghe, and L. Hudders. 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. doi:10.1080/02650487.2017.1348035

De Veirman, M., and L. Hudders. 2020. Disclosing spon-

sored Instagram posts: The role of material connection

with the brand and message-sidedness when disclosing

covert advertising. International Journal of Advertising 39

(1):94–130. doi:10.1080/02650487.2019.1575108

De Veirman, M., L. Hudders, and M. R. Nelson. 2019.

What is influencer marketing and how does it target

children? A review and direction for future research.

Frontiers in Psychology 10:2685. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.

02685

Dhanesh, G. S., and G. Duthler. 2019. Relationship manage-

ment through social media influencers: Effects of fol-

lowers’awareness of paid endorsement. Public Relations

Review 45 (3):101765. doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2019.03.002

16 C. LOU

Dibble, J. L., T. Hartmann, and S. F. Rosaen. 2016.

Parasocial interaction and parasocial relationship:

Conceptual clarification and a critical assessment of

measures. Human Communication Research 42 (1):21–44.

doi:10.1111/hcre.12063

Djafarova, E., and C. Rushworth. 2017. Exploring the cred-

ibility of online celebrities’Instagram profiles in influ-

encing the purchase decisions of young female users.

Computers in Human Behavior 68:1–7. doi:10.1016/j.chb.

2016.11.009

Erdogan, B. Z. 1999. Celebrity endorsement: A literature

review. Journal of Marketing Management 15 (4):

291–314. doi:10.1362/026725799784870379

Escalas, J. E., and J. R. Bettman. 2017. Connecting with

celebrities: How consumers appropriate celebrity mean-

ings for a sense of belonging. Journal of Advertising 46

(2):297–308. doi:10.1080/00913367.2016.1274925

Evans, N. J., M. G. Hoy, and C. C. Childers. 2018.

Parenting ‘YouTube natives’: The impact of pre-roll

advertising and text disclosures on parental responses to

sponsored child influencer videos. Journal of Advertising

47 (4):326–46. doi:10.1080/00913367.2018.1544952

Evans, N. J., J. Phua, J. Lim, and H. Jun. 2017. Disclosing

Instagram influencer advertising: The effects of disclos-

ure language on advertising recognition, attitudes, and

behavioral intent. Journal of Interactive Advertising 17

(2):138–49. doi:10.1080/15252019.2017.1366885

Evans, N. J., B. W. Wojdynski, and M. Grubbs Hoy. 2019.

How sponsorship transparency mitigates negative effects

of advertising recognition. International Journal of

Advertising 38 (3):364–82. doi:10.1080/02650487.2018.

1474998

Federal Trade Commission. 2017, April 19. “FTC Staff

Reminds Influencers and Brands to Clearly Disclose

Relationship.”https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-

releases/2017/04/ftc-staff-reminds-influencers-brands-

clearly-disclose.

Friestad, M., and P. Wright. 1994. The persuasion know-

ledge model: How people cope with persuasion attempts.

Journal of Consumer Research 21 (1):1–31. doi:10.1086/

209380

Glaser, B. G. 1965. The constant comparative method of

qualitative analysis. Social Problems 12 (4):436–45. doi:

10.2307/798843

Government of Singapore. 2019. What are the racial pro-

portions among Singapore citizens? https://www.gov.sg/

article/what-are-the-racial-proportions-among-singapore-

citizens.

Haley, E. 1996. Exploring the construct of organization as

source: Consumers’understandings of organizational

sponsorship of advocacy advertising. Journal of

Advertising 25 (2):19–35. doi:10.1080/00913367.1996.

10673497

Hirschman, E. C. 1986. Humanistic inquiry in marketing

research: Philosophy, method, and criteria. Journal of

Marketing Research 23 (3):237–49. doi:10.1177/

002224378602300304

Horton, D., and R. R. Wohl. 1956. Mass communication

and para-social interaction: Observations on intimacy at

a distance. Psychiatry 19 (3):215–29. doi:10.1080/

00332747.1956.11023049

Hwang, K., and Q. Zhang. 2018. Influence of parasocial

relationship between digital celebrities and their fol-

lowers on followers’purchase and electronic word-of-

mouth intentions, and persuasion knowledge. Computers

in Human Behavior 87:155–73. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2018.05.

029

Influencer Marketing Hub. 2020. 80 influencer marketing

statistics for 2020. https://influencermarketinghub.com/

influencer-marketing-statistics/.

Jung, A.-R., and J. Heo. 2019. Ad disclosure vs. ad recogni-

tion: How persuasion knowledge influences native adver-

tising evaluation. Journal of Interactive Advertising 19

(1):1–14. doi:10.1080/15252019.2018.1520661

Kaikati, J. G. 1987. Celebrity advertising: A review and syn-

thesis. International Journal of Advertising 6 (2):93–105.

doi:10.1080/02650487.1987.11107007

Kay, S., R. Mulcahy, and J. Parkinson. 2020. When less is

more: The impact of macro and micro social media

influencers’disclosure. Journal of Marketing Management

36 (3–4):248–78. doi:10.1080/0267257X.2020.1718740

Ki, C.-W. (C.), L. M. Cuevas, S. M. Chong, and H. Lim.

2020. Influencer marketing: Social media influencers as

human brands attaching to followers and yielding posi-

tive marketing results by fulfilling needs. Journal of

Retailing and Consumer Services 55:102133. doi:10.1016/j.

jretconser.2020.102133

Krouwer, S., K. Poels, and S. Paulussen. 2020. Moving

towards transparency for native advertisements on news

websites: A test of more detailed disclosures.

International Journal of Advertising 39 (1):51–73. doi:10.

1080/02650487.2019.1575107

Leskin, P. 2020. I spent a day following an Instagram influ-

encer around New York City to see what her job was

really like. Business Insider, January. https://www.busi-

nessinsider.com/influencer-day-in-the-life-courtkelly-

courtney-seamon-photos-2019-10.

Li, J., Tang, J. Y. Wang, Y. Wan, Yi Chang, and H. Liu.

2018. Understanding and predicting delay in reciprocal

relations. Proceedings of the 2018 World Wide Web

Conference 2018:1643–52. doi:10.1145/3178876.3186076

Lincoln, Y. S., and E. G. Guba. 1985. Naturalistic inquiry.

Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Lou, C., and H. K. Kim. 2019. Fancying the new rich and

famous? Explicating the roles of influencer content, cred-

ibility, and parental mediation in adolescents’parasocial

relationship, materialism, and purchase intentions.

Frontiers in Psychology 10:2567. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.

02567

Lou, C., S.-S. Tan, and X. Chen. 2019. Investigating con-

sumer engagement with influencer-vs. brand-promoted

ads: The roles of source and disclosure. Journal of

Interactive Advertising 19 (3):169–86. doi:10.1080/

15252019.2019.1667928

Lou, C., and S. Yuan. 2019. Influencer marketing: How

message value and credibility affect consumer trust of

branded content on social media. Journal of Interactive

Advertising 19 (1):58–73. doi:10.1080/15252019.2018.

1533501

Mohsin, M. 2020. 10 Instagram stats every marketer should

know in 2020. Oberlo, February. https://www.oberlo.

com/blog/instagram-stats-every-marketer-should-know.

JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING 17

M€

uller, J. 2019. Share of respondents who have been per-

suaded to purchase a product by a social media influen-

cer in Singapore as of August 2018, by age group.

Statista. https://www.statista.com/statistics/950956/singa-

pore-social-media-influencers-reach/.

M€

uller, J. 2020. Social media in Singapore –Statistics &

facts. Statista. https://www.statista.com/topics/5815/

social-media-in-singapore/.

O’Neil-Hart, C., and H. Blumenstein. 2016. Why YouTube

stars are more influential than traditional celebrities.

Google, July. https://www.thinkwithgoogle.com/con-

sumer-insights/youtube-stars-influence/

O’Sullivan, P. B., and C. T. Carr. 2018. Masspersonal com-

munication: A model bridging the mass-interpersonal

divide. New Media & Society 20 (3):1161–80. doi:10.

1177/1461444816686104

Omnicore. 2020. YouTube by the numbers: Stats, demo-

graphic & fun facts. https://www.omnicoreagency.com/

youtube-statistics/.

P€

oyry, E., M. Pelkonen, E. Naumanen, and S.-M.

Laaksonen. 2019. A call for authenticity: Audience

responses to social media influencer endorsements in

strategic communication. International Journal of

Strategic Communication 13 (4):336–51. doi:10.1080/

1553118X.2019.1609965

Rozendaal, E., M. A. Lapierre, E. A. Van Reijmersdal, and

M. Buijzen. 2011. Reconsidering advertising literacy as a

defense against advertising effects. Media Psychology 14

(4):333–54. doi:10.1080/15213269.2011.620540

Russell, C. A., B. B. Stern, and B. B. Stern. 2006.

Consumers, characters, and products: A balance model

of sitcom product placement effects. Journal of

Advertising 35 (1):7–21. doi:10.2753/JOA0091-

3367350101

Schomer, A. 2019. Influencer marketing: State of the social

media influencer market in 2020. Business Insider,

December. https://www.businessinsider.com/influencer-

marketing-report.

Schouten, A. P., L. Janssen, and M. Verspaget. 2020.

Celebrity vs. influencer endorsements in advertising: The

role of identification, credibility, and product endorser

fit. International Journal of Advertising 39 (2):258–81.

doi:10.1080/02650487.2019.1634898

Sokolova, K., and H. Kefi. 2020. Instagram and YouTube

bloggers promote it, why should I buy? How credibility

and parasocial interaction influence purchase intentions.

Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 53:101742.

doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.01.011

Steuer, J. 1992. Defining virtual reality: Dimensions deter-

mining telepresence. Journal of Communication 42 (4):

73–93. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1992.tb00812.x

Swant, M. 2016. Twitter says users now trust influencers

nearly as much as their friends. Adweek, May. http://

www.adweek.com/digital/twitter-says-users-now-trust-

influencers-nearly-much-their-friends-171367/.

Tracy, S. J. 2013. Qualitative research methods: Collecting

evidence, crafting analysis, communicating impact.

Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.

Tsai, W.-H S., and L. R. Men. 2013. Motivations and ante-

cedents of consumer engagement with brand pages on

social networking sites. Journal of Interactive Advertising

13 (2):76–87. doi:10.1080/15252019.2013.826549

Van Dam, S., and E. van Reijmersdal. 2019. Insights in ado-

lescents’advertising literacy, perceptions and responses

regarding sponsored influencer videos and disclosures.

Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on

Cyberspace 13 (2):2. doi:10.5817/CP2019-2-2

Van Reijmersdal, E. A., and S. van Dam. 2020. How age

and disclosures of sponsored influencer videos affect

adolescents’knowledge of persuasion and persuasion.

Journal of Youth and Adolescence 49 (7):1531–44. doi:10.

1007/s10964-019-01191-z

Van Reijmersdal, E. A., E. Rozendaal, L. Hudders, I.

Vanwesenbeeck, V. Cauberghe, and Z. M. van Berlo.

2020. Effects of disclosing influencer marketing in vid-

eos: An eye tracking study among children in early ado-

lescence. Journal of Interactive Marketing 49:94–106. doi:

10.1016/j.intmar.2019.09.001

Weinswig, D. 2016. Influencers are the new brands. Forbes,

October. https://www.forbes.com/sites/deborahweinswig/

2016/10/05/influencers-are-the-new-brands/

#41a786447919.

Wojdynski, B. W., and N. J. Evans. 2016. Going native:

Effects of disclosure position and language on the recog-

nition and evaluation of online native advertising.

Journal of Advertising 45 (2):157–68. doi:10.1080/

00913367.2015.1115380

Worldometer. 2020. GDP per capita. https://www.worldom-

eters.info/gdp/gdp-per-capita/.

Yuan, S., and C. Lou. 2020. How social media influencers

foster relationships with followers: The Roles of source

credibility and fairness in parasocial relationship and

product interest. Journal of Interactive Advertising 20 (2):

133–47. doi:10.1080/15252019.2020.1769514

18 C. LOU

Do I look real? Impact of digital human avatar influencer realism on consumer engagement and attachment

Article

Feb 2025

Purpose AI-powered digital human avatar influencer (DHAI) is a digitally created character with a human-like appearance and noteworthy social media presence. They mimic human behavior through form, behavior and emotional realism. However, there have been varied viewpoints in the literature about the effect of DHAI realism on consumer response. Therefore, this study aims to examine the effect of form, behavioral and emotional realism on consumer engagement and parasocial relationships that further affect attachment toward DHAI and brand, with the moderating effect of content authenticity. Design/methodology/approach Using a cross-sectional design, 426 respondents in India were asked to visit the Instagram page of a specific DHAI identified through a pretest study. The authors used the Smart PLS 4.0 version to examine the hypotheses. Findings Accordingly, based on the social presence theory, the findings of the quantitative study indicated that DHAI’s form, behavioral and emotional realism positively influence customers’ engagement with DHAI, but only the behavior and emotional realism of DHAI positively affect the parasocial relationship. Further, perceived DHAI’s content authenticity moderates the effect of DHAI engagement and parasocial relationship on DHAI sentimental attachment. Originality/value This study provides novel and practical insights for developing DHAI by considering realism characteristics for enhanced customer engagement, parasocial relationship and attachment toward DHAI and brands.

Exploring Emotional Contagion and Reciprocity Between Social Media Influencers and Followers: A Content Analysis of Autobiographic Content About Depression and Comments on Douyin

Article

Mar 2025
Mass Comm Soc

Perilaku Wisatawan

Book

Full-text available

Feb 2025

Yerik Afrianto Singgalen

Understanding virtual influencers as brand endorsers: A conceptual framework for evaluating the traits of virtual influencers and an agenda for future research

Article

Mar 2025

Over the last few years, brands have increasingly looked to influencer marketing to promote their products. More recently, a new approach has emerged, leveraging artificial intelligence to create virtual influencers. Despite the growing importance of virtual brand ambassadors, academic research on virtual influencers remains fragmented, with limited discussion regarding the ideal characteristics of such agents. This paper addresses this gap in the literature and identifies the conditions necessary for virtual influencers to deliver positive outcomes. Based on existing literature, we identify eight essential attributes that significantly influence the effectiveness of virtual influencers. We also propose an agenda for future research and present a conceptual model to elucidate virtual influencer dynamics. This research enhances our understanding of virtual influencers’ role and impact in contemporary brand promotion, providing valuable insights for scholars and practitioners.

An IBM Watson Analysis of Twitter Followers and Influencers

Article

Full-text available

Mar 2025

In this paper, the authors examined the structure and relationship between followers and leaders in Twitter followership to find similarities in personality. Specifically, they focused on the relationships between Twitter (now X) influencers and their followers through an extensive analysis of millions of tweets using IBM Watson Personality Insights. The results are founded on the relationships between two major social media influencers and their respective followers. The present research informs marketing practitioners on using IBM Watson to find congruence between social media influencers and followers for the most effective and compelling marketing strategies to sell products.

El influencer desde la perspectiva de las relaciones públicas y su relevancia en el sector ecuestre

Article

Full-text available

Feb 2025

ABSTRACT. Influencers have become key players in today’s public relations landscape because of their ability to genuinely connect with specific audiences. This makes them valuable partners for brands and organizations looking to strengthen their message and public image. Through in-depth interviews, this study explores how different stakeholders in the equestrian industry view the current and future role of influencers. The findings highlight the growing importance of public relations in sports, particularly in equestrianism, where influencers are emerging as a powerful tool to engage audiences and enhance the public perception of various organizations within the industry. RESUMEN. Los influencers se han establecido como figuras cruciales en el panorama actual de las relaciones públicas, dada su capacidad para conectarse genuinamente con audiencias específicas, hecho que permite a las marcas y organizaciones potenciar su mensaje y fortalecer su imagen pública. A través de un extenso análisis cualitativo desarrollado a través de entrevistas semiestructuradas, este estudio pretende aportar una visión desde los diferentes stakeholders del sector sobre la situación actual y potencial de los influencers. Este estudio pone de manifiesto la importancia creciente de las relaciones públicas en el ámbito deportivo, y, particularmente, en la equitación, un sector emergente en el empleo de influencers, pues permiten amplificar y fortalecer la conexión con el público objetivo, y así mejorar la imagen pública de las diferentes entidades que intervienen en el sector.

Looking for gamers where they are: Norwegian broadcasting from television to Twitch

Article

Mar 2025
Convergence

In 2022–2023, the gaming house LL35, live-streamed on Twitch.tv, was the Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation’s (NRK) content strategy to reach one of the most elusive audiences: male gamers between 18–29. This article discusses the case of LL35 in the light of Norwegian media policy, with particular focus on the Norwegian public service mandate. Through an analysis of how the content and scheduling of the live Twitch broadcasts developed over the span of its first year of existence, informed by interviews with the production crew behind LL35, we discuss whether LL35 was able to live up to the public service mandate and how LL35 can be part of preparing NRK for the competition in a world of (inter)networked broadcasting. The article centers on two research questions: How did the content and scheduling of LL35 develop over time, and to what degree could this development enable NRK to fulfill its commitment to offer public service content to its target group? The research shows that despite the will for innovation in NRK, combining the social media logic of Twitch and the media logic of NRK was a challenge. It also underlined the mutual dependency of legacy television and streaming, and how their roles shift. The theoretical foundation for the study is a combination of perspectives from media policy studies with insights from research on esports, game streaming and Twitch, and studies of public service youth content.

Factors Affecting the Inference of Manipulative Intent in Influencer Marketing

Article

Mar 2025
Tech Soc

Sustainability on the plate: how influencers and social norms transform food choices

Article

Mar 2025

Purpose This study attempts to encapsulate how social norms and social media influencers, through their content, environmental concerns and engagement with their followers, encourage sustainable food choices (SFC). Additionally, it examines the role of consumers’ engagement in sustainable consumption (CES) and price sensitivity (PS) in shaping their sustainable food choice behaviour. Design/methodology/approach An online survey of 353 social media users utilizing a self-administered questionnaire was undertaken to validate the proposed research model. Data analysis was performed using the partial least squares structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM) methodology, incorporating measurement model analysis, structural model analysis, prediction-oriented segmentation (POS) analysis and necessary condition analysis (NCA). Findings The findings reveal that influencer-follower engagement, the influencer’s environmental concern and followers’ trust in the influencer’s content favourably impact SFC, while social norms further reinforce this relationship. Moreover, CES was found to mediate the relationship between the role of influencers, influencer engagement, social norms and SFC. Additionally, the role of consumers’ price sensitivity in moderating their sustainable food choice behaviour has been validated. Originality/value The study proposes a comprehensive theoretical framework and a holistic model that integrate influencer marketing, social norms and consumer behaviour in the context of sustainability. It enriches the existing literature by offering a dynamic understanding of how influencers and social norms shape SFC, particularly when sustainability is a global concern. Additionally, it provides noteworthy insights and practical implications for academicians, marketing practitioners, businesses and policymakers.

Boosting travel desire through secure attachment: examining travel influencers’ impact via attachment and social comparison theories

Article

Jan 2025
J Trav Tourism Market

How Social Media Influencers Foster Relationships with Followers: The Roles of Source Credibility and Fairness in Parasocial Relationship and Product Interest

Article

Full-text available

May 2020

Afforded by the unprecedented interactivity of social media, social media personae can build strong relationships with followers. Such relationships, which carry great marketing potential, appeal to corporates and brands. Based on the literature of source credibility and communication justice, this study investigated the determinants of the parasocial relationship between social media influencers and their followers, as well as its effect on followers’ interests in the products advertised by influencers. The results of an online survey (N = 355) showed that, followers’ perceived attractiveness of influencers, similarity to influencers, procedural fairness and interpersonal fairness of their interaction with influencers are positively related to the strength of their parasocial relationship with influencers, which further mediates the effect of the aforementioned factors on followers’ interests in influencer-promoted products. The findings of this study explicated the mechanism through which influencers foster relationships with followers and also provide practitioners with insights on orchestrating strategic influencer campaigns.

More than meets the eye: The functional components underlying influencer marketing

Article

Full-text available

Mar 2020
Bus Horiz

Influencer marketing is the practice of compensating individuals for posting about a product or service on social media. Influencer marketing is on the rise, and many marketers now plan either to start using influencers or to increase their use of them in their media mixes. Despite such growth, relatively little strategic or academic insight exists that is specific to influencers. In this article, we describe the roots of influencer marketing and the many different types of influencers that now exist. We identify influencers’ three functional components: the audience, the endorser, and the social media manager. We then detail for each of these components the different sources of value influencers potentially offer marketers. We draw on relevant academic research to offer advice about how to leverage each component strategically. We close by describing how the interplay of these functional components makes influencers a potentially powerful—and undervalued—marketing tool.

When less is more: the impact of macro and micro social media influencers’ disclosure

Article

Full-text available

Jan 2020

There are growing discussions of social media influencers and their effectiveness in endorsing products. Further, recent policy regulations are requiring social media influencers to disclose sponsored content when using a form of native advertising. This research examined the effect of macro-influencers (high likes) and micro-influencers (low likes) and their disclosure of native advertising sponsorship on consumer evaluations of products. Results from a 2 × 2 experiment first show that consumers exposed to the micro-influencer condition report higher levels of product knowledge, and consumers exposed to the disclosure condition reported the products endorsed by social media influencers to be more attractive. The results also show that when exposed to micro-influencers who disclose, consumers have higher levels of purchase intentions than when exposed to macro-influencers who do not disclose, as well as higher purchase intentions than for posts where sponsorship is not disclosed by influencers. The important findings of this research for theory, practice and policy are discussed.

How Age and Disclosures of Sponsored Influencer Videos Affect Adolescents’ Knowledge of Persuasion and Persuasion

Article

Full-text available

Jul 2020
J YOUTH ADOLESCENCE

This study examines the effects of age (early versus middle adolescence) combined with the content of disclosures for sponsoring in online influencer videos on adolescents’ knowledge of persuasion and on persuasion. An experiment was conducted among a sample of 406 adolescents (167 early adolescents aged 12–14 years, mean age 12.85, SD = 0.14, 53% female; and 239 middle adolescents, aged 15–16 years, mean age 14.36, SD = 0.13, 59% female). The results show that early adolescents need extensive information (disclosure of advertising and of its intent) to activate their knowledge of persuasion regarding sponsored influencer videos, whereas middle adolescents’ knowledge of persuasion is activated by disclosure of advertising alone. This indicates that early adolescents’ knowledge of persuasion is less well developed and that their information processing is more limited than that of middle adolescents. Moreover, only middle adolescents showed more negative brand and influencer attitudes in response to the disclosure. Interestingly, purchase intention remains unaffected by the disclosure for all adolescents. These findings add to the research on adolescence as they show that adolescents’ responses to influencer marketing are a function of their developmental stage in combination with disclosure content. As such, this study has implications for theory on persuasion among adolescents and for regulations aiming to empower adolescents to deal with online sponsored influencer videos.

Disclosing Influencer Marketing on YouTube to Children: The Moderating Role of Para-Social Relationship

Article

Full-text available

Jan 2020

Watching online videos is becoming an important part of children’s media diets. Children particularly like content that is specifically created for YouTube by YouTube personalities. Because these personalities have a large reach and are considered likeable and credible, they have become social media influencers. For advertisers, these influencers are an interesting channel to reach youth. Therefore, influencers often embed persuasive sponsored messages in their videos to earn money. However, there are concerns about this practice because it is not always clear when a video includes advertising. Therefore, in several countries, guidelines have been developed that state that sponsoring in influencer videos should be disclosed as such. Until now, little is known about the effects of disclosures for influencer videos on children and the boundary conditions for such effects. Therefore, we investigated the effects of a disclosure of sponsored influencer videos on children’s advertising literacy. Additionally, we examined the consequences of the disclosure for children’s responses to the brand, advertised product, and video. We also included the para-social relationship (PSR) that children experience with an influencer as a possible boundary condition for disclosure effects on persuasion. Our experiment amongst children between 8 and 12 years old showed that, when children correctly recalled the disclosure, the disclosure increased their recognition of advertising, and understanding of selling and persuasive intent. Moreover, advertising literacy evoked by the disclosure affected persuasion: The disclosure enhanced brand memory through ad recognition, but also decreased advertised product desire through understanding the selling intent of the video. Furthermore, the PSR of children with the influencer proved to be a boundary condition for disclosure effects on brand attitudes. Only for those children who experienced moderate to low PSRs with the influencer, the disclosure resulted in less positive brand attitudes through understanding selling intent. For children who experienced a strong PSR with the influencer, the understanding that the content had a selling intent did not affect their brand attitudes. These findings show that a disclosure (if noticed and remembered) can be an effective tool to achieve transparency, but also influences the persuasive outcomes of influencer marketing in online videos.

What Is Influencer Marketing and How Does It Target Children? A Review and Direction for Future Research

Article

Full-text available

Dec 2019

Children nowadays spend many hours online watching YouTube videos in which their favorite vloggers are playing games, unboxing toys, reviewing products, making jokes or just going about their daily activities. These vloggers regularly post attractive and entertaining content in the hope of building a large follower base. Although many of these vloggers are adults, the number of child vloggers is flourishing. The famous child vlogger Ryan of Ryan’s World, for instance, has more than 19 million viewers and he is (at age seven) a social media influencer. The popularity of these vloggers incited advertisers to include them as a new marketing communication tool, also referred to as influencer marketing, in their marketing strategy. Accordingly, many influential vloggers now receive free products from brands in return for a mention in one of their videos and their other social media (e.g., TikTok or Instagram) and some are even paid to create a sponsored post or video and distribute it to their followers. This sponsored content appears to be highly influential and may affect young children’s brand preferences. Given the limited advertising literacy skills (i.e., knowledge of advertising and skills to critically reflect on this advertising) of children under age 12, they are a vulnerable target group when it comes to persuasion. Therefore, caution is needed when implementing this marketing tactic to target them. However, research on how influencer marketing affects young children (under 12) is scarce and it is unclear how these young children can be empowered to critically cope with this fairly new form of persuasion. This paper therefore aims to shed light on why and how social media influencers have persuasive power over their young followers. The paper starts with providing insights into how and why social media influencers became a new source in advertising. We then discuss the few studies that have been conducted on influencer marketing among young children (under 12), based on a systematic literature review, and take these findings to formulate societal and policy implications and develop a future research agenda.

Fancying the New Rich and Famous? Explicating the Roles of Influencer Content, Credibility, and Parental Mediation in Adolescents’ Parasocial Relationship, Materialism, and Purchase Intentions

Article

Full-text available

Nov 2019

While social media influencers are gleaning increasing trust and investment from brands, advertisers, and followers, insights on the role of influencers in adolescents’ relationship formation and consumption behaviors are still rare. Drawing on the literatures of influencer content value, influencer credibility, parental mediation, and parasocial relationship (PSR), this study proposed a conceptual model that expounds the appeal of influencers among adolescents. To test the model, we administered an online survey – recruited in proportion to demographic quotas (i.e., age, gender and ethnicity) – among 500 United States adolescents (aged 10- to 19-years old) via Qualtrics panel. Results revealed that, the entertainment value of influencer-generated content, influencer expertise, trustworthiness, attractiveness, and followers’ perceived similarity to their favorite influencers, are positively related to the perceived PSR between adolescent followers and their favorite influencers, which in turn, are associated with adolescents’ materialistic views and purchase intentions. We also explored the role of parental mediation of adolescents’ social media use in their PSR with influencers. Results indicate that, neither active mediation nor restrictive mediation is related to the PSR between adolescents and influencers. Active mediation is negatively associated with adolescents’ materialism, whereas restrictive mediation is positively related to adolescents’ purchase intentions toward influencer-promoted products. This study proposed and tested a comprehensive conceptual model that accounts for the role of influencers in adolescent followers’ materialism and purchase intentions. This study yields three major theoretical contributions. First, it adopts and applies the concept of PSR from the literature of media psychology to explicate influencers’ appeal among adolescents, which lays a theoretical foundation for future research on the impact of influencers. Second, it advances the current literature on social media influencers by specifying key contributing factors for the development of adolescents’ PSR with influencers. Lastly, it explores the roles of the two facets of parental mediation – active and restrictive mediation – in the appeal of influencers among adolescents, which offers directions for future research of parental mediation in the influencer context.

Disclosure of Vlog Advertising Targeted to Children

Article

May 2020

Influencers can disclose vlog advertising by implementing a platform-generated disclosure or by generating their own disclosure. This study aims to investigate whether and how these two types of disclosures differentially affect children's responses toward the sponsored content and the influencer. To do so, a two (platform-generated [PG] disclosure: no PG disclosure versus PG disclosure) by three (influencer-generated [IG] disclosure: no IG disclosure versus no commercial interference disclosure versus commercial interference disclosure) between-subjects experimental study was conducted among 190 children (aged ten to twelve). The results show that both types of disclosures increased children's recognition of vlog advertising; however, children's advertising literacy (i.e. their understanding of influencer marketing and skepticism toward the ad) was less activated when the influencer specifically indicated that there was no commercial interference of the brand. In addition, besides being more beneficial for influencers (by not negatively affecting children's evaluations of the influencer), an IG disclosure also showed to be more favorable for brands, as it increased brand effects among children, whereas a PG disclosure decreased these brand effects.

Influencer marketing: Social media influencers as human brands attaching to followers and yielding positive marketing results by fulfilling needs

Article

Jul 2020
J Retailing Consum Serv

While the literature related to this topic has predominantly focused on investigating the influence mechanism that social media influencers (SMIs) impose over their followers, less is known about their attachment mechanism. Given that social media platforms were originally designed to facilitate personal bonding and not product or brand recommendations, we posited that social media followers' emotional attachment to SMIs is an important precedent that affects the followers' behavioral inclination to accept the SMIs' endorsements. We thus drew new attention to the relationship between SMIs and their followers by focusing on their attachment development mechanism and its casual factors and effects. In doing so, Study 1 inductively analyzed the key causal factors, both with respect to SMI persona- and content-driven attributes, that make followers feel attached to SMIs. By integrating the findings of Study 1 with the human brand theory, Study 2 provided empirical evidence after analyzing 325 U.S. consumers' responses about how SMIs' personas (i.e., inspiration, enjoyability, and similarity) and content curation abilities (i.e., informativeness) affected followers to perceive the SMIs as human brands who fulfill their needs for ideality, relatedness, and competence—all of which resulted in an intense attachment to SMIs. It was this positive emotion shaped with SMIs that transferred to SMIs’ endorsements and positively influenced the followers to acquire the products/brands that the SMIs recommended.

Effects of Disclosing Influencer Marketing in Videos: An Eye Tracking Study among Children in Early Adolescence

Article

Jan 2020

This study focused on the effects of sponsorship disclosure timing on children's ability to understand that social influencer videos are sponsored. The study also investigated how sponsorship disclosure timing affects children's attitudes toward the sponsoring brand, the video, and the influencer. An experiment among 272 children in early adolescence (10–13 years of age) was conducted using eye tracking. Results show that a disclosure shown prior to the start of the videos leads to more visual attention than a disclosure shown concurrently with the start of videos. Consequently, disclosure prior to the start of videos is better processed, as indicated by disclosure memory, which then leads to a better understanding that the content is sponsored. This understanding evokes a more critical attitude toward the sponsored content in the video, and results in less positive attitudes toward the brands, the videos, and the influencers. Theoretically, this study provides insights into the mechanisms that explain disclosure timing effects among children in early adolescence. Practically, this study offers recommendations to policy makers to develop sponsorship disclosures that can increase transparency of online embedded advertising to minors.

Social Media Influencers and Followers: Theorization of a Trans-Parasocial Relation and Explication of Its Implications for Influencer Advertising View supplementary material

Abstract and Figures

Recommended publications

The role of trustworthiness in social media influencer advertising: Investigating users’ appreciatio...

Increasing Trust in Influencer Marketing: The Effects of Sponsorship Disclosure and Endorser Type

Blind trust? The importance and interplay of parasocial relationships and advertising disclosures in...

Blind trust? The importance and interplay of parasocial relationships and advertising disclosures in...