Impact of influencer’s authenticity and credibility on purchase intention: case of virtual vs. human influencer
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3846/mla.2026.25048Abstract
This study investigates the influence of influencers’ authenticity and credibility on purchase intention, with a focus on the differences between virtual influencers and human influencers. Using a 2×2 factorial design experiment, the research explores the mediating role of influencer authenticity in the relationship between influencer credibility dimensions (trustworthiness, expertise, and attractiveness), message credibility and consumers’ purchase intentions under the framework of the Information Adoption Model. It further examines the moderating role of the interaction of influencer types (virtual vs. human influencer) and message frame valence (positive vs. negative). The findings reveal that influencers’ perceived trustworthiness and attractiveness are positively associated with the authenticity and purchase intention, whereas expertise does not have a significant impact. Influencer authenticity consistently predicts purchase intention for both virtual and human influencers, regardless of message valence. In contrast, message credibility does not have an impact on purchase intention for virtual influencers delivering negative-framed messages, but it remains a significant antecedent in the other three conditions.
Article in English.
Nuomonės formuotojo autentiškumo ir patikimumo įtaka pirkimo ketinimams: virtualiųjų ir žmogiškųjų nuomonės formuotojų atvejis
Santrauka
Šiame tyrime nagrinėjama nuomonės formuotojų autentiškumo ir patikimumo įtaka vartotojų pirkimo ketinimams, daugiausia dėmesio skiriant virtualiųjų ir žmogiškųjų nuomonės formuotojų skirtumams. Taikant 2×2 faktorinio dizaino eksperimentą, tiriamas nuomonės formuotojų autentiškumo tarpininkaujantis vaidmuo ryšyje tarp nuomonės formuotojų patikimumo dimensijų (patikimumo, kompetencijos ir patrauklumo), žinutės patikimumo ir vartotojų pirkimo ketinimų, remiantis informacijos įsisavinimo modeliu. Toliau nagrinėjamas nuomonės formuotojų tipų (virtualusis ir žmogiškasis) ir žinutės rėmelio valentingumo (teigiamas ir neigiamas) sąveikos moderuojantis vaidmuo. Tyrimo rezultatai rodo, kad nuomonės formuotojų suvokiamas patikimumas ir patrauklumas yra teigiamai susiję su autentiškumu ir pirkimo ketinimais, o kompetencija reikšmingo poveikio neturi. Nuomonės formuotojų autentiškumas nuosekliai prognozuoja pirkimo ketinimus tiek virtualiųjų, tiek žmogiškųjų nuomonės formuotojų atveju, nepriklausomai nuo žinutės valentingumo. Priešingai, žinutės patikimumas neturi įtakos pirkimo ketinimams, kai virtualieji nuomonės formuotojai pateikia neigiamai suformuluotas žinutes, tačiau kitomis trijomis sąlygomis jis išlieka reikšmingu veiksniu.
Reikšminiai žodžiai: virtualusis nuomonės formuotojas, patikimumas, autentiškumas, žinutės rėmelio valentingumas, pirkimo ketinimai, faktorinis eksperimento dizainas.
Keywords:
virtual influencer, credibility, authenticity, message frame valence, purchase intention, factorial design of experimentHow to Cite
Share
License
Copyright (c) 2026 The Author(s). Published by Vilnius Gediminas Technical University.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
Akhtar, N., Hameed, Z., Islam, T., Pant, M. K., Sharma, A., Rather, R. A., & Kuzior, A. (2024). Avatars of influence: Understanding how virtual influencers trigger consumer engagement on online booking platforms. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 78, Article 103742. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2024.103742
Aldlimi, T., Priporas, C. V., & Chang, S. W. (2025). Engagement in influencer marketing: A systematic review of key drivers, behaviors, and future research directions. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 24(3), 1541–1566. https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.2485
Arsenyan, J., & Mirowska, A. (2021). Almost human? A comparative case study on the social media presence of virtual influencers. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 155, Article 102694. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2021.102694
Audrezet, A., De Kerviler, G., & Moulard, J. G. (2020). Authenticity under threat: When social media influencers need to go beyond self-presentation. Journal of Business Research, 117, 557–569. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.07.008
Bakpayev, M., Baek, T. H., Van Esch, P., & Yoon, S. (2022). Programmatic creative: AI can think but it cannot feel. Australasian Marketing Journal, 30(1), 90–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ausmj.2020.04.002
Balaban, D. C., & Szambolics, J. (2022). A proposed model of self-perceived authenticity of social media influencers. Media and Communication, 10(1), 235–246. https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v10i1.4765
Belanche, D., Casaló, L. V., & Flavián, M. (2024). Human versus virtual influences, a comparative study. Journal of Business Research, 173, Article 114493. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.114493
Cabeza-Ramírez, L. J., Sánchez-Cañizares, S. M., Santos-Rol¬dán, L. M., & Fuentes-García, F. J. (2022). Impact of the perceived risk in influencers’ product recommendations on their followers’ purchase attitudes and intention. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 184, Article 121997. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121997
Chaihanchanchai, P., Anantachart, S., & Ruangthanakorn, N. (2024). Unlocking the persuasive power of virtual influencer on brand trust and purchase intention: a parallel mediation of source credibility. Journal of Marketing Communications, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2023.2301390
Choudhry, A., Han, J., Xu, X., & Huang, Y. (2022). “I felt a little crazy following a ‘doll’”: Investigating real influence of virtual influencers on their followers. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 6(GROUP), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1145/3492862
Cornelius, S., Leidner, D., & Bina, S. (2023). Significance of visual realism – eeriness, credibility, and persuasiveness of virtual influencers. In Proceedings of the 56th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 3421–3429). https://doi.org/10.24251/HICSS.2023.421
da Silva Oliveira, A. B., & Chimenti, P. (2021). “Humanized robots”: A proposition of categories to understand virtual influencers. Australasian Journal of Information Systems, 25, 1–27. https://doi.org/10.3127/ajis.v25i0.3223
De Cicco, R., Iacobucci, S., Cannito, L., Onesti, G., Ceccato, I., & Palumbo, R. (2024). Virtual vs. human influencer: Effects on users’ perceptions and brand outcomes. Technology in Society, 77, Article 102488. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2024.102488
Deng, F., Tuo, M., Chen, S., & Zhang, Z. (2024). Born for marketing? The effects of virtual versus human influencers on brand endorsement effectiveness: The role of advertising recognition. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 80, Article 103904. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2024.103904
Edwards, A., Elwyn, G., Covey, J., Matthews, E., & Pill, R. (2001). Presenting risk information: A review of the effects of framing and other manipulations on patient outcomes. Journal of Health Communication: International Perspective, 6(1), 61–82. https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730150501413
Florence, E. S., Fleischman, D., Mulcahy, R., & Wynder, M. (2022). Message framing effects on sustainable consumer behaviour: A systematic review and future research directions for social marketing. Journal of Social Marketing, 12(4), 623–652. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSOCM-09-2021-0221
Foroughi, B., Iranmanesh, M., Nilashi, M., Ghobakhloo, M., Asadi, S., & Khoshkam, M. (2024). Determinants of followers’ purchase intentions toward brands endorsed by social media influencers: Findings from PLS and fsQCA. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 23(2), 888–914. https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.2252
Fortune Business Insights. (2025). Influencer marketing platform market. https://www.fortunebusinessinsights.com/influencer-marketing-platform-market-108880
Gerlich, M. (2023). The power of virtual influencers: Impact on consumer behaviour and attitudes in the age of AI. Administrative Sciences, 13(8), Article 178. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci13080178
Gerlich, M. (2025). The shifting influence: Comparing AI tools and human influencers in consumer decision-making. AI, 6(1), Article 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/ai6010011
Glikson, E., & Woolley, A. W. (2020). Human trust in artificial intelligence: Review of empirical research. Academy of Management Annals, 14(2), 627–660. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2018.0057
Gökerik, M. (2024). The enchantment of social media influencers: Analysing consumer attitudes through the lens of the information adoption model. OPUS Journal of Society Research, 21(3), 125–139. https://doi.org/10.26466/opusjsr.1454145
Gold, A. H., Malhotra, A., & Segars, A. H. (2001). Knowledge management: An organizational capabilities perspective. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(1), 185–214. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2001.11045669
Grand View Research. (2025). Virtual influencer market (2025–2030). https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/virtual-influencer-market-report
Gupta, P., Burton, J. L., & Costa Barros, L. (2023). Gender of the online influencer and follower: The differential persuasive impact of homophily, attractiveness and product-match. Internet Research, 33(2), 720–740. https://doi.org/10.1108/INTR-04-2021-0229
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Cengage Learning.
Ye, G., Hudders, L., De Jans, S., & De Veirman, M. (2021). The value of influencer marketing for business: A bibliometric analysis and managerial implications. Journal of Advertising, 50(2), 160–178. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2020.1857888
Yuan, S., & Lou, C. (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), 133–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/15252019.2020.1769514
Jamil, R. A., & Qayyum, A. (2022). Word of mouse vs word of influencer? An experimental investigation into the consumers’ preferred source of online information. Management Research Review, 45(2), 173–197. https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-03-2021-0184
Kapitan, S., van Esch, P., Soma, V., & Kietzmann, J. (2022). Influencer marketing and authenticity in content creation. Australasian Marketing Journal, 30(4), 342–351. https://doi.org/10.1177/18393349211011171
Kim, D. Y., & Kim, H. Y. (2021). Trust me, trust me not: A nuanced view of influencer marketing on social media. Journal of Business Research, 134, 223–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.05.024
Kim, D., & Wang, Z. (2024). Social media influencer vs. virtual influencer: The mediating role of source credibility and authenticity in advertising effectiveness within AI influencer marketing. Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans, 2(2), Article 100100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbah.2024.100100
Kim, E., Kim, D., E, Z., & Shoenberger, H. (2023). The next hype in social media advertising: Examining virtual influencers’ brand endorsement effectiveness. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, Article 1089051. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1089051
Kim, H., & Park, M. (2023). Virtual influencers’ attractiveness effect on purchase intention: A moderated mediation model of the Product-Endorser fit with the brand. Computers in Human Behavior, 143, Article 107703. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2023.107703
Koles, B., Audrezet, A., Moulard, J. G., Ameen, N., & McKenna, B. (2024). The authentic virtual influencer: Authenticity manifestations in the metaverse. Journal of Business Research, 170, Article 114325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.114325
Kong, H., & Fang, H. (2024). Research on the effectiveness of virtual endorsers: A study based on the match-up hypothesis and source credibility model. Sustainability, 16(5), Article 1761. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16051761
Kuo, Y. H., & Le, S. B. H. (2025). Authenticity meets aesthetics: Physical attractiveness as the Equalizer for virtual and human influencers. Asia Pacific Management Review, 30(2), Article 100359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmrv.2025.100359
Lee, H., Shin, M., Yang, J., & Chock, T. M. (2025). Virtual influencers vs. human influencers in the context of influencer marketing: The moderating role of machine heuristic on perceived authenticity of influencers. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 41(10), 6029–6046. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2024.2374100
Lee, J. A., & Eastin, M. S. (2021). Perceived authenticity of social media influencers: Scale development and validation. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, 15(4), 822–841. https://doi.org/10.1108/JRIM-12-2020-0253
Lee, J. A., Sudarshan, S., Sussman, K. L., Bright, L. F., & Eastin, M. S. (2022). Why are consumers following social media influencers on Instagram? Exploration of consumers’ motives for following influencers and the role of materialism. International Journal of Advertising, 41(1), 78–100. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650487.2021.1964226
Li, H., Lei, Y., Zhou, Q., & Yuan, H. (2023). Can you sense without being human? Comparing virtual and human influencers endorsement effectiveness. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 75, Article 103456. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2023.103456
Li, Y., & Peng, Y. (2021). Influencer marketing: Purchase intention and its antecedents. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 39(7), 960–978. https://doi.org/10.1108/MIP-04-2021-0104
Liao, W., Oh, Y. J., Feng, B., & Zhang, J. (2023). Understanding the influence discrepancy between human and artificial agent in advice interactions: The role of stereotypical perception of agency. Communication Research, 50(5), 633–664. https://doi.org/10.1177/00936502221138427
Lindmoser, C., Weitzl, W. J., & Zniva, R. (2022, June). Influencer authenticity–conceptualization, nature and nomological role. In Digital Marketing & eCommerce Conference (pp. 140–148). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-05728-1_17
Liu, F., & Lee, Y. H. (2024). Virtually authentic: Examining the match-up hypothesis between human vs virtual influencers and product types. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 33(2), 287–299. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBM-03-2023-4418
Lou, C., Kiew, S. T. J., Chen, T., Lee, T. Y. M., Ong, J. E. C., & Phua, Z. (2023). Authentically fake? How consumers respond to the influence of virtual influencers. Journal of Advertising, 52(4), 540–557. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2022.2149641
Mordor Intelligence. (2025). Influencer marketing market size and share. https://www.mordorintelligence.com/industry-reports/influencer-marketing-market
Moulard, J. G., Garrity, C. P., & Rice, D. H. (2015). What makes a human brand authentic? Identifying the antecedents of celebrity authenticity. Psychology & Marketing, 32(2), 173–186. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20771
Newman, G. E., & Dhar, R. (2014). Authenticity is contagious: Brand essence and the original source of production. Journal of Marketing Research, 51(3), 371–386. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmr.11.0022
Nissen, A., Conrad, C., Seeber, I., & Newman, A. J. (2025). Why do we follow virtual influencer recommendations? Three theoretical explanations from brain data tested with self-reports. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 26(4), 1042–1080. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00930
Ohanian, R. (1990). Construction and validation of a scale to measure celebrity endorsers’ perceived expertise, trustworthiness, and attractiveness. Journal of Advertising, 19(3), 39–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.1990.10673191
O’Keefe, D. J., & Jensen, J. D. (2008). Do loss-framed persuasive messages engender greater message processing than do gain-framed messages? A meta-analytic review. Communication Studies, 59(1), 51–67. https://doi.org/10.1080/10510970701849388
Peetz, T. B. (2012). Celebrity athlete endorser effectiveness: Construction and validation of a scale [Doctoral dissertation, University of NV]. https://doi.org/10.34917/4332590
Pujadas-Gómez, A., Jiménez-Morales, M., & Montaña-Blasco, M. (2025). Mapping the rise of virtual influencers: A bibliometric analysis. Telecommunications Policy, 49(10), Article 103071. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2025.103071
Pushparaj, P., & Kushwaha, B. P. (2023). Communicate your audience through virtual influencer: A systematic literature review. Journal of Content, Community and Communication, 17(9), 31–45. https://doi.org/10.31620/JCCC.06.23/04
Pöyry, E., Pelkonen, M., Naumanen, E., & Laaksonen, S. M. (2021). A call for authenticity: Audience responses to social media influencer endorsements in strategic communication. In Social media influencers in strategic communication (pp. 103–118). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003181286-6
Roldan-Gallego, J. S., Sánchez-Torres, J. A., Argila-Irurita, A., & Arroyo-Cañada, F. J. (2023). Are social media influencers effective? An analysis of information adoption by followers. International Journal of Technology Marketing, 17(2), 188–211. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTMKT.2023.130026
Roth-Cohen, O., Segev, S., & Liu, Y. (2025). The effect of non-celebrity influencers’ perceived authenticity on social media advertising outcomes. International Journal of Advertising, 44(6), 1017–1039. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650487.2024.2440251
Sardar, S., Tata, S. V., & Sarkar, S. (2024). Examining the influence of source factors and content characteristics of influencers’ post on consumer engagement and purchase intention: A moderated analysis. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 79, Article 103888. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2024.103888
Shamim, K., & Islam, T. (2022). Digital influencer marketing: How message credibility and media credibility affect trust and impulsive buying. Journal of Global Scholars of Marketing Science, 32(4), 601–626. https://doi.org/10.1080/21639159.2022.2052342
Shao, Z. (2024). From human to virtual: Unmasking consumer switching intentions to virtual influencers by an integrated fsQCA and NCA method. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 78, Article 103715. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2024.103715
Slater, M. D., Karan, D. N., Rouner, D., & Walters, D. (2002). Effects of threatening visuals and announcer differences on responses to televised alcohol warnings. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 30, 27–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/00909880216575
Song, B. L., Liew, C. Y., Sia, J. Y., & Gopal, K. (2021). Electronic word-of-mouth in travel social networking sites and young consumers’ purchase intentions: An extended information adoption model. Young Consumers, 22(4), 521–538. https://doi.org/10.1108/YC-03-2021-1288
Stein, J. P., Linda Breves, P., & Anders, N. (2024). Parasocial interactions with real and virtual influencers: The role of perceived similarity and human-likeness. New Media & Society, 26(6), 3433–3453. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448221102900
Sussman, S. W., & Siegal, W. S. (2003). Informational influence in organizations: An integrated approach to knowledge adoption. Information Systems Research, 14(1), 47–65. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.14.1.47.14767
Taber, K. S. (2018). The use of Cronbach’s alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education. Research in Science Education, 48(6), 1273–1296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2
The Influencer Marketing Factory. (2024). The state of virtual influencers in 2024. https://theinfluencermarketingfactory.com/virtual-influencers-2024/
Thota, S. C., Pandey, S., & Thota, A. (2025). Micro-influencer marketing: The impact of teen viewers’ skepticism on brand attitudes and purchase intentions. Journal of Global Marketing, 38(3), 269–285. https://doi.org/10.1080/08911762.2024.2444492
Trafton, J. G., McCurry, J. M., Zish, K., & Frazier, C. R. (2024). The perception of agency. ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction, 13(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1145/3640011
Um, N. (2023). Predictors affecting effects of virtual influencer advertising among college students. Sustainability, 15(8), Article 6388. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15086388
Vanneste, B. S., & Puranam, P. (2024). Artificial intelligence, trust, and perceptions of agency. Academy of Management Review, 50(4). https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2022.0041
Venciute, D., Mackeviciene, I., Kuslys, M., & Correia, R. F. (2023). The role of influencer–follower congruence in the relationship between influencer marketing and purchase behaviour. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 75, Article 103506. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2023.103506
Vrontis, D., Makrides, A., Christofi, M., & Thrassou, A. (2021). Social media influencer marketing: A systematic review, integrative framework and future research agenda. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 45(4), 617–644. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12647
Wang, E. S. T., & Weng, Y. J. (2024). Influence of social media influencer authenticity on their followers’ perceptions of credibility and their positive word-of-mouth. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 36(2), 356–373. https://doi.org/10.1108/APJML-02-2023-0115
Wang, S. W., & Scheinbaum, A. C. (2018). Enhancing brand credibility via celebrity endorsement: Trustworthiness trumps attractiveness and expertise. Journal of Advertising Research, 58(1), 16–32. https://doi.org/10.2501/JAR-2017-042
Wansink, B., & Pope, L. (2015). When do gain-framed health messages work better than fear appeals? Nutrition Reviews, 73(1), 4–11. https://doi.org/10.1093/nutrit/nuu010
Wellman, M. L. (2024). “A friend who knows what they’re talking about“: Extending source credibility theory to analyze the wellness influencer industry on Instagram. New Media & Society, 26(12), 7020–7036. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448231162064
Xu, Q. (2014). Should I trust him? The effects of reviewer profile characteristics on eWOM credibility. Computers in Human Behavior, 33, 136–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.01.027
Zhou, X., Yan, X., & Jiang, Y. (2024). Making sense? The sensory-specific nature of virtual influencer effectiveness. Journal of Marketing, 88(4), 84–106. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222429231203699
Zhu, Y., Wang, T., Wang, C., Quan, W., & Tang, M. (2023). Complexity-driven trust dynamics in human–robot interactions: Insights from AI-enhanced collaborative engagements. Applied Sciences, 13(24), Article 12989. https://doi.org/10.3390/app132412989
Zniva, R., Weitzl, W. J., & Lindmoser, C. (2023). Be constantly different! How to manage influencer authenticity. Electronic Commerce Research, 23(3), 1485–1514. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10660-022-09653-6
View article in other formats
CrossMark check
Published
Issue
Section
Copyright
Copyright (c) 2026 The Author(s). Published by Vilnius Gediminas Technical University.
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.