Instagram users’ para-social interactions with virtual influencers: The mediating role of human-likeness, perceived similarity, and wishful identification
List of Authors
  • Dian Jin , Wan Anita Wan Abas

Keyword
  • virtual influencer, para-social interaction, media psychology, Instagram, social media

Abstract
  • With technological developments, virtual influencers have been created and are experienced by social media users and practitioners. As it is a relatively new topic, existing research on users’ para-social responses toward virtual influencers is currently insufficient. Therefore, this study conducted an online experiment (N = 211), comparing Instagram users’ para-social interactions with virtual or human influencers. After participants were exposed to images of human and virtual influencers, they were asked to complete the questionnaires. The results showed a significant difference between the users’ para-social responses to the two groups. Additionally, four relevant mediator variables were examined. “Mental human-likeness” and “wishful identification” were found to have significant negative mediating effect on the relationship between influencer type and users’ para-social interactions. The results have important implications for media psychology and contribute to studies on virtual influencers.

Reference
  • 1. 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, 102694. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2021.102694

    2. Baklanov, N. (2021). The Top Virtual Instagram Influencers in 2021. https://hypeauditor.com/blog/the-top-instagram-virtual-influencers-in-2021/

    3. Bartneck, C., Kulić, D., Croft, E., & Zoghbi, S. (2009). Measurement instruments for the anthropomorphism, animacy, likeability, perceived intelligence, and perceived safety of robots. International Journal of Social Robotics, 1(1), 71-81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-008-0001-3

    4. Bond, B. J. (2016). Following your “friend”: Social media and the strength of adolescents’ parasocial relationships with media personae. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 19(11), 656-660. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2016.0355

    5. Breves, P., Liebers, N., Motschenbacher, B., & Reus, L. (2021). Reducing resistance: The impact of nonfollowers’ and followers’ parasocial relationships with social media influencers on persuasive resistance and advertising effectiveness. Human Communication Research, 47(4), 418-443. https://doi.org/10.1093/hcr/hqab006

    6. Broadbent, E., Kumar, V., Li, X., Sollers, J., Stafford, R. Q., MacDonald, B. A., & Wegner, D. M. (2013). Robots with display screens: A robot with a more humanlike face display is perceived to have more mind and a better personality. PLoS ONE, 8(8), e72589. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0072589

    7. Callison-Burch, C. (2009). Fast, cheap, and creative: Evaluating translation quality using Amazon’s Mechanical Turk. In Proceedings of the 2009 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing (pp. 286-295)

    8. Choi, S. M., & Rifon, N. J. (2012). It is a match: The impact of congruence between celebrity image and consumer ideal self on endorsement effectiveness. Psychology & Marketing, 29(9), 639-650. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20550

    9. Dibble, J. L., Hartmann, T., & Rosaen, S. F. (2016). Parasocial interaction and parasocial relationship: Conceptual clarification and a critical assessment of measures. Human Communication Research, 42(1), 21-44. https://doi.org/10.1111/hcre.12063

    10. Edwards, C., Edwards, A., Stoll, B., Lin, X., & Massey, N. (2019). Evaluations of an artificial intelligence instructor’s voice: Social identity theory in human-robot interactions. Computers in Human Behavior, 90, 357-362.

    11. Feilitzen, C. V., & Linné, O. (1975). Identifying with television characters. Journal of Communication, 25(4), 51-55. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1975.tb00638.x

    12. Ferrari, F., Paladino, M. P., & Jetten, J. (2016). Blurring human-machine distinctions: Anthropomorphic appearance in social robots as a threat to human distinctiveness. International Journal of Social Robotics, 8(2), 287-302. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-016-0338-y

    13. Fox, J., Ahn, S. J. G., Janssen, J. H., Yeykelis, L., Segovia, K. Y., & Bailenson, J. N. (2015). Avatars versus agents: A meta-analysis quantifying the effect of agency on social influence. Human-Computer Interaction, 30(5), 401-432. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370024.2014.921494

    14. Gierl, H., & Praxmarer, S. (2001). Die wahrgenommene Dynamik des Kommunikators und Einstellungen der Rezipienten. Marketing ZFP, 23(4), 236-252.

    15. Giles, D. C. (2002). Parasocial interaction: A review of the literature and a model for future research. Media Psychology, 4(3), 279-305. https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532785XMEP0403_04

    16. Haslam, N., Kashima, Y., Loughnan, S., Shi, J., & Suitner, C. (2008). Subhuman, inhuman, and superhuman: Contrasting humans with nonhumans in three cultures. Social Cognition, 26(2), 248-258. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2008.26.2.248

    17. Ho, C. C., & MacDorman, K. F. (2017). Measuring the uncanny valley effect: Refinements to indices for perceived humanness, attractiveness, and eeriness. International Journal of Social Robotics, 9(1), 129-139. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-016-0380-9

    18. Hoffner, C. (1996). Children’s wishful identification and parasocial interaction with favorite television characters. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 40(3), 389-402. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838159609364360

    19. Hoffner, C., & Buchanan, M. (2005). Young adults’ wishful identification with television characters: The role of perceived similarity and character attributes. Media Psychology, 7(4), 325-351. https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532785XMEP0704_2

    20. Horton, D., & Richard Wohl, R. (1956). Mass communication and para-social interaction: Observations on intimacy at a distance. Psychiatry, 19(3), 215-229.

    21. HypeAuditor. (2022). State of Influencer Marketing 2022. https://hypeauditor.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/US-State-of-Influencer-Marketing-2022.pdf

    22. Khamis, S., Ang, L., & Welling, R. (2017). Self-branding,‘micro-celebrity’ and the rise of social media influencers. Celebrity studies, 8(2), 191-208.

    23. Kim, J., & Song, H. (2016). Celebrity’s self-disclosure on Twitter and parasocial relationships: A mediating role of social presence. Computers in Human Behavior, 62, 570-577. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.083

    24. Kowert, R., & Daniel, E. (2021). The one-and-a-half sided parasocial relationship: The curious case of live streaming. Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 4, 100150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2021.100150

    25. Labrecque, L. I. (2014). Fostering consumer-brand relationships in social media environments: The role of parasocial interaction. Journal of interactive marketing, 28(2), 134-148.

    26. Lim, J. S., Choe, M. J., Zhang, J., & Noh, G. Y. (2020). The role of wishful identification, emotional engagement, and parasocial relationships in repeated viewing of live-streaming games: A social cognitive theory perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 108, 106327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106327

    27. Lou, C. (2022). Social media influencers and followers: Theorization of a trans-parasocial relation and explication of its implications for influencer advertising. Journal of Advertising, 51(1), 4-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2021.1880345

    28. Luo, M., Hsu, T. W., Park, J. S., & Hancock, J. T. (2020). Emotional amplification during live-streaming: Evidence from comments during and after news events. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 4(CSCW1), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1145/3392853

    29. Mediakix. (2017). Instagram influencer marketing is a 1 billion dollar industry. http://mediakix.com/2017/03/instagram-influencer-marketing-industry-size-how-big/#gs.QAEVJdQ

    30. Mori, M., MacDorman, K. F., & Kageki, N. (2012). The uncanny valley [from the field]. IEEE Robotics & automation magazine, 19(2), 98-100.

    31. Moustakas, E., Lamba, N., Mahmoud, D., & Ranganathan, C. (2020). Blurring lines between fiction and reality: Perspectives of experts on marketing effectiveness of virtual influencers. In 2020 International Conference on Cyber Security and Protection of Digital Services (Cyber Security) (pp. 1-6)

    32. Nass, C., & Moon, Y. (2000). Machines and mindlessness: Social responses to computers. Journal of social issues, 56(1), 81-103.

    33. Paolacci, G., Chandler, J., & Ipeirotis, P. G. (2010). Running experiments on Amazon Mechanical Turk. Judgment and Decision making, 5(5), 411-419.

    34. Park, G., Nan, D., Park, E., Kim, K. J., Han, J., & Del Pobil, A. P. (2021). Computers as social actors? Examining how users perceive and interact with virtual influencers on social media. In Proceedings of the 2021 15th International Conference on Ubiquitous Information Management and Communication (IMCOM) (pp. 1-6)

    35. Robinson, B. (2020). Towards an ontology and ethics of virtual influencers. Australasian Journal of Information Systems, 24, 2807. https://doi.org/10.3127/AJIS.V24I0.2807

    36. Schouten, A. P., Janssen, L., & Verspaget, M. (2020). Celebrity vs. influencer endorsements in advertising: the role of identification, credibility, and product-endorser fit. International Journal of Advertising, 39(2), 258-281. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650487.2019.1634898

    37. Schramm, H., & Hartmann, T. (2008). The PSI-process scales. A new measure to assess the intensity and breadth of parasocial processes. Communications, 33(4), 385-401. https://doi.org/10.1515/comm.2008.025

    38. Shechtman, N., & Horowitz, L. M. (2003). Media inequality in conversation: How people behave differently when interacting with computers and people. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 2881-288)

    39. Sheldon, Z., Romanowski, M., & Shafer, D. M. (2021). Parasocial interactions and digital characters: The changing landscape of cinema and viewer/character relationships. Atlantic Journal of Communication, 29(1), 15-25. https://doi.org/10.1080/15456870.2019.1702550

    40. Shin, J., & Lee, S. (2020). Intimacy between actual users and virtual agents: Interaction through “likes” and “comments”. In Proceedings of the 2020 14th International Conference on Ubiquitous Information Management and Communication (IMCOM) (pp. 1-4)

    41. Stein, J.-P., Linda Breves, P., & Anders, N. (2022). Parasocial interactions with real and virtual influencers: The role of perceived similarity and human-likeness. New Media & Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448221102900

    42. Stein, J. P., Appel, M., Jost, A., & Ohler, P. (2020). Matter over mind? How the acceptance of digital entities depends on their appearance, mental prowess, and the interaction between both. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 142, 102463. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2020.102463

    43. Stein, J. P., & Ohler, P. (2017). Venturing into the uncanny valley of mind—The influence of mind attribution on the acceptance of human-like characters in a virtual reality setting. Cognition, 160, 43-50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2016.12.010

    44. Terttunen, A. (2017). The influence of Instagram on consumers’ travel planning and destination choice.

    45. Tian, Q., & Hoffner, C. A. (2010). Parasocial interaction with liked, neutral, and disliked characters on a popular TV series. Mass Communication and Society, 13(3), 250-269. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205430903296051

    46. Tukachinsky, R., & Stever, G. (2019). Theorizing development of parasocial engagement. Communication Theory, 29(3), 209-230. https://doi.org/10.1093/ct/qty032

    47. Turner, J. R. (1993). Interpersonal and psychological predictors of parasocial interaction with different television performers. Communication Quarterly, 41(4), 443-453. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463379309369904

    48. Van Looy, J., Courtois, C., De Vocht, M., & De Marez, L. (2012). Player identification in online games: Validation of a scale for measuring identification in MMOGs. Media Psychology, 15(2), 197-221. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2012.674917

    49. Waytz, A., Gray, K., Epley, N., & Wegner, D. M. (2010). Causes and consequences of mind perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 14(8), 383-388. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2010.05.006

    50. Wulf, T., Schneider, F. M., & Queck, J. (2021). Exploring viewers’ experiences of parasocial interactions with videogame streamers on Twitch. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 24(10), 648-653. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2020.0546

    51. Xu, Z., Islam, T., Liang, X., Akhtar, N., & Shahzad, M. (2021). ‘I’m like you, and I like what you like’ sustainable food purchase influenced by vloggers: A moderated serial-mediation model. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 63, 102737. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102737

    52. Yam, K. C., Bigman, Y. E., Tang, P. M., Ilies, R., Cremer, D. D., Soh, H., & Gray, K. (2021). Robots at work: People prefer—and forgive—service robots with perceived feelings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 106(10), 1557-1572. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000834

    53. Yin, J., Wang, S., Guo, W., & Shao, M. (2021). More than appearance: The uncanny valley effect changes with a robot’s mental capacity. Current Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-02298-y