The rise of virtual influencers is reshaping the landscape of social media, extending even to the promotion of social causes. Yet, lingering doubts persist regarding the authenticity of their motives. This research delves into the impact of both the racial identities of virtual influencers and those of their creators when linked to the support of racial movements. In terms of source credibility, results find that a creator’s racial background, but not that of a virtual influencer, plays a substantial role, and an interaction effect between these factors was identified. The results also show that individuals’ assessments of a virtual influencer and their message are influenced by the perceived social agency. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of these findings.
CasalóLVFlaviánCIbáñez-SánchezS (2017) Antecedents of consumer intention to follow and recommend an Instagram account. Online Information Review41(7): 1046–1063.
4.
ChoudhryAHanJXuX, et al. (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 Interaction6: 1–28.
CropanzanoRGoldmanBFolgerR (2005) Self-interest: defining and understanding a human motive. Journal of Organizational Behavior26(8): 985–991.
8.
CzoppAMMonteithMJMarkAY (2006) Standing up for a change: reducing bias through interpersonal confrontation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology90(5): 784–803.
9.
DrentenJBrooksG (2020) Celebrity 2.0: Lil Miquela and the rise of a virtual star system. Feminist Media Studies20(8): 1319–1323.
10.
EarlJMaherTVPanJ (2022) The digital repression of social movements, protest, and activism: a synthetic review. Science Advances8(10): eabl8198.
11.
FastNJSchroederJ (2020) Power and decision making: new directions for research in the age of artificial intelligence. Current Opinion in Psychology33: 172–176.
12.
FoxJAhnSJJanssenJH, et al. (2015) Avatars versus agents: a meta-analysis quantifying the effect of agency on social influence. Human–Computer Interaction30(5): 401–432.
13.
GamberiniLChittaroLSpagnolliA, et al. (2015) Psychological response to an emergency in virtual reality: effects of victim ethnicity and emergency type on helping behavior and navigation. Computers in Human Behavior48: 104–113.
14.
GambinoAFoxJRatanRA (2020) Building a stronger CASA: extending the computers are social actors paradigm. Human-Machine Communication1: 71–85.
15.
GoffmanE (1959) The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
16.
HatfieldHRAhnSJKleinM, et al. (2022) Confronting whiteness through virtual humans: a review of 20 years of research in prejudice and racial bias using virtual environments. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication27(6): zmac016.
17.
HayesA (2018) Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach. 2nd ed.New York: Guilford Press.
HongJW (2024) Machines As Social Entities (MASE) scale: validation of a new scale measuring beliefs in the sociality of intelligent machine agents. Social Science Computer Review42: 65–83.
20.
HongJWWilliamsD (2019) Racism, responsibility and autonomy in HCI: testing perceptions of an AI agent. Computers in Human Behavior100: 79–84.
JablonskiNG (2021) Skin color and race. American Journal of Physical Anthropology175(2): 437–447.
23.
KiddDMcIntoshK (2016) Social media and social movements. Sociology Compass10(9): 785–794.
24.
KimEAKimDShoenbergerH (2023) The next hype in social media advertising: examining virtual influencers’ brand endorsement effectiveness. Frontiers in Psychology14: 1089051.
25.
LeaverTHighfieldTAbidinC (2020) Instagram: Visual Social Media Cultures. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
26.
LeeJASudarshanSSussmanKL, et al. (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 Advertising41(1): 78–100.
27.
LimRELeeSY (2023) “You are a virtual influencer!”: understanding the impact of origin disclosure and emotional narratives on parasocial relationships and virtual influencer credibility. Computers in Human Behavior148: 107897.
28.
LouCKiewSTJChenT, et al. (2023) Authentically fake? How consumers respond to the influence of virtual influencers. Journal of Advertising52: 540–557.
29.
MareeT (2017) The social media use integration scale: toward reliability and validity. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction33(12): 963–972.
30.
McLuhanM (1994) Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
31.
MeyerJWJeppersonRL (2002) The “actors” of modern society: the cultural construction of social agency. Sociological Theory18(1): 100–120.
32.
MillerDT (1999) The norm of self-interest. American Psychologist54(12): 1053–1060.
33.
MillerDTEffronDA (2010) Psychological license: when it is needed and how it functions. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology43: 115–155.
34.
MoustakasELambaNMahmoudD, et al. (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), Dublin, 15–19 June, pp. 1–6. New York: IEEE.
35.
NafeesLCookCMNikolovAN, et al. (2021) Can social media influencer (SMI) power influence consumer brand attitudes? The mediating role of perceived SMI credibility. Digital Business1(2): 100008.
36.
NahHS (2022) The appeal of “real” in parasocial interaction: the effect of self-disclosure on message acceptance via perceived authenticity and liking. Computers in Human Behavior134: 107330.
37.
NakamuraL (2013) Cybertypes: Race, Ethnicity, and Identity on the Internet. New York: Routledge.
38.
NassCMoonY (2000) Machines and mindlessness: social responses to computers. Journal of Social Issues56(1): 81–103.
39.
NassCSteuerJTauberER (1994) Computers are social actors. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (eds AdelsonBDumalsSOlsonJ), Boston, MA, 24–28 April, pp. 72–78. New York: ACM.
40.
PangL (2022) Mask as identity? The political subject in the 2019 Hong Kong’s social unrest. Cultural Studies36(4): 624–643.
41.
ParkGNanDParkE, et al. (2021) Computers as social actors? Examining how users perceive and interact with virtual influencers on social media. In: 2021 15th international conference on ubiquitous information management and communication (IMCOM), Seoul, South Korea, 4–6 January, pp. 1–6. New York: IEEE.
42.
ParkSSungY (2023) The interplay between human likeness and agency on virtual influencer credibility. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking26: 764–771.
43.
PeckTCSeinfeldSAgliotiSM, et al. (2013) Putting yourself in the skin of a black avatar reduces implicit racial bias. Consciousness and Cognition22(3): 779–787.
44.
RatnerRKMillerDT (2001) The norm of self-interest and its effects on social action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology81(1): 5–16.
SelvanathanHPLickelBDasguptaN (2020) An integrative framework on the impact of allies: how identity-based needs influence intergroup solidarity and social movements. European Journal of Social Psychology50(6): 1344–1361.
48.
ShenL (2010) Mitigating psychological reactance: the role of message-induced empathy in persuasion. Human Communication Research36(3): 397–422.
49.
ShoenbergerHKimE (2023) Explaining purchase intent via expressed reasons to follow an influencer, perceived homophily, and perceived authenticity. International Journal of Advertising42(2): 368–383.
50.
SilverCATatlerBWChakravarthiR, et al. (2021) Social agency as a continuum. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review28(2): 434–453.
51.
SteinJPriskaLBNoraA (2024) Parasocial interactions with real and virtual influencers: the role of perceived similarity and human-likeness. New Media & Society26: 3433–3453.
52.
StevensWE (2021) Blackfishing on Instagram: influencing and the commodification of Black urban aesthetics. Social Media + Society7(3): 1–15.
YangJChuenterawongPLeeH, et al. (2023) Anthropomorphism in CSR endorsement: a comparative study on humanlike vs. cartoonlike virtual influencers’ climate change messaging. Journal of Promotion Management29(5): 705–734.
