Given the number of identified risks associated with influencer sharenting, momfluencers are increasingly adopting a more mindful approach to sharing information about their children online. Prior qualitative research suggests that followers respond positively towards these mindful sharenting practices, especially when motives are communicated. However, there is a lack of experimental exploration into this finding and its potential explanations. Therefore, drawing upon theoretical insights regarding self-disclosure and self-determination theory, this experimental study with 176 mothers seeks to investigate the impact of momfluencers providing an explanation regarding mindful sharenting practices, proposing the need for relatedness and empathy as mediators. The findings reveal that when momfluencers disclose their motives, this significantly enhances follower engagement, admiration, and evaluation of the momfluencer. This effect is fully explained by empathy, and partly by the need for relatedness. This study emphasizes the importance of transparency and provides momfluencers strategies to balance privacy protection and the benefits of influencer sharenting.
AbidinC (2015) Micro-microcelebrity: branding Babies on the Internet. M/C Journal18: 1022.
4.
ÅgrenY (2023) Branded childhood: infants as digital capital on Instagram. Childhood30(1): 9–23.
5.
AltmanITaylorDA (1973) Social Penetration: The Development of Interpersonal Relationships. Austin, TX: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
6.
ArcherC (2019) How influencer ‘mumpreneur’ bloggers and ‘everyday’ mums frame presenting their children online. Media International Australia170(1): 47–56.
7.
AudrezetAde KervilerGGuidry MoulardJ (2018) Authenticity under threat: when social media influencers need to go beyond self-presentation. Journal of Business Research117: 557–569.
8.
AutenriethU (2018) Family photography in a networked age: anti-sharenting as a reaction to risk assessment and behaviour adaption. In: MascheroniGPonteCJorgeA (eds) Digital Parenting: The Challenges for Families in the Digital Age. London: The International Clearinghouse on Children, Youth & Media at Nordicom, pp. 219–231.
9.
BartschAKloßA (2019) Personalized charity advertising. Can personalized prosocial messages promote empathy, attitude change, and helping intentions toward stigmatized social groups?International Journal of Advertising38(3): 345–363.
10.
BatsonCDLishnerDAStocksEL (2015) The empathy – Altruism hypothesis. In: SchroederDAGrazianoWG (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Prosocial Behavior. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 259–281.
11.
BaumeisterRFLearyMR (1995) The need to belong: desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Interpersonal Development117: 497–529.
12.
BessantC (2018) Sharenting: balancing the conflicting rights of parents and children. Communications Law23: 7–24.
13.
BeuckelsEDe JansS (2022) ‘My mom got influenced by yours’: the persuasiveness of mom influencers in relation to mothers’ food assessments and decisions. Appetite178: 106269.
14.
BeuckelsEDe WolfR (2024) Social media influencers as new agents on parenthood? A systematic literature review of parent influencer research and a future research agenda. new media & society. Epub ahead of print 10 April. DOI: 10.1080/1369118X.2024.2334913.
15.
BeuckelsEHuddersLVanwesenbeeckI, et al (2024) Work it baby! A survey study to investigate the role of underaged children and privacy management strategies within parent influencer content. new media & society. Epub ahead of print 26 January. DOI: 10.1177/14614448231218992.
16.
BickartBKimSPaiS, et al (2015) How social media influencers build a brand following by sharing secrets. In: FournierSBreazealeMJAveryJ (eds) Strong Brands, Strong Relationships. New York: Routledge, pp. 172–184.
17.
Blum-RossALivingstoneS (2017) ‘Sharenting’, parent blogging, and the boundaries of the digital self. Popular Communication15(2): 110–125.
18.
BoermanSReijmersdalENeijensP (2012) Sponsorship disclosure: effects of duration on Persuasion knowledge and brand responses. Journal of Communication62: 1047–1064.
19.
BoermanSC (2020) The effects of the standardized Instagram disclosure for micro-and meso-influencers. Computers in Human Behavior103: 199–207.
20.
BuvárÁOroszG (2023) Adult-focused sharenting does not pay out: sharenting in sponsored posts elicits negative ethical attitudes if the product is adult-related, but not when it is child-related. Journal of Marketing Communications30: 1039–1059.
21.
CampanaMVan den BosscheAMillerB (2020) #dadtribe: performing Sharenting Labour to Commercialise Involved Fatherhood. Journal of Macromarketing40(4): 475–491.
22.
CarréAStefaniakNd'AmbrosioF, et al (2013) The Basic Empathy Scale in adults (BES-A): factor structure of a revised form. Psychological Assessment25(3): 679.
23.
ChenTYYehTLHuangYW (2023) The influence of self-disclosure micro-celebrity endorsement on subsequent brand attachment: from an emotional connection perspective. The Service Industries Journal45: 228–255.
24.
Christov-MooreLSimpsonEACoudéG, et al (2014) Empathy: gender effects in brain and behavior. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews46: 604–627.
25.
ChungJDingYKalraA (2023) I really know you: how influencers can increase audience engagement by referencing their close social ties. Journal of Consumer Research50: 683–703.
26.
ChungSChoH (2017) Fostering parasocial relationships with celebrities on social media: implications for celebrity endorsement. Psychology & Marketing34(4): 481–495.
27.
DavisMH (2018) Empathy: A Social Psychological Approach. London: Routledge
28.
De JansSVan de SompelDDe VeirmanM, et al (2020) #Sponsored! How the recognition of sponsoring on Instagram posts affects adolescents’ brand evaluations through source evaluations. Computers in Human Behavior109: 106342.
29.
De VeirmanMCaubergheVHuddersL (2017) Marketing through Instagram influencers: the impact of number of followers and product divergence on brand attitude. International Journal of Advertising36(5): 798–828.
30.
DimofteCVForehandMRDeshpandeR (2003) Ad schema incongruity as elicitor of ethnic self-awareness and differential advertising response. Journal of Advertising32: 7–17.
31.
DuanCHillCE (1996) The current state of empathy research. Journal of Counseling Psychology43(3): 261–274.
32.
DuffyBEHundE (2019) Gendered visibility on social media: navigating Instagram’s authenticity bind. International Journal of Communication13: 20.
EsfandiariMYaoJ (2022) Sharenting as a double-edged sword: evidence from Iran. Information, Communication & Society26(15): 1–19.
35.
FengYChenHKongQ (2021) An expert with whom I can identify: the role of narratives in influencer marketing. International Journal of Advertising40(7): 972–993.
36.
FergusonAMCameronCDInzlichtM (2020) Motivational effects on empathic choices. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology90: 104010.
37.
FoxAKHoyMGCarterAE (2022) An exploration of first-time dads’ sharenting with social media marketers: implications for children’s online privacy. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice31: 185–196.
38.
GannonVProtheroA (2016) Beauty blogger selfies as authenticating practices. European Journal of Marketing 50(9/10): 1858–1878.
39.
GuCDuanQ (2024) Exploring the dynamics of consumer engagement in social media influencer marketing: from the self-determination theory perspective. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications11(1): 1–17.
40.
GurrieriLDrentenJ (2019) Visual storytelling and vulnerable health care consumers: normalising practices and social support through Instagram. Journal of Services Marketing33(6): 702–720.
41.
HajjarS (2018) Statistical analysis: internal-consistency reliability and construct validity. International Journal of Quantitative and Qualitative Research Methods6(1): 27–38.
42.
HuangL-S (2015) Trust in product review blogs: the influence of self-disclosure and popularity. Behaviour & Information Technology34(1): 33–44.
43.
JanssenSvan VuurenMde JongMD (2013) Identifying support functions in developmental relationships: a self-determination perspective. Journal of Vocational Behavior82(1): 20–29.
44.
JiangLJohnLKBoghratiR, et al (2022) Fostering perceptions of authenticity via sensitive self-disclosure. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied28(4): 898–915.
45.
JorgeAMarôpoLCoelhoA, et al (2021) Mummy influencers and professional sharenting. European Journal of Cultural Studies25: 166–182.
46.
KayserJWCossetteSAldersonM (2014) Autonomy-supportive intervention: an evolutionary concept analysis. Journal of Advanced Nursing70(6): 1254–1266.
47.
KiCWCKimYK (2019) The mechanism by which social media influencers persuade consumers: the role of consumers’ desire to mimic. Psychology & Marketing36(10): 905–922.
48.
KiC-WCCuevasLMChongSM, et al (2020) Influencer marketing: social media influencers as human brands attaching to followers and yielding positive marketing results by fulfilling needs. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services55: 102133.
49.
KimDYKimH-Y (2021) Trust me, trust me not: a nuanced view of influencer marketing on social media. Journal of Business Research134: 223–232.
50.
KimEHuhJ (2023) Intentional ad-viewing to support video creators on digital video-sharing platforms. Journal of Marketing Communications29(1): 67–81.
51.
La GuardiaJGRyanRMCouchmanCE, et al (2000) Within-person variation in security of attachment: a self-determination theory perspective on attachment, need fulfillment, and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology79(3): 367.
LeaverTHighfieldTAbidinC (2020) Instagram: Visual Social Media Cultures. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
54.
LeeMTTheokaryC (2021) The superstar social media influencer: exploiting linguistic style and emotional contagion over content?Journal of Business Research132: 860–871.
55.
LeeSSJohnsonBK (2022) Are they being authentic? The effects of self-disclosure and message sidedness on sponsored post effectiveness. International Journal of Advertising41(1): 30–53.
56.
LeiteFPBaptistaPdP (2022) The effects of social media influencers’ self-disclosure on behavioral intentions: the role of source credibility, parasocial relationships, and brand trust. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice30(3): 295–311.
57.
LeiteFPPontesNBaptistaP, et al (2022) Oops, I've overshared! When social media influencers' self-disclosure damage perceptions of source credibility. Computers in Human Behavior133: 107274.
58.
LiBChenSZhouQ (2023) Empathy with influencers? The impact of the sensory advertising experience on user behavioral responses. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services72: 103286.
59.
LiY (2022) Cross-cultural privacy differences. In: KnijnenburgBPPageXWisniewskiP, et al (eds) Modern Socio-technical Perspectives on Privacy. New York: Springer, pp. 267–292.
60.
LouC (2021) Social Media Influencers and Followers: theorization of a Trans-Parasocial Relation and Explication of Its Implications for Influencer Advertising View supplementary material. Journal of Advertising51: 1880345.
61.
LouC (2022) Social media influencers and followers: theorization of a trans-parasocial relation and explication of its implications for influencer advertising. Journal of Advertising51(1): 4–21.
62.
MaaresPBanjacSHanuschF (2020) The labour of visual authenticity on social media: exploring producers’ and audiences’ perceptions on Instagram. Poetics84: 101502.
63.
MasurPKBazarovaNNDiFranzoD (2023) The impact of what others do, approve of, and expect you to do: an in-depth analysis of social norms and self-disclosure on social media. Social Media + Society9(1): 20563051231156401.
64.
MirowskaAArsenyanJ (2023) Sweet escape: the role of empathy in social media engagement with human versus virtual influencers. International Journal of Human-computer Studies174: 103008.
65.
MusiyiwaRJacobsonJ (2023) Sponsorship disclosure in social media influencer marketing: the algorithmic and non-algorithmic barriers. Social Media+ Society9(3): 20563051231196870.
66.
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.
67.
NeufeldAMalinG (2024) Cultivating physician empathy: a person-centered study based in self-determination theory. Medical Education Online29(1): 2335739.
68.
NgJYNtoumanisNThøgersen-NtoumaniC, et al (2012) Self-determination theory applied to health contexts: a meta-analysis. Perspectives on Psychological Science7(4): 325–340.
69.
NottinghamE (2019) Dad! Cut that part out!’Children’s rights to privacy in the age of ‘generation tagged’: sharenting, digital kidnapping and the child micro-celebrity. In: MurrayJSwadenerBBSmithK (eds) The Routledge International Handbook of Young Children's Rights. New York: Routledge, p. 14.
70.
Orhan KılıçBKiliçSKonukseverD, et al (2024) The relationship between mothers' Instagram follower count and the concept of sharenting. Pediatrics International: Official Journal of the Japan Pediatric Society66: e15736.
71.
OuvreinG (2022) Mommy influencers: helpful or harmful? The relationship between exposure to mommy influencers and perceived parental self-efficacy among mothers and primigravida. new media & society26(4): 14614448221086296.
72.
PerssonBNKajoniusPJ (2016) Empathy and universal values explicated by the empathy-altruism hypothesis. The Journal of Social Psychology156(6): 610–619.
73.
ReinikainenHMunnukkaJMaityD, et al (2020) ‘You really are a great big sister’–parasocial relationships, credibility, and the moderating role of audience comments in influencer marketing. Journal of Marketing Management36(3-4): 279–298.
74.
RyanRMDeciEL (2000) Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. The American Psychologist55: 68–78.
75.
RyanRMDeciEL (2017) Self-Determination Theory: Basic Psychological Needs in Motivation, Development, and Wellness. New York: Guilford Publications.
76.
SchindlerIPaechJL€owenbrückF (2015) Linking admiration and adoration to self-expansion: different ways to enhance one’s potential. Cognition & Emotion29(2): 292–310.
77.
SchumannKZakiJDweckCS (2014) Addressing the empathy deficit: beliefs about the malleability of empathy predict effortful responses when empathy is challenging. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology107(3): 475.
78.
SteinbergS (2016) Sharenting: Children’s privacy in the age of social media. Emory Law Journal66: 839.
79.
TrepteSReineckeLEllisonNB, et al (2017) A cross-cultural perspective on the privacy calculus. Social Media+ Society3(1): 2056305116688035.
80.
UtzS (2015) The function of self-disclosure on social network sites: not only intimate, but also positive and entertaining self-disclosures increase the feeling of connection. Computers in Human Behavior45: 1–10.
81.
Van den AbeeleEBeuckelsEHuddersL, et al (2024a) Cute but concerning: Investigating the impact of portraying children in momfluencer content on engagement, advertising value and advertising effectiveness. International Journal of Advertising1: 1–31.
82.
Van den AbeeleEVanwesenbeeckIHuddersL (2024b) Child’s privacy versus mother’s fame: Unravelling the biased decision-making process of momfluencers to portray their children online. Information, Communication & Society27(2): 297–313.
83.
Van den AbeeleEVanwesenbeeckIHuddersL (2024c) The (un)necessity of child portrayal in momfluencer content: Exploring mothers’ perspectives on influencer sharenting through in-depth interviews. Information, Communication and Society1: 1–21.
84.
van der HofSLievensEMilkaiteI, et al (2020) The child’s right to protection against economic exploitation in the digital world. The International Journal of Children's Rights28(4): 833–859.
85.
VerdoodtV (2024) The privacy implications of child(-targeted) influencer content on digital platforms. In: KerckaertJGeiregatS (eds) Social Media Influencers and the #Law. Leuven: LeA Uitgevers, pp. 187–210.
86.
WalraveMRobbéSStaesL, et al (2023) Mindful sharenting: How millennial parents balance between sharing and protecting. Frontiers in Psychology14: 1171611.
87.
WangYNoriceGCranorLF (2011) Who is concerned about what? A study of American, Chinese and Indian Users’ privacy concerns on social network sites. In: McCuneJMBalacheffBPerrigA, et al (eds) Trust and Trustworthy Computing. Berlin: Springer, pp. 146–153.
88.
WaterlooSFBaumgartnerSEPeterJ, et al (2018) Norms of online expressions of emotion: comparing Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and WhatsApp. new media & society20(5): 1813–1831.
89.
WellmanML (2023) ‘A friend who knows what they’re talking about’: extending source credibility theory to analyze the wellness influencer industry on Instagram. new media & society1(1): 14614448231162064.
90.
WilliamsGCDeciEL (1996) Internalization of biopsychosocial values by medical students: a test of self-determination theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology70(4): 767.
91.
ZakiJ (2014) Empathy: a motivated account. Psychological Bulletin140(6): 1608–1647.
