SMM3 - Persuasive intent & social influencers (keyterms, mp + scenario questions)

Three unique characteristics of SMM

1. Innovation — new tools that overcome ad resistance 2. Social — content flows through networks via ties 3. Relevance — content matches user context and needs

Ad clutter

The overabundance of advertising in the media landscape that causes consumer fatigue and active resistance to persuasion attempts

Why SMM overcomes ad resistance

Campaigns have become more enjoyable with high entertainment value, AND persuasive intent is less clear — consumers do not always recognize they are being marketed to

Online social network structure

Nodes (individuals) connected through ties; includes strong ties (close relationships), weak ties (acquaintances), and latent ties (dormant connections)

Flow in online social networks

The exchange of resources, information, or influence among members of a network, including eWOM; what makes content spread through the network

Multi-level marketing (MLM)

A legal marketing innovation where consumers are recruited to sell products and earn commission on actual sales; similar to eWOM but with a financial incentive structure

MLM vs pyramid scheme

MLM is legal and focuses on actual product sales with commissions earned on what is sold; pyramid schemes are illegal and focus on recruiting members who pay fees, with little or no real product

Persuasive intent

An explicit desire to influence; marketers often avoid making this intent clear because visibility activates consumer resistance

Why marketers hide persuasive intent

When persuasive intent is recognized, consumers activate persuasion knowledge and resistance increases; hidden intent keeps defenses lower

Persuasion knowledge (PK) — Friestad & Wright, 1994

Personal knowledge about the tactics used in persuasion attempts; helps consumers identify how, when, and why marketers try to influence them; gives a sense of control and hovers in readiness

When does persuasion knowledge develop?

From approximately age 7 through a socialization process involving own experiences with persuasion attempts and social media exposure; continuously develops throughout life

Change-of-meaning

A persuasion coping behavior that occurs when a consumer recognizes a persuasion attempt and reinterprets the message accordingly (e.g. dismissing it as just an ad)

Detachment

A persuasion coping behavior where the target mentally disengages from the context of the persuasion attempt entirely

Persuasion Knowledge Model (PKM) — Friestad & Wright, 1994

A model describing the interaction between an agent (persuader) and a target (consumer) during a persuasion episode, mediated by three types of knowledge on each side

Three types of knowledge in the PKM

1. Topic knowledge — knowledge about the subject of the message 2. Persuasion knowledge — knowledge about persuasion tactics 3. Agent knowledge (target side) / Target knowledge (agent side) — what each party knows about the other

Agent knowledge

What the target knows about the entity trying to persuade them (e.g. recognizing a brand logo as a commercial sender)

Persuasion episode

The specific interaction between agent and target during a persuasion attempt, including the persuasion attempt itself and the resulting coping behaviors

Persuasion coping behaviors

The strategies a target uses to manage and respond to a recognized persuasion attempt, including change-of-meaning and detachment

How to apply the PKM to a Burger King ad

The logo activates agent knowledge (you recognize who is persuading you); the low price activates persuasion knowledge (you recognize this as a sales tactic); together they trigger persuasion coping behaviors

Why influencer content activates less PK than brand content

Influencers present themselves as ordinary people and appear approachable, authentic, and friendly; this lowers perceived persuasive intent and reduces resistance

Social influencer (definition)

An opinion leader in a social community; a content creator with a substantial following who has developed a human brand — appearing authentic, transparent, and relevant

Human brand

A personal, recognizable identity built by a social influencer that audiences identify and form relationships with, functioning like a brand but based on a person

Parasocial interaction

A one-sided emotional relationship a follower develops with an influencer that feels like a real friendship despite no actual relationship existing

Why social influencers are more effective than traditional celebrities

Smaller reach but higher engagement; appear more authentic and similar to the audience; trigger lower persuasion knowledge; parasocial interaction creates stronger identification

Three mechanisms behind influencer effectiveness

1. Similarity — followers perceive the influencer as like themselves 2. Identification — followers adopt the influencer's attitudes 3. Parasocial interaction — followers develop one-sided emotional bonds

Why do people follow social influencers? (Croes & Bartels, 2021)

Four motives: it is cool and a new trend, relaxation, boredom relief, and information seeking; these lead to social identification with the influencer, which increases ad clicking and buying behavior

Croes & Bartels 2021 — causal chain

Motives (cool/relaxation/boredom/information) → Social identification with influencer → Online ad clicking + Buying behavior

Virtual influencers (VIs)

CGI or AI-based computer avatars with form and behavioral realism, designed to display real expressions; often used by luxury brands (Jhawar et al., 2022)

Motives for following virtual influencers

Curiosity, intrigue, perceived similarity, and interest in general life-related events

Similarities between virtual and human influencers

Both have celebrity status, generate social influence, develop specific personas, trigger parasocial responses, and enable effective brand partnerships

Differences: virtual vs human influencers

VIs have no offline presence; audiences feel VIs are more distant due to agency involvement; no skepticism about VI authenticity; VIs are AI-based and always available; VIs can freely create brand advertising; VIs are less trusted overall; VIs require more developmental resources

Lee et al. 2025 — counterintuitive finding on VIs

Virtual influencers are perceived as more authentic than human influencers when audiences hold high belief in machine heuristics; perceived authenticity → trust in influencer → purchase intention

Why disclosure helps with virtual influencers

Being transparent that an influencer is not human increases rather than undermines trust; it reduces the fear of deception and signals honesty from the brand

Dark side of influencer marketing

SMI posts can trigger negative emotions (anxiety, anger); VIs and idealized influencers portray unrealistic beauty standards; this leads to upward social comparison which diminishes follower wellbeing

Upward social comparison

The process of comparing oneself unfavorably to someone perceived as superior, triggered by idealized influencer content; consistently linked to reduced wellbeing

Vassey et al. 2025 — vaping culture research question

How is the vaping subculture organized on social media, how do Instagram and TikTok function differently as promotion engines, and how do these networks bypass public health regulations?

Instagram vaping network (Vassey et al. 2025)

Dense and cohesive; influencers follow each other back creating a tight-knit community; content saturation makes vaping appear universal to young audiences

TikTok vaping network (Vassey et al. 2025)

More fragmented and decentralized; content spreads primarily through the For You Page algorithm rather than interconnected community structure

Super-influencers (Vassey et al. 2025)

A small number of highly central influencers whose removal would largely collapse the global vaping network; they are the structural core of the influencer ecosystem

Algorithmic amplification

Platform algorithms detect high engagement from well-connected influencers and push their content to even more users including non-smokers; amplifies the reach of influencer networks beyond their direct followers

COBRAs — Consumers' Online Brand-Related Activities

A classification of consumer brand engagement into three levels: consumption (passive), contribution (interactive), and creation (autonomous production)

Consumption (COBRA level 1)

The basic level of brand engagement: passively watching, reading, or observing brand content without any visible reaction or interaction

Contribution (COBRA level 2)

The middle level of brand engagement: responding to brand stimuli by liking, sharing, or commenting — interactive but not creating original content

Creation (COBRA level 3)

The highest level of brand engagement: autonomously producing and publishing new brand-related content; requires the strongest motivation

Two strongest drivers of COBRAs across all platforms

Empowerment (wanting to influence brand choices) and remuneration (expecting rewards such as discounts); most motivations only drive consumption, very few drive creation

Empowerment (COBRA motivation)

The motivational drive to influence brand decisions or the perceptions of others by sharing opinions and demanding improvements

Remuneration (COBRA motivation)

The goal-directed motive to obtain external benefits such as discount codes or economic incentives through brand-related online participation

Profile-based platforms

Platforms where personal profiles and specific connections form the core of interaction (e.g. Facebook, Instagram); empowerment strongly drives contribution here

Content-based platforms

Platforms where content or topic rather than the user is the focus (e.g. Reddit, YouTube); information seeking primarily drives consumption here

Effect of social interaction motive on creation

Social interaction motive has a surprisingly negative effect on content creation on personalized platforms (Facebook, Reddit); users focus on personal friendships and see intense brand creation as time-consuming or a social risk

Ad trust and motivation — key finding

Users in an information-seeking mindset trust social media ads less than users with social or entertainment motivations

Ad congruency and information motivation

When users are seeking information, a congruent ad (matching the search context) increases trust compared to an incongruent ad

Ad congruency and entertainment motivation

When users are in an entertainment mindset, a congruent ad triggers privacy concerns and reduces trust — perfectly matched ads signal surveillance and disrupt the relaxed state

Ad congruency and social motivation

When users have a social motivation, congruency or incongruency between ad content and motivation has no significant effect on trust

Privacy concerns in advertising

The fear that personal data is being monitored or used by advertisers; triggered by highly congruent ads in entertainment contexts and incongruent ads in information contexts

Involvement in advertising context

The cognitive attention and concentration a user directs toward a specific task; high involvement in information seeking makes incongruent ads disruptive and erodes trust

Take-home message of SMM3

The success of SMM lies in its social and innovative nature; PK is lower in influencer posts than brand posts leading to more positive effects; virtual influencers are as powerful as human ones; be mindful of the negative effects of influencer marketing

Statement 1: Persuasion knowledge is higher when consumers watch influencer content than brand content. Statement 2: Persuasion knowledge is lower in influencer posts than brand posts, leading to more positive effects. Which is correct?

Statement 1 is incorrect, statement 2 is correct — influencers appear as ordinary people which reduces perceived persuasive intent and lowers PK

Statement 1: Change-of-meaning means the target disengages from the persuasion context. Statement 2: Detachment means the target reinterprets a message once they recognize it as persuasion. Which is correct?

Both are incorrect — change-of-meaning is the reinterpretation, detachment is the disengagement

A beauty brand hires a virtual influencer to promote their skincare line and discloses that the influencer is AI-generated. According to Lee et al. 2025, what effect does this disclosure have?

Disclosure increases trust rather than undermining it — transparency about the virtual nature of the influencer signals honesty and reduces fear of deception, especially for audiences with high machine heuristic beliefs

A food delivery brand places an ad on Instagram while a user is scrolling for entertainment. The ad is perfectly matched to their recent food browsing. According to the ad trust research, what is the likely effect?

The highly congruent ad in an entertainment context triggers privacy concerns — the user feels surveilled — which disrupts their relaxed state and significantly reduces trust in the ad

Apply the PKM to an influencer post: a fitness influencer promotes protein powder. Identify the three knowledge types activated for the consumer

Topic knowledge: what the consumer knows about protein powder and fitness; Agent knowledge: what the consumer knows about this influencer (are they paid, are they credible?); Persuasion knowledge: recognition that this is a paid promotion or sponsored content, which activates resistance

Why is the vaping influencer network difficult to regulate according to Vassey et al. 2025?

The network is globally distributed across platforms with different regulations; super-influencers connect the global network; algorithmic amplification spreads content beyond followers to non-smokers; Instagram's dense network makes pro-vaping content appear universal and normal

A brand manager asks whether to use a human or virtual influencer. What does the research say?

Virtual influencers can be just as effective as human influencers; they work particularly well for brands targeting consumers who strive to be unique; disclosure of their virtual nature increases rather than decreases trust; however they require more developmental resources and audiences may feel more distant