In Belief, They Thrive: Comparative Studies Examining the Moderating Role of Machine Heuristic in the Perceived Authenticity and Credibility of Virtual and Human Influencers in Product Advertising and Charitable Campaigns

Date of Award

6-27-2025

Date Published

August 2025

Degree Type

Dissertation

Degree Name

Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

Department

Mass Communications

Advisor(s)

Tamara Chock

Keywords

authenticity, cognitive elaboration, credibility, machine heuristic, trust, virtual influencer

Subject Categories

Communication | Social and Behavioral Sciences

Abstract

As virtual influencers continue to emerge as novel tools in strategic communication, the psychological mechanisms underlying their persuasive effectiveness call for investigation across diverse domains. In particular, there has been a need to examine the conditions and contexts under which they can serve as effective alternatives to human influencers. To expand the existing literature, this study reports two experimental studies examining how individuals evaluate virtual influencers compared to human influencers in both commercial and prosocial contexts. Drawing on the authenticity management framework and the modality, agency, interactivity, and navigability model, Study 1 investigates how influencer type (virtual vs. human) is associated with consumers’ perceptions of authenticity, and how these perceptions influence trust and product purchase intention. Importantly, we examine whether individuals’ machine heuristic moderates the relationship between influencer type and authenticity perception. Results (N = 130) revealed that virtual influencers were unexpectedly perceived as more authentic than human influencers. This effect was moderated by the machine heuristic—Individuals with stronger beliefs in machine capabilities perceived virtual influencers as more authentic than those with weaker beliefs. In turn, authenticity was positively associated with trust, which predicted purchase intentions. Based on the social media influencer value model, the modality, agency, interactivity, and navigability model, and the heuristic-systematic model of information processing, Study 2 shifted the context to charitable donation appeals. This study examined how influencer type (virtual vs. human) relates to perceived credibility (i.e., expertise and trustworthiness) and donation intention, while also testing the moderating role of the machine heuristic. Results (N = 241) showed that virtual influencers were also evaluated as more credible than human influencers, with machine heuristic significantly moderating this effect. Furthermore, perceived credibility was positively associated with cognitive elaboration, which in turn was curvilinearly associated with charitable intention, suggesting a threshold beyond which elaboration no longer improves persuasion. Together, these studies offer theoretical and practical implications for understanding how individuals’ beliefs about machines influence their evaluations of artificial agents across diverse message contexts. While prior research has often found that human influencers are generally perceived as more authentic or credible due to ontological differences, our findings suggest that, under certain conditions, virtual influencers may be viewed equally or even more favorably than human influencers. These results provide unique contributions to the existing literature and suggest the need for more context-sensitive future investigation.

Access

SURFACE provides description only. Full text may be available to ProQuest subscribers. Please ask your Librarian for assistance.

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS