A Meta-Analytic Comparison of Human Influencers and Virtual Influencers Across Different Levels of Human-Likeness: Is Humanness More Persuasive?

Virtual influencers (VIs) mimic how human influencers (HIs) persuade consumers. This meta-analysis (n = 46 experimental studies) compares the persuasiveness of HIs and VIs, including human-like (HVIs) and anime-like (AVIs) appearances. VIs were less persuasive than HIs in source and message attitudes, but matched HIs in message perceptions, behavioral intentions, and actual behaviors. VIs were less persuasive than HIs when their follower counts were low or undisclosed, these differences were negligible when they had high follower count. HVIs outperformed AVIs in source perceptions and behavioral intentions, though both were equally effective in other outcomes. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed. Virtual influencers (both human-like and anime-like) are perceived as less persuasive, engendering less favorable source attitudes and message attitudes than human influencers. Human-like virtual influencers are perceived as more persuasive and facilitate behavioral intentions more effectively than their anime-like counterparts. High follower count (macro- or mega-influencers) attenuates the impact of influencer type. Since prominent virtual influencers can be as effective as human influencers with equivalent following, they are a viable choice for brand partnerships. Advertisers should use anime-like virtual influencers cautiously, as they are less persuasive when their follower count is not displayed or when embedded in plain backgrounds.