Influencer marketing on Instagram—The optimal disclosure strategy from influencers’ and marketers’ perspectives

Sa e nus, Zo ia; Mihale-Wilson, C is ina; Hinz, Oli e
A icle — Published Ve sion
In luence ma ke ing on Ins ag am—The op imal
disclosu e s a egy om in luence s’ and ma ke e s’
pe spec i es
Elec onic Ma ke s
P o ided in Coope a ion wi h:
Sp inge Na u e
Sugges ed Ci a ion: Sa e nus, Zo ia; Mihale-Wilson, C is ina; Hinz, Oli e (2024) : In luence
ma ke ing on Ins ag am—The op imal disclosu e s a egy om in luence s’ and ma ke e s’
pe spec i es, Elec onic Ma ke s, ISSN 1422-8890, Sp inge , Be lin, Heidelbe g, Vol. 34, Iss. 1,
h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s12525-024-00743-x
This Ve sion is a ailable a :
h ps://hdl.handle.ne /10419/315702
S anda d-Nu zungsbedingungen:
Die Dokumen e au EconS o dü en zu eigenen wissenscha lichen
Zwecken und zum P i a geb auch gespeiche und kopie we den.
Sie dü en die Dokumen e nich ü ö en liche ode komme zielle
Zwecke e iel äl igen, ö en lich auss ellen, ö en lich zugänglich
machen, e eiben ode ande wei ig nu zen.
So e n die Ve asse die Dokumen e un e Open-Con en -Lizenzen
(insbesonde e CC-Lizenzen) zu Ve ügung ges ell haben soll en,
gel en abweichend on diesen Nu zungsbedingungen die in de do
genann en Lizenz gewäh en Nu zungs ech e.
Te ms o use:
Documen s in EconS o may be sa ed and copied o you pe sonal
and schola ly pu poses.
You a e no o copy documen s o public o comme cial pu poses, o
exhibi he documen s publicly, o make hem publicly a ailable on he
in e ne , o o dis ibu e o o he wise use he documen s in public.
I he documen s ha e been made a ailable unde an Open Con en
Licence (especially C ea i e Commons Licences), you may exe cise
u he usage igh s as speci ied in he indica ed licence.
h p://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/
Vol.:(0123456789)
Elec onic Ma ke s (2024) 34:60
h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s12525-024-00743-x
RESEARCH PAPER
In luence ma ke ing onIns ag am—The op imal disclosu e s a egy
omin luence s’ andma ke e s’ pe spec i es
Zo iaSa e nus1 · C is inaMihale‑Wilson2 · Oli e Hinz2
Recei ed: 11 Decembe 2023 / Accep ed: 13 No embe 2024 / Published online: 10 Decembe 2024
© The Au ho (s) 2024
Abs ac
This a icle explo es he impac o di e en ad e ising disclosu e s a egies (i.e., explici sponso ship disclosu e, concealing
disclosu e, impa iali y disclosu e, and no disclosu e) in in luence ma ke ing on in luence - ela ed ou comes (use engage-
men , use sen imen , and in luence c edibili y) and ma ke e - ela ed ou comes (use a i ude owa ds he b and and use s’
in en ion o pu chase). We conduc ed wo ield expe imen s and an online su ey wi h an expe imen al design in collabo a-
ion wi h an ac i e mic o-in luence on Ins ag am. The esul s o he s udies indica e ha om a ma ke e s’ pe spec i e, i is
bes when in luence s p omo e p oduc s as genuine ecommenda ions and use impa iali y disclosu e. F om an in luence ’s
pe spec i e, he op imal disclosu e s a egy depends on whe he he in luence seeks o imp o e engagemen wi h hei
con en o hei le els o c edibili y. When in luence s’ p ima y ocus is o inc ease engagemen , i hey p o ide in o ma ion
on sponso ship o non-sponso ship, hey do no ha e o wo y abou dec easing engagemen a es due o he employed dis-
closu e s a egy. Suppose in luence s’ goal is o inc ease hei c edibili y. In ha case, i depends on hei con en (whe he
i is ich in genuine ecommenda ions o sponso ed con en ) and he g oup hey wan o a ge —i.e., i hey seek o a ge
ollowe s e sus non- ollowe s.
Keywo ds In luence ma ke ing· Disclosu e· Ins ag am· Followe beha io s· Field expe imen
JEL Classi ica ion M37
In oduc ion
In luence ma ke ing ia social media, pa icula ly on Ins a-
g am, has es ablished i sel as a way o ma ke p oduc s and
se ices. Ma ke e s and b ands nowadays o en pay in luenc-
e s o endo se hei p oduc s and b ands. Wi h mo e han 1
billion mon hly ac i e use s, Ins ag am is one o he mos
s a egically impo an pla o ms o in luence ma ke ing
(Mansoo 2021).
In luence ma ke ing is expe iencing apid g ow h, ou -
pacing adi ional paid ad e isemen s on pla o ms like Ins-
ag am, TikTok, and YouTube. A signi ican end o no e is
ha U.S. in luence spending1 on Ins ag am is o ecas ed o
exceed $2 billion o he i s ime in 2024, e lec ing a majo
shi in how ma ke e s alloca e hei budge s (Lebow 2023).
This end unde sco es he inc easing impo ance o in lu-
ence collabo a ions in p oducing engaging, au hen ic, and
communi y-d i en con en . In luence ma ke ing’s g ow h
is ueled by i s abili y o connec b ands wi h consume s
Responsible Edi o : S e en Bellman
* C is ina Mihale-Wilson
[email p o ec ed] .de
Zo ia Sa e nus
zo ia.sa e [email p o ec ed]
Oli e Hinz
[email p o ec ed] .de
1 SAP AG Ge many, Die ma -Hopp-Allee 16, Walldo 69190,
Ge many
2 In o ma ion Sys ems andIn o ma ion Managemen ,
Goe he Uni e si y, Theodo -W.-Ado no-Pla z 4,
F ank u amMain60323, Ge many
1 In luence spending as a key pe o mance indica o (KPI) is
inc easingly ecognized o i s ole in e alua ing he e ec i eness o
in luence ma ke ing campaigns. This me ic p o ides insigh s in o
how much b ands in es in in luence collabo a ions ela i e o he
e u ns gene a ed.
Elec onic Ma ke s (2024) 34:6060 Page 2 o 27
h ough c ea o s who unde s and and engage deeply wi h
hei audiences. This allows o mo e pe sonalized and ela -
able con en , making i mo e e ec i e han adi ional ads
(B ooks e al. 2021).
On social media pla o ms, p i a e and comme cial com-
munica ions equen ly go hand in hand. Sponso ed Ins a-
g am pos s imi a e and blend wi h non-sponso ed con en ,
making i di icul o use s o dis inguish ad e ising om
o ganic, genuine (impa ial) ecommenda ions (Campbell
& G imm 2019; De Cicco e al. 2021; De Vei man & Hud-
de s 2020). Hence, a ious egula o y agencies sugges ha
sponso ed con en should be disclosed. In esponse o a i-
ous calls o anspa ency, Ins ag am implemen ed a buil -
in disclosu e ea u e ha ags con en wi h “Paid pa ne -
ship wi h [B and].” Howe e , wi h mul iple s akeholde s
c i icizing he posi ion and s yle o he Ins ag am-gene a ed
ag and esea ch unable o conclusi ely p o e i s e ec i e-
ness in inc easing ad e ising awa eness unde eal-wo ld
condi ions (De Cicco e al. 2021), i seems o be in luenc-
e s’ esponsibili y o make sponso ed con en iden i iable
(Ka agü e al. 2022).
Al hough disclosu es a e essen ial o e hical and
esponsible ad e ising, ma ke e s and in luence s migh
be eluc an o use hem. One eason is ha ma ke e s and
in luence s need mo e ce ain y ega ding he bes disclo-
su e s a egy o agging sponso ed con en (FTC 2016,
2017a). As o 2017, based on a Fede al T ade Commission
(FTC) manda e, any online sponso ed con en by a hi d-
pa y sou ce mus disclose sponso ship in o ma ion (FTC
2017b; S ubb e al. 2019). Simila ly, in Belgium, he Flemish
Regula o o he Media (VRM2) published in 2021 Con en
C ea o P o ocol, including ules ha in luence s mus ol-
low when sha ing comme cial communica ions, as well as
in Ge many, acco ding o § 5a UWG
3 (Law agains un ai
compe i ion), § 6 TMG4 (Telemedia Ac ), and § 58 RS V5
(In e s a e B oadcas ing Ag eemen ), he p omo ional back-
g ound o a pos ing mus be ecognizable o use s. Howe e ,
he guidelines lea e oom o in e p e a ion ega ding hei
implemen a ion (K ouwe e al. 2017).
In Eu ope, inconsis en cou ulings on so-called su -
ep i ious ad e ising ha e added o he unce ain y su -
ounding disclosu e, wi h some in luence s ha ing o pay
penal ies o hei con en . Fo ins ance, in luence Pamela
Rei was ined o p omo ing a b and wi hou a sponso ship
con ac because he subs an ial in luence made i coun as
ad e ising. In con as , li es yle in luence V eni F os was
no ined as she agged companies o edi o ial pu poses
a he han comme cial con en . Ye ano he social media
in luence , Ca hy Hummels, had he case dismissed due o
he inabili y o p o e ha she was paid o he espec i e
pos . These inconsis encies a e no limi ed o sponso ed
con en alone bu also ex end o si ua ions whe e in luenc-
e s p omo e p oduc s hey ha e pe sonally pu chased. Con-
side in luence s who, a e a long sea ch, ind a p oduc
ha sol es a p oblem hey ha e had o a long ime. The
in luence s migh genuinely wish o ecommend he p oduc
on hei social media accoun i con inced o he p oduc .
He e, he ques ion a ises: a e hey supposed o disclose he
con en as no sponso ed? A e hey supposed no o disclose
a all, since he p oduc was bough by hemsel es and he
pe suasion a emp in he media con en es s upon a genu-
ine ecommenda ion? Due o he incising discussion abou
co e ma ke ing in social media and he g owing numbe o
legal issues, in luence s s a ed o use decla a ions such as “#
non-sponso ed” o “ his pos is no sponso ed” o indica e a
genuine ecommenda ion o which hey we e no emune -
a ed in any way (De Vei man e al. 2019; S ubb & Colliande
2019).
Ano he eason o ma ke e s’ and in luence s’ eluc-
ance o disclose sponso ships is he ambigui y o whe he
such disclosu es nega i ely a ec b and and p oduc a i-
udes and in luence e alua ions (De Vei man & Hudde s
2020; Wojdynski & E ans 2016). Subsequen ly, by exploi -
ing he oom o in e p e a ion in he cu en egula ion, in
p ac ice, in luence s use a a ie y o disclosu es (De Cicco
e al. 2021). Sponso ed pos s, ideos, and o he social media
con en can, o ins ance, be agged wi h explici sponso -
ship labels such as “sponso ed” con en , as “ad e ising” o
“ad e ”. Simul aneously, con en can also be ambiguously
ma ked wi h concealing ags such as “collabo a ion,” “in
associa ion wi h,” “ hanks o [b and] o making his pos-
sible.” In an a emp o u he conceal paid ad e isemen ,
in luence s can also call hemsel es “ambassado ” o y o
use inconspicuous and challenging o ecognize abb e ia-
ions and ac onyms such as “ad,”6 “sp,” “spon,” and “collab”
(De Cicco e al. 2021).
Amids he cu en unce ain ies a ound social media
sponso ship disclosu e and he ple ho a o possibili ies o
explici ly disclose and e en y o conceal paid ad e ise-
men s, social media is one o he dominan channels o con-
sume engagemen and pu chasing. The apid expansion in
he a ie y and a ailabili y o online p oduc s in e-comme ce
2 VRM—Vlaamse Regula o oo de Media (Flemish Regula o o
he Media)
3 UWG—Gese z gegen den unlau e en We bewe b (Law agains
un ai compe i ion)
4 TMG—Telemediengese z (Telemedia Ac )
5 RS V—Rund unks aa s e ag (In e s a e B oadcas ing Ag eemen )
6 Albei “ad” is a common label o ad e ising in English speak-
ing coun ies such as he USA, Canada, o he UK, in he es o he
wo ld, “ad” is no necessa ily well known and a common iden i ie
o ad e ising (Medienans al en 2018; Schnoo 2018).
Elec onic Ma ke s (2024) 34:60 Page 3 o 27 60
has p omp ed consume s o inc easingly ely on in e media -
ies, such as social media in luence s, o p oduc disco e y
and ecommenda ions (Cao & Belo 2024). Gi en ha in lu-
ence s play a c ucial ole in elec onic ma ke s, ac ing as
us ed guides who shape consume p e e ences and d i e
pu chasing decisions wi hin digi al pla o ms, unde s anding
he e ec o a ious sponso ship disclosu es (De Vei man
& Hudde s 2020; Wojdynski & E ans 2016) is c i ical—no
only o in luence s and he b ands ha use in luence ma -
ke ing bu also o main aining he in eg i y o he pla o ms
on which hey ope a e.
Howe e , o uly cap u e he eal-wo ld dynamics o spon-
so ship disclosu e, i is c ucial ha such s udies be conduc ed
using au hen ic in luence s on ac ual social media pla o ms
a he han elying solely on epo ed beha io o ic i ious sce-
na ios (Cao & Belo 2024, Hughes e al. 2019). Resea ch ha
in ol es eal in luence s in e ac ing wi h hei genuine ollow-
e s p o ides a mo e accu a e and comp ehensi e unde s anding
o how di e en disclosu e s a egies a ec audience engage-
men and in luence and b and- ela ed pe cep ion.
P io wo k explo ed he impac o disclosu e language in
in luence ad e ising on a ious ou comes such as ad ec-
ogni ion, b and a i ude, and pu chase and sha ing in en ion
among consume s (Boe man 2020; e.g., De Vei man & Hud-
de s 2020; E ans e al. 2017; Lee & Kim 2020) o en by ely-
ing on ic i ious pos s and in luence s (De Vei man e al. 2017;
De Vei man & Hudde s 2020; E ans e al. 2017). Whene e
s udies used au hen ic pos s, hey ypically did no measu e
hei impac on a eal audience ha could be composed o
iewe s o ollowe s (e.g., Boe man, 2020; Hughes e al.,
2019; S ubb & Colliande , 2019). Howe e , dis inguishing
be ween iewe s and ollowe s is c ucial because iewe s ep-
esen he passi e audience who may come ac oss he con en
inciden ally, while ollowe s a e an engaged audience who
ac i ely subsc ibe o he con en c ea o ’s upda es. Unde -
s anding he impac on bo h g oups p o ides a mo e comp e-
hensi e assessmen o how au hen ic pos s in luence di e en
le els o audience engagemen and pe cep ion.
Agains he backg ound ha cu en knowledge on con-
sume s’ pe cep ions o ad e ising disclosu es migh hold
only pa ly in eal-wo ld se ings, his wo k in es iga es he
e ec s o di e en disclosu e s a egies based on da a om wo
ield expe imen s and an online su ey wi h an expe imen al
design. In ou s udies, we pa ne ed wi h an Ins ag am mic o-
in luence (< 100,000 ollowe s (Campbell & Fa ell, 2020)).
We collabo a e wi h he and he audience o add ess he ol-
lowing esea ch ques ion: Gi en ou disclosu e s a egies (i.e.,
explici sponso ship disclosu e, concealing disclosu e, impa -
iali y disclosu e, and no disclosu e a all) wha is he op imal
s a egy om an in luence s’ and ma ke e s’ pe spec i e?
In his a icle, we ope a ionalize op imal disclosu e s a -
egy in e ms o (i) in luence - ele an ou comes, including
changes in hei c edibili y o hei abili y o engage indi id-
uals wi h hei pos s and (ii) ou comes ele an o ma ke e s,
such as indi iduals’ a i ude owa ds he b and o hei in en-
ion o pu chase he p oduc showcased in he con en . A e
all, ma ke e s’ mo i a ion o e e o in luence ma ke ing
(and in pa icula mic o-in luence ma ke ing) is d i en by
b and- ela ed and p oduc -sales- ela ed mo i es (Lou e al.
2019), while in a cons an ly expanding sha e o in luence s,
(mic o-) in luence s’ goal is o emain ele an and inc ease
he ollowe base (Wies e al. 2022).
In summa y, ou esea ch o e s a ious con ibu ions
o bo h p ac ical and heo e ical domains. On a p ac ical
le el, i u nishes clea guidance on disclosu e s a egies
o ma ke e s and in luence s alike. Theo e ically, ou wo k
highligh s he c i ical dis inc ion be ween ollowe s and non-
ollowe s in in luence ma ke ing. Ou indings demons a e
ha disclosu e s a egies impac hese wo g oups in dis inc
ways, sugges ing ha u u e esea ch and heo e ical ame-
wo ks mus accoun o his di e en ia ion o ully unde -
s and he e ec i eness o sponso ship disclosu es and hei
in luence on consume beha io .
Rela ed wo k andhypo heses
A he co e o his esea ch a e ou disclosu e s a egies ha
a e ecu en ly appea ing in li e a u e and p ac ice: explici
sponso ship disclosu e, concealing disclosu e, impa ial
Table 1 Disclosu e s a egies
Type Desc ip ion wi h exempla y disclosu e ags
Explici sponso ship disclosu e Clea cue abou sponso ed con en h ough labels such as “ad e ising,” “sponso ed,” “ad e isemen ,” and
“ad e ”
Concealing disclosu e Hidden cue abou sponso ed con en h ough he use o inconspicuous and di icul o ecognize abb e ia ions
and ac onyms such as “ad1,” “collab,” “ambassado ,” “sp,” and “spon”
Impa iali y disclosu e Clea cue abou non-sponso ed con en h ough ags such as “unpaid, ” “non-sponso ed” o “ his pos is no
sponso ed.” The main goal o his s a egy is o highligh in luence s’ al uis ic mo i a ion o ecommend a
p oduc o b and u he .
No disclosu e Ambiguous s a e in which in luence s p o ide no in o ma ion/no clues abou whe he he con en is comme cial
and was sponso ed o no .
Elec onic Ma ke s (2024) 34:6060 Page 4 o 27
disclosu e, and no disclosu e a all. Table1 p o ides an
o e iew o he ou disclosu e s a egies and co esponding
agging examples. While explici sponso ship disclosu e and
impa ial disclosu e a e anspa en ways o in o m iewe -
ship whe he he con en is sponso ed, concealing disclosu e
and no disclosu e ep esen a emp s o ob usca e in o ma-
ion on whe he he con en is sponso ed. Theo y and p io
esea ch sugges ha bo h in luence and ma ke e - ela ed
ou comes migh a y depending on he disclosu e s a egy
employed.
Disclosu e s a egies andin luence ‑ ele an
ou comes
This a icle ocuses on h ee in luence - ele an ou comes
ha di ec ly de e mine he in luence s’ e ec i eness as opin-
ion leade s and ambassado s wi hin a ma ke ing campaign.
These a e in luence s’ abili y o mo i a e use engagemen
(i.e., in ense in e ac ion) wi h hei con en (Lou e al. 2019;
Wies e al. 2022); hei abili y o induce posi i e sen imen s
h ough hei con en (Lou e al. 2019); and in luence c ed-
ibili y. The a ionale o ocusing on hese h ee ou comes
s ems om he ac ha hey a e he ones o in e es o ma -
ke e s when coope a ing wi h (mic o-)in luence s (Childe s
e al. 2019).
Use engagemen
Use engagemen is he social media equi alen o “con-
sume beha io al engagemen ” in adi ional ma ke ing
channels (Ta esse & Wood 2021). The concep o consume
engagemen has i s oo s in ela ionship ma ke ing (Ashley
e al. 2011; Vi ek e al. 2012) and has ga ne ed signi ican
a en ion om bo h esea ch and p ac ice (Boujena e al.
2021). Vi ek e al. (2012) de ined engagemen as “ he in en-
si y o an indi idual’s pa icipa ion in and connec ion wi h
an o ganiza ion’s o e ings o o ganiza ion ac i i ies” (p.
127). Rega ding in luence s’ pe o mance as opinion lead-
e s, use engagemen migh be a leas i no mo e impo an
han in luence s’ numbe o ollowe s (Wies e al. 2022). In
ac , a high numbe o ollowe s a e ela i ely meaningless
i he audience does no in e ac wi h he social media con-
en he in luence p o ides. As ecen li e a u e sugges s,
a la ge ollowe base does no necessa ily gua an ee high
engagemen , and a small ollowe base does no necessa ily
mean low engagemen (De Vei man e al. 2017; Dja a o a &
Rushwo h 2017; Ta esse & Wood 2021). Nano- and mic o-
in luence s, o ins ance, o en gene a e highe engagemen
a es han celeb i ies o mega-in luence s because hey o e
hei ollowe s he bene i s o pe sonal accessibili y and high
pe cei ed au hen ici y (Campbell & Fa ell, 2020). Thus,
al hough he numbe o ollowe s emains impo an o
in luence ma ke ing, use engagemen is e en mo e impo -
an o measu ing online ma ke ing success (Ta esse &
Wood 2021; Wissman 2018).
Typically, use engagemen can be concep ualized in
e ms o likes, sha es, o commen s (Ta esse & Wood 2021)
and p o ides essen ial insigh s in o he success o ma ke ing
campaigns by indica ing how well he ea u ed con en was
ecei ed (Ba ge e al. 2016; Gumme us e al. 2012; Lou
e al. 2019). Mo eo e , i ensu es ha in luence s’ con en is
isible o mo e people since Ins ag am’s algo i hms end o
highligh pos s om accoun s ha expe ience a high le el o
iewe ship engagemen (Sa aco 2020). The ene is ha he
highe he engagemen wi h in luence s’ media con en , he
be e he in luence ’s con en isibili y and g ea e each.
Thus, i is no su p ising ha bo h in luence s and ma ke e s
seek o op imize use engagemen conce ning hei con en
(Wies e al. 2022). Agains his backg ound, he ques ion
a ises o whe he and how sponso ship disclosu e s a egies
a ec use s’ engagemen wi h in luence s’ con en .
P io li e a u e p esen s ambiguous esul s on how disclo-
su e could a ec social media engagemen (Boe man 2020).
Fo ins ance, E ans e al. (2017) ound a nega i e e ec
o ad e isemen ecogni ion on indi iduals’ engagemen
in en ion. In pa icula , when indi iduals unde s and ha
in luence s’ con en is a pe suasi e a emp in he o m o
ad e isemen , schola s ound ha indi iduals a e less will-
ing o sha e he con en wi h hei pee s (E ans e al., 2017).
In con as , Johnson e al. (2019) and Lou e al. (2019) ound
no e ec o ad e isemen ecogni ion on engagemen , while
Boe man (2020) epo s ha s anda dized disclosu e e sus
no disclosu e can ha e a posi i e e ec on indi iduals’ in en-
ion o engage wi h he pos . Simila ly, Ka agü e al. (2022)
ound ha consume s app ecia e anspa ency, whe he he
con en is sponso ed o no , by being mo e willing o engage
wi h he pos . Due o he mixed esul s p esen ed by he
ex an body o he li e a u e, his a icle seeks o in es iga e
he sub- esea ch ques ion
RQ1: whe he and how explici sponso ship disclosu e,
impa iali y disclosu e, concealing disclosu e, and no
disclosu e migh impac iewe s’ engagemen wi h con-
en .
Following E ans e al. (2017), one would expec ha
explici disclosu e would nega i ely in luence use engage-
men . In con as , ollowing Ka agü e al. (2022), one would
expec o see a posi i e in luence o explici sponso ship
disclosu e and impa iali y disclosu e on use engagemen
wi h he pos . We empi ically in es iga e his sub- esea ch
ques ion in S udy 1.

Elec onic Ma ke s (2024) 34:60 Page 5 o 27 60
Use sen imen
Besides use engagemen , his a icle also seeks o empi i-
cally in es iga e he e ec o a ious disclosu e s a egies (i.e.,
explici sponso ship disclosu e, impa iali y disclosu e, con-
cealing disclosu e, and no disclosu e) on use sen imen . We
empi ically in es iga e his sub- esea ch ques ion in S udy 2.
Gene ally, use sen imen e eals indi iduals’ subjec-
i e a i udes owa d he con en (Lou e al., 2019). In lu-
ence s mus s ay a uned o wha use s engage wi h and
wha consume s p e e o dislike. In oday’s compe i i e
in luence landscape, wi h apidly changing consume
p e e ences and he ansien popula i y o in luence s
and b ands (Wies e al. 2022), s aying success ul equi es
ecognizing shi s in use p e e ences h ough sen imen
analysis (Hombu g e al. 2015).
Viewe ship sen imen is especially impo an o mic o-
in luence s wi h < 100,000 ollowe s, as hese in luence s
canno a o d o miss ou on shi s in iewe ship p e e -
ences. Many in e ac ions may indica e engaging, in e es -
ing con en likely o p o oke he use ’s posi i e a i ude
owa d he in luence . Howe e , hese in e ac ions (e.g.,
likes and commen s) do no con ey he unde lying sen i-
men o hese engagemen s (G ä e 2019).
Gene ally, use sen imen is ex ac ed om use s’ com-
men s on he social media pla o m in ques ion (Lou e al.
2019). I can be an abs ac key pe o mance indica o o
he quali y o con en bu also a good p oxy o a cam-
paign’s success. The eby, mo e posi i e sen imen indi-
ca es highe success (G ä e 2019).
Despi e he impo ance o consume sen imen o
measu ing he success o a campaign, i is su p ising ha
only li le li e a u e in es iga es he e ec s o sponso -
ship disclosu e on use sen imen . The wo k o Lou e al.
(2019) is a no able excep ion. In hei s udy, he schol-
a s hypo hesize a nega i e e ec be ween sen imen and
sponso ship disclosu e by expec ing o measu e he leas
posi i e sen imen o explici sponso ship disclosu es, ol-
lowed by ambiguous disclosu es and no disclosu e. How-
e e , based on da a om in luence ma ke ing campaigns
om 41 appa el b ands in he U.S., he schola s ound
no s a is ically signi ican e ec o he h ee in es iga ed
disclosu es on sen imen (Lou e al. 2019).
No ably, Lou e al. (2019) use a supe ised lea ning algo-
i hm o conduc sen imen analysis on use s’ commen s. In
his a icle, we ollow a dis inc app oach and concep ualize
sen imen in e ms o isual cues ep esen ed by an emoji
scale ( o mo e de ails, please see S udy 2 in he ollowing
sec ions). Ou app oach builds on p io li e a u e sugges ing
ha emoji can ha e simila p ope ies o lexical sen imen
indica o s, and sen imen exp essed in he o m o an emoji
scale e lec s he same indings as con en -based analysis
(Phan e al. 2019).
Fo mally, we in es iga e ollowing esea ch ques ion:
RQ2: Wha is he e ec o a ious disclosu e s a egies
(i.e., explici sponso ship disclosu e, impa iali y disclo-
su e, concealing disclosu e, and no disclosu e) on use
sen imen .
In luence c edibili y
C edibili y is ano he cons uc ha is pa icula ly impo an
o in luence s. Because a i s co e, in luence ma ke ing
es s on he basic p inciple o pee endo semen and elec-
onic wo d o mou h [eWOM] whe e a ypical sa is ied cus-
ome “endo ses o demons a es a p oduc o se ice and
ac s as a sou ce o in o ma ion o in luence he accep abili y
o he message” (Munnukka e al., 2016, p.182), i is essen-
ial ha in luence s come ac oss as e e yday indi iduals
ha a e us wo hy and compe en (De Cicco e al. 2021).
In line wi h his no ion, in luence c edibili y, some imes
also e e ed o as sou ce c edibili y, is ypically concep u-
alized as a composi e cons uc o in luence us wo hi-
ness, pe cei ed in luence expe ise, and pe cei ed simila i y
(V on is e al. 2021).
P io li e a u e has shown ha he accep abili y o he
message con eyed by he in luence hinges on ecipien s’
pe cep ion o he in luence ’s c edibili y (Munnukka e al.
2016). Fu he mo e, esea ch on in e pe sonal ela ionships
has epea edly illus a ed he nega i e a ibu ions esul -
ing om impa ial, equi ocal, and decei ul disclosu es
(Ca & Hayes, 2014; Toma & Hancock, 2012). The e o e,
concealing disclosu e and no disclosu e ha appea s o be
clouding o misleading he use ’s imp ession o he in lu-
ence ’s bias may nega i ely impac in luence s’ c edibili y.
Case in poin : I use s see a pos wi hou a sponso ship dis-
closu e, i should be sa e o assume he con en o he pos
is unbiased. Howe e , he pos ’s con en migh lead use s
o suspec ha he pos is sponso ed a e all, e en hough
no disclosed. To esol e his issue, one can expec use s o
downg ade he in luence ’s c edibili y (Ca & Hayes 2014;
Jeong e al. 2019). This can be explained using Psychologi-
cal Con ac Viola ion (PCV) heo y.
The PCV heo y o us has been well es ablished in
he con ex o buye -selle ela ionships in an e-ma ke -
place (Pa lou & Ge en 2005). I e e s o he pe cep ion
ha he e has been a b each o he psychological con ac
be ween wo pa ies (i.e., selle and buye ). The psychologi-
cal con ac is an unw i en se o expec a ions and obliga-
ions be ween wo pa ies (Pa lou & Ge en 2005). Such
psychological con ac s can e e o ules and expec a ions
ha ocus on he long- e m ela ionship be ween pa ies and
include implici obliga ions beyond hose ha can be explic-
i ly desc ibed in legal e ms. Such ela ional psychological
con ac s emphasize us , loyal y, and mu ual commi men
Elec onic Ma ke s (2024) 34:6060 Page 6 o 27
o each o he . A psychological con ac b each occu s when
one pa y eels ha he o he pa y has iola ed one o mo e
o he implici ly se unw i en ules and expec a ions (Pa -
lou & Ge en 2005). In ou esea ch con ex , psychological
con ac s en ail use belie s and expec a ions ha in luenc-
e s should beha e in a pa icula manne —e.g., p o ide
o ganic ecommenda ions and explici ly disclose sponso -
ship i hei con en is sponso ed (Wang & Wang 2019).
Thus, indi iduals’ in e ac ion wi h an in luence ’s con en
can cons i u e an implici psychological con ac ha he
in luence is hones and us wo hy. Psychological con ac
iola ion in an in luence - iewe ship ela ionship occu s
when iewe s pe cei e ha he in luence has b eached
hei implici obliga ions o expec a ions. Viewe s de elop
ce ain expec a ions ega ding he in luence s’ au hen ici y,
anspa ency, and hones y in hei con en . When in luence s
engage in beha io s ha iola e hese expec a ions, such
as undisclosed sponso ships o misleading endo semen s,
iewe s may eel a sense o be ayal, disappoin men , o
mis us . Fo example, suppose iewe s belie e an in lu-
ence genuinely uses and ecommends a p oduc bu la e
disco e ha he in luence was paid o p omo e i wi hou
disclosu e. In ha case, iewe s may pe cei e a psycho-
logical con ac iola ion. This iola ion unde mines he
us and pe cei ed au hen ici y o he in luence - iewe ship
ela ionship. Lack o disclosu e o misleading disclosu e o
con en ha esembles an ad e isemen iola es he psy-
chological con ac be ween he use and in luence (Wang
& Wang 2019), so use s dec ease hei us in he in luence
as a sou ce o c edible and unbiased in o ma ion. In u n,
wi h inc easing ecen e idence ha anspa ency on spon-
so ship educes pe cep ions o manipula i e in en while
inc easing consume s’ pe cei ed c edibili y o he ma ke -
ing agen (Abend o h & Heyman 2013, Cao & Belo 2014,
E ans e al. 2019, Wang & Wang 2019), we can expec ha :
H1: Compa ed o explici sponso ship disclosu e, con-
cealing disclosu e and no disclosu e will nega i ely
impac in luence ’s c edibili y.
The eby, p io li e a u e indica es ha in luence s’ c ed-
ibili y migh be highe o impa iali y disclosu e han
explici sponso ship disclosu e (e.g., Ca & Hayes, 2014;
Dekke & Van Reijme sdal, 2013; Hwang & Jeong, 2016).
Fo ins ance, Hwang and Jeong (2016) in es iga ed di -
e ences in blogge c edibili y o blog pos s wi h explici
sponso ship disclosu e and blog pos s agged as genuine
ecommenda ions—i.e., impa iali y disclosu e. The schol-
a s epo a highe blogge c edibili y o genuine ecom-
menda ions. Simila ly, Ca & Hayes (2014) and Dekke
& Van Reijme sdal (2013) ound ha consume s e alua e
in luence s mo e posi i ely and pe cei e hem as mo e
c edible when using ex ended disclosu es.
Disclosu e s a egies andma ke e ‑ ele an
ou comes
To be success ul, businesses mus handle hei cus ome s
in e ac i ely, collabo a i ely, and in a pe sonalized manne
(Wieneke & Leh e 2016). Gi en his con ex , i becomes
c ucial o an icipa e how di e en disclosu e s a egies
may in luence consume s’ eac ions o bo h he b and and
he p oduc . Compa ed o o he ma ke ing ac i i ies, such
as celeb i y endo semen o ad e ising in he adi ional
media, in luence ma ke ing, and pa icula ly mic o-in lu-
ence ma ke ing, ep esen s a a he e ec i e ye inexpensi e
way o each a b oad cus ome base (Lou e al. 2019). Ne -
e heless, in luence ma ke ing also induces cos s ha need
o be ou weighed by he bene i s i gene a es. Business logic
manda es ha ma ke e s do no in es in in luence ma ke -
ing wi hou i s analyzing he po en ial e u n on in es men
and compa ing i o o he ma ke ing s a egies. Al hough
i emains unclea how in luence ma ke ing’s success can
be measu ed (Childe s e al. 2019), ma ke ing campaigns’
end goal is o p omo e he b and and ul ima ely d i e sales
and e enue up (Campbell & Fa ell 2020). How cus ome s
pe cei e and expe ience a b and is e lec ed in hei a i-
udes. A he same ime, consume s’ in en ion o pu chase
he ad e ised p oduc s is a good indica o ha he ma ke -
ing campaign induces sales. Acco dingly, in his s udy, we
ocus on use s’ a i udes owa d he b and and indi iduals’
pu chase in en ion as wo key pe o mance me ics o in lu-
ence ma ke ing success (Campbell & Fa ell 2020).
A i ude owa ds heb and
Faced wi h highly compe i i e ma ke s, he lee ing whims
o consume s, and he popula i y o p oduc s and b ands,
de eloping a solid consume -b and ela ionship is becom-
ing mo e c i ical han e e . In heo y, b ands can engage in
consume -b and ela ionships and y o s eng hen his ela-
ionship by pu suing ma ke ing campaigns in social media
ia (i) hei b and accoun s and pages o (ii) he in luence s
(Lou e al. 2019). In ecen yea s, in luence s, especially
mic o-in luence s, ha e become inc easingly popula . These
in luence s a e seen as us ed igu es by he gene al pub-
lic and hei ollowe s (Boe man 2020). People end o ind
in luence s mo e us wo hy and eliable han adi ional
ad e ising sou ces (Lou e al. 2019). In ma ke ing pa ne -
ships, in luence s o en ac as b and ambassado s (Boe man
2020) and c ea e con en ha seamlessly i s wi h egula
non-comme cial pos s (De Vei man & Hudde s 2020). As a
esul , s udies consis en ly show ha b and-p omo ed mes-
sages a e pe cei ed as mo e biased compa ed o in luence -
p omo ed b and messages (Lou e al. 2019).
Elec onic Ma ke s (2024) 34:60 Page 7 o 27 60
In gene al, b anding and c ea ing a solid b and play an
essen ial ole in he success o he p oduc s and se ices o
a company. Fo ins ance, since b anding can ha e s ong
signaling e ec s o p oduc s ha a e ini ially unknown o
consume s, i is i al ha consume s de elop posi i e a i-
udes owa d he b and. A e all, posi i e a i udes owa ds
he b and (which can culmina e in o “b and lo e”) b ing a
a ie y o ad an ages. Such ad an ages include inc eased
b and loyal y o willingness o pay p ice p emiums (Ba a
e al. 2012).
Due o he impo ance o a i udes owa ds he b and o
a company’s success, schola s in es iga ed he e ec s o
sponso ship disclosu e on b and a i udes. The indings a e
mixed, sugges ing ha sponso ship disclosu e could ha e
bo h posi i e and nega i e impac s on consume s’ b and
a i ude. Fo ins ance, in a s udy wi h ele ision ads, Boe -
man e al. (2012) ound ha when indi iduals ecognize he
con en as ad e ising, hey a e mo e c i ical o he con en
message, leading o less a o able a i udes owa d he b and.
Simila ly, a me a-analysis by K ouwe e al. (2017) epo ed
ha disclosing sponso ed con en educed b and a i udes.
In con as , mo e ecen esea ch a gues ha anspa ency
on sponso ship educes pe cep ions o manipula i e in en
(Abend o h & Heyman 2013, Cao & Belo 2014, Wang &
Wang 2019), which, in u n, ansla es in o a posi i e e ec
on b and a i ude, by mi iga ing he nega i e impac o
ad e ising ecogni ion (Campbell and E ans 2018, E ans
e al. 2019). Gi en ha indi iduals gene ally espond mo e
nega i ely when hey pe cei e manipula i e in en (Camp-
bell and E ans 2018), we can expec ha :
H2: Compa ed o explici disclosu e, all o he disclosu e
s a egies will esul in less posi i e b and a i udes.
Use in en ion opu chase
Besides he ad an ages o in luence ma ke ing o b and-
ing, ma ke e s collabo a e wi h in luence s o p omo e and
sell hei p oduc s and se ices. To assess he e ec i eness
o ma ke ing campaigns and es ima e he e u n on in es -
men , ma ke e s equen ly ely on use s’ in en o make a
pu chase as a p ac ical p oxy o hei ac ual pu chasing
beha io . Consequen ly, i is unde s andable ha he e a e
exis ing s udies in es iga ing he link be ween sponso ship
disclosu es and indi iduals’ pu chase in en ions. Again,
p io li e a u e p esen s ambiguous esul s. While a ious
s udies epo ha disclosu e ha helps ecognize he con en
as sponso ed (i.e., explici sponso ship disclosu e) and hus
ha ms consume s’ in en ions o pu chase (Boe man e al.
2015; Van Reijme sdal e al. 2016; Wojdynski & E ans
2016), o he s udies ound no signi ican di ec e ec o dis-
closu e on he in en ion o pu chase. Ye , ecen ly, esea ch
inc easingly epo s a posi i e link be ween anspa en
sponso ship disclosu e and consume s’ pu chase in en ions
(Wang & Wang 2019, Wood oo e al. 2020). D awing on
hese ecen insigh s pai ed wi h he well-es ablished ela-
ionship be ween a i udes owa ds a p oduc and b and and
pu chase in en ions, we posi ha :
H3: Compa ed o explici disclosu e, all o he disclosu e
s a egies will esul in a lowe in en ion o pu chase.
Po en ial media ing andmode a ing ac o s
In luence c edibili y media e ma ke e s‑ ele an
ou comes Besides he di ec e ec o sponso ship disclo-
su es on use s’ a i udes owa d he b and and in en ion o
pu chase, we can also expec indi ec e ec s h ough in lu-
ence s’ c edibili y. As men ioned p e iously, in luence s’
c edibili y is impo an no only o he in luence hem-
sel es bu also o ma ke e s, as i has downs eam e ec s
on b and a i ude (Hwang & Jeong, 2016) and in en ion o
pu chase (Ohanian 1990; Ri on e al. 2004). Ou expec a-
ion ha in luence c edibili y media es he e ec o a ious
disclosu e s a egies aligns wi h heo e ical pe spec i es on
he p ocessing o pe suasi e communica ions.
The Pe suasion Knowledge Model (PKM) in oduced by F i-
es ad and W igh , (1994) heo ises how indi iduals e alua e
and espond o in luence a emp s om ma ke e s. The PKM
model consis s o “a a ge ” (i.e., he pa y who is a emp ed
o be pe suaded), “an agen ” (i.e., he pa y who ies o
pe suade he a ge ), and h ee ypes o knowledge on bo h
sides: opic knowledge, agen knowledge, and pe suasion
knowledge. F om he a ge s’ (i.e., consume s’) pe spec i e,
opic knowledge e e s o belie s abou he opic o ad e -
isemen subjec . Pe suasion knowledge adhe es o belie s
abou he ma ke e s’ mo i es and s a egies. Finally, agen
knowledge e e s o belie s and pe cep ion o he agen ’s
(i.e., in luence ’s) ai s, abili ies, and goals.
T ans e ing he PKM o he in luence ma ke ing con-
ex , he in luence is ac ing as an agen , and he a ge is he
social media use exposed o he agen ’s ad e ising pos .
The paid pos ing on social media can be conside ed as pe -
suasion a emp (Kim and Song 2018).
The esponse o a pe suasion a emp is based on hese
h ee ypes o knowledge and esul s in he a ge ’s pe sonal
pe suasion coping beha io (Ki mani and Campbell 2009).
Al hough ma ke ing li e a u e acknowledges se e al di e -
en s a egies ha consume s can use o espond o pe sua-
sion a emp s (Ki mani and Campbell 2009), in his s udy—
o he sake o simplici y—we classi y consume s’ coping
beha io in o esis ance o compliance wi h he agen s’
eques .
Se e al schola s concluded in hei s udies ha pe suasion
knowledge is a cen al ac o o consume s’ coping beha io
Elec onic Ma ke s (2024) 34:6060 Page 8 o 27
(Boe man e al., 2015, 2017). Indi iduals use hei pe sua-
sion knowledge o e alua e and p ocess ad e ising si ua-
ions on a daily basis. I indi iduals in e ha a salespe son
has ul e io mo i es, hey ac i a e hei pe suasion knowl-
edge and become suspicious abou he company, esul ing in
a nega i e e alua ion (Campbell & Ki mani, 2000).
Besides pe suasion knowledge, in his s udy we also con-
side he link be ween agen knowledge and consume s’ coping
beha io . Because in in luence ma ke ing he agen and i s
cha ac e is ics a e impo an ac o s in con eying he ad e ise-
men message o he a ge s, agen knowledge is mos likely a
leas as impo an as he pe suasion knowledge i sel .
A i s co e, in luence ma ke ing es s on he basic p inciple
o pee endo semen and (e)WOM whe e a ypical sa is ied
cus ome “endo ses o demons a es a p oduc o se ice and
ac s as a sou ce o in o ma ion o in luence he accep abili y
o he message” (Munnukka e al., 2016, p.182). The a ge ed
indi iduals’ accep abili y o he message con eyed by he agen
hinges on a ge s’ pe cep ion o he agen s’ c edibili y (com-
posi e o us wo hiness, expe ise, and simila i y (Munnukka
e al. 2016). This is especially he case when he endo sed p od-
uc o b and is no known o he a ge ed indi iduals.
Al oge he , acco ding o he PKM model, he pe suasi e-
ness o a message (in his case, he disclosu e) can al e he
ecei e ’s a i ude owa ds he communica o ( he in luence ),
which subsequen ly a ec s esponses o he endo sed p od-
uc . As p io esea ch showed, he e ec o in luence c ed-
ibili y can be, in some cases, s ong and long-las ing. Fink
e al. (2020) o ins ance epo ha in a Facebook commu-
ni y, celeb i y-endo sed ma ke ing in luence c edibili y has a
mul i-yea las ing posi i e e ec on he in en ion o pu chase.
Addi ionally, concep ualizing in luence s’ c edibili y as a
cons uc composed o us wo hiness, pe cei ed in luence
expe ise, and pe cei ed simila i y, p io esea ch indica es
ha c edibili y in luences a i udes and pu chase beha io s
mos ly h ough he us wo hiness componen because he
in luence s y ou he p oduc s hemsel es (Uzunoğlu &
Kip 2014). Agains his backg ound, a dec ease in in luenc-
e s’ c edibili y is expec ed o nega i ely impac consume s’
a i udes owa d he b and and hei pu chasing in en ions.
This should be especially he case o ob usca ing disclosu e
s a egies (i.e., no disclosu e o concealing disclosu e) whe e
ollowe s migh ques ion he in eg i y o he in luence ’s con-
en (Ca & Hayes 2014; Magnini 2011) and us wo hiness.
Al oge he , in line wi h p io li e a u e demons a ing ha
i he o igins o a message seem disingenuous, use s a e
mo e likely o dis us he con en (Dou e al. 2012), i would
be sensible o expec ha :
H4: In luence c edibili y, and in pa icula he us -
wo hiness componen , will media e he e ec s o a ious
sponso ship disclosu es on indi iduals’ a i udes owa d
he b and and in en ions o pu chase.
Followe s e susnon‑ ollowe s The a e a which in lu-
ence s’ c edibili y migh su e om concealed disclosu e
s a egies is likely o depend on whe he he iewe ship o
he pos is ollowe s o non- ollowe s. P io esea ch in es-
iga ing he e ec o disclosu e on consume pe cep ions
p ima ily elied on labo a o y-s yle expe imen s wi h ic i-
ious pos s and in luence s (e.g., De Vei man e al., 2017; De
Vei man & Hudde s, 2020; E ans e al., 2017). Thus, ela ed
wo k on he e ec o a ious disclosu e s a egies does no
dis inguish be ween he opinions and e alua ions o non-
ollowe s and ollowe s o eal in luence s. This is su p ising
o wo easons: Fi s ly, p io wo k on in luence ma ke ing
sugges s ha ollowe s and non- ollowe s ha e di e en sen-
si i i y le els ega ding he p oduc -in luence i (Belanche
e al. 2020) and downs eam ou comes o he ma ke ing
campaign (Leung e al. 2022). Secondly, he con en o Ins-
ag am au ho s a ge s i s and o emos ollowe s, and indi-
iduals gene ally us mo e iends and acquain ances han
comple e s ange s (Resnick & Zeckhause 2002). Follow-
ing an in luence o e ime allows ollowe s o lea n abou
hem. As ollowe s a e con inually exposed o de ails o an
in luence ’s li e, ollowe s o m ce ain a i udes owa d he
in luence and e en expe ience a sense o iendship (Boe -
man 2020). Fo some ollowe s, i seems as i hey ha e a
long-dis ance iend in he in luence (Dja a o a & Rush-
wo h 2017). Mo eo e , by being able o in e ac wi h he
in luence (e.g., by commen ing on an in luence ’s pos s),
ollowe s will eel inc easingly simila o he in luence
(Schou en e al. 2020). Also, in luence s end o add ess hei
ollowe s di ec ly in hei pos s, implying some deg ee o
closeness and making ollowe s hink hey a e pee s (E z &
Hee is Ch is ensen 2018; Gannon & P o he o 2018). These
a gumen s a e in line wi h he Pa asocial In e ac ion Theo y
(Ho on & Wohl 1956), which e e s o he ac ha mass
media iewe s o lis ene s come o build some psychologi-
cal ela ionship (e.g., iendship) wi h media pe sonali ies,
despi e ha ing no con ac o in e ac ion wi h hem. T ans e -
ing he Pa asocial In e ac ion Theo y o social media sug-
ges s ha an indi idual A (i.e., ollowe ) ollowing ano he
pe son B (i.e., he in luence ) enables pe son A o de elop
speci ic a i udes o e en expe ience eelings o in imacy
owa ds pe son B (Boe man 2020). The special emo ional
bond in luence s build wi h hei ollowe s is he eason why
in luence s can sway hei ollowe s’ opinions and beha io s
(Ki e al. 2020). As he bond be ween in luence s and hei
ollowe s s eng hens, so does hei psychological con ac
and he abili y o exe in luence o e hei ollowe s (Ki
e al. 2020). In ac ions on in luence s’ side, such as con-
cealed disclosu e s a egies, ep esen psychological con ac
iola ions ha ollowe s migh pe cei e as a ype o be ayal
ha signi ican ly damages hei ela ionship and has ad e se
spillo e e ec s on he b and (Ki e al., 2020). In con as ,
non- ollowe s’ ela ionship wi h he in luence is nei he
Elec onic Ma ke s (2024) 34:60 Page 15 o 27 60
Table 4 Co ela ion ma ix
T us -wo -
hiness
Expe ise Simila i y Pu chase
in en ion
A i ude
w. he
b and
Conceal-
ing disclo-
su e
Impa ial-
i y disclo-
su e
No disclo-
su e
Female Ac i i y
le el on
Ins ag am
Explici
disc. × ol-
lowe s
Conceal-
ing disc. ×
ollowe s
Impa ial-
i y disc. ×
ollowe s
No disc.
× ollow-
e s
T us -wo -
hiness
1
Expe ise 0.711 1
Simila i y 0.579 0.546 1
Pu chase
in en ion
0.608 0.560 0.542 1
A i ude w.
he b and
0.736 0.638 0.525 0.659 1
Concealing
disc.
−0.004 0.017 0.006 −0.004 −0.004 1
Impa iali y
disc.
0.047 0.009 −0.004 0.007 0.059 −0.334 1
No disc. −0.021 −0.042 0.006 −0.029 0.003 −0.338 −0.339 1
Female 0.254 0.197 0.412 0.236 0.179 −0.015 −0.004 −0.019 1
Ac i i y
le el on
Ins ag am
0.196 0.174 0.189 0.146 0.173 0.007 −0.019 −0.006 0.302 1
Explici
disc. ×
ollowe s
0.057 0.093 0.128 0.094 −0.004 −0.263 −0.264 −0.267 0.162 0.092 1
Concealing
disc. ×
ollowe s
0.136 0.157 0.172 0.102 0.113 0.765 −0.255 −0.259 0.132 0.062 −0.201 1
Impa iali y
disc. ×
ollowe s
0.177 0.122 0.170 0.099 0.141 −0.260 0.779 −0.264 0.148 0.046 −0.206 −0.1989 1
No disc. ×
Followe s
0.134 0.138 0.219 0.081 0.117 −0.247 −0.248 0.731 0.137 0.107 −0.195 −0.1891 −0.193 1
Ma ke
a iable
0.066 0.071 0.108 0.087 0.016 −0.009 −0.009 0.001 0.068 0.062 0.037 0.026 0.007 0.054

Elec onic Ma ke s (2024) 34:6060 Page 16 o 27
A 5-poin seman ic di e en ial scale p o ided by Spea s
and Singh (2004) measu ed indi iduals’ b and a i udes.
Pa icipan s we e asked o e alua e he a ious cha ac e -
is ics o he b and MyP o ein ( he b and shown in he pos -
ing), using i e bipola cha ac e is ics: unappealing/appeal-
ing, bad/good, unpleasan /pleasan , un a o able/ a o able,
and unlikable/likable. This scale also p o ed eliable, wi h
α = .851.
Indi iduals’ pu chase in en ion was measu ed wi h h ee
i ems on a 7-poin Like scale (1 = s ongly disag ee, 7 =
s ongly ag ee). The o iginal scale was de eloped by Be -
ens e al. (2005) and en ailed he ollowing ques ions: “I
you we e planning o buy a p oduc o his ype, would you
choose his p oduc ?,” “Would you pu chase his p oduc ?,”
“I a iend was looking o a p oduc o his ype, would you
ad ise him o he o pu chase his p oduc ?.” In ou s udy,
his scale also p o ed eliable, wi h α = .817.
To cap u e he a i udes and beha io al in en ions o a
b oad g oup o indi iduals who did no necessa ily ha e an
a achmen o he in luence and he e o e migh eac di e -
en ly o he pos and he ad e isemen disclosu e, he s udy
link was ci cula ed among ollowe s o he in luence and
non- ollowe s. Mo eo e , indi iduals we e con ac ed and
in i ed o pa icipa e in he online su ey ia social media
pla o ms. To expand he each o he su ey, we also used
he snowball me hod and asked pa icipan s o pos he in i-
a ion on hei social media pages (Wagenaa and Babbie
2004). In o al, 1175 indi iduals esponded o ou in i a ions
o pa icipa e. While 826 indi iduals comple ed he su ey,
a e checking o a en ion bias, ushing h ough he su ey
(i.e., all pa icipan s who comple ed he su ey signi ican ly
as e (app oxima ely 5 min) o signi ican ly slowe (abou
20 min), and o he inconsis encies in indi iduals’ esponses,
he inal sample en ails 657 subjec s. The ollowing desc ip-
i e s a is ics e e o he inal sample.
We kep he sample popula ion as simila o he in lu-
ence ’s a ge audience as possible. Eigh y- wo pe cen o
he pa icipan s we e emale, and 17.9% we e male. These
esul s align wi h he ac ha he in luence mainly a ac s a
emale audience (as commen ed in he sec ion discussing he
s udy se ing). Also, mo e emales use Ins ag am han males
(Tanko ska 2020). The pa icipan s’ age ange was be ween
15 and 38 yea s (Mage = 22.86, SDage = 3.48). This sample
esembles he a e age Ins ag am ollowe o he in luence
as he main audience (69%) is be ween 18 and 34 yea s old
(see Fig.2 “P o ile analy ics o “@dyedblondpony”). This
is also in line wi h he ecen end on Ins ag am ha shows
ha Ins ag am is domina ed mos ly by younge use s below
he age o 34 (Tanko ska 2020). On a e age, people ha e
been using Ins ag am o 2 o 5 yea s. Ul ima ely, 65% o he
pa icipan s epo ed ollowing he accoun @dyedblond-
pony on Ins ag am.
Empi ical analyses and esul s
To explo e he p oposed ela ionships empi ically while
ensu ing ou esul s’ in e nal and ex e nal alidi y we unde -
ook a se ies o es s. Fi s , we pe o med a andomiza ion
es o he ea men adminis a ion. A one-way analysis o
a iance (ANOVA) co obo a es ha he andomiza ion p o-
cedu e was success ul and shows no s a is ically signi ican
di e ences be ween he expe imen al g oups wi h espec o
gende (p ob > chi2 = 0.582), age (p ob > chi2 = 0.196), and
in ensi y o Ins ag am use (p ob > chi2 = 0.862).
Second, we checked whe he ou ea men adminis a ion
i sel was success ul—i.e., whe he he adminis e ed ea -
men s success ully in luenced pa icipan s’ ecogni ion o he
ad e isemen s—c ucial o e alua ing he subsequen e ec s
on a i udes and beha io s. To his end, we asked pa icipan s
o ecall whe he he pos hey iewed con ained an exp ession
ha he pos was an ad e isemen . We compa ed ecogni ion
a es ac oss he di e en disclosu e ypes. I all pa icipan s,
i espec i e o hei g oup, would ecognize he shown pos as
an ad e isemen , ou ea men s would no ha e been app o-
p ia e o measu e he ou comes o in e es . Howe e , ou da a
shows ha ad e isemen ecogni ion le els a e depending on
he adminis e ed ea men s. The pa icipan s (63.13%) who
iewed he explici disclosu e (ad e isemen ) and 30.30%
who iewed he impa iali y disclosu e pos ecalled ha ing
pe cei ed he cue ha he iewed con en was ad e ising. In
con as , only 15.24% o he pa icipan s who iewed he con-
cealing disclosu e (#ad) and 16.07% o he no disclosu e con-
di ion epo ed seeing a label indica ing ha he con en was
ad e ising. One-way analysis o a iance (ANOVA) co obo-
a es ha in e ms o ad e isemen ecogni ion, he g oups
a e signi ican ly di e en om each o he (p ob > chi2 = .00).
Thi d, o ensu e ha we do no epo spu ious esul s ha
migh a ise om complex models (A ms ong 2012), we
es ed ou hypo heses H1 o H5 ia a mul i a ia e analysis
o a iance (MANOVA), linea eg essions, and media ion
analyses. Be o e unning he MANOVA we compu ed he
co ela ion ac o s be ween he a iables o in e es (see
Table4). None o he co ela ion ac o s a e highe han .79.
No ably, all hypo heses a e o mula ed such ha hey pos-
ula e e ec s o di e en disclosu e s a egies compa ed o a
clea agging o ad e ising (i.e., explici disclosu e). Explici
agging o sponso ed con en is desi ed om no only a legal
bu also om an e hical pe spec i e. The e o e, in all analy-
ses, we choose he explici disclosu e s a egy as ou baseline
s a egy and compa e he o he disclosu e s a egies wi h his
baseline in o de o unde s and how hey compa e o each
o he . Wi h his in mind, we an MANOVA using indi iduals’
pu chase in en ion, hei a i ude owa ds he b and, and in lu-
ence c edibili y componen s as dependen a iables (DVs).
The a ious pos ula ed disclosu e s a egies, as well as he
Elec onic Ma ke s (2024) 34:60 Page 17 o 27 60
pos ula ed in e ac ion be ween hem and ollowe ship s a us,
we e used as independen a iables. Fo be e eadabili y and
in e p e a ion o he esul s, Table5 epo s only Pillai’s ace
s a is ics. In gene al, Pillai’s ace is conside ed obus agains
iola ions o some o he assump ions o MANOVA, such as
no mali y and homogenei y o a iances (Finch and F ench
2013), and is he e o e a a o able choice in many cases. The
es s s a is ics do no indica e a signi ican mul i a ia e ela-
ionship be ween he a ious disclosu e s a egies (concealing
disclosu e, impa iali y disclosu e, o no disclosu e) and he
dependen a iables o in e es . Howe e , he s a is ics do sup-
po he exis ence o a mode a ing e ec o ollowe ship on
hese disclosu e s a egies, by showing s a is ically signi ican
Pillai’s T ace s a is ics (p < 0.01) o he in e ac ion e ms
disclosu e s a egies × ollowe ship s a us.
Al oge he , he MANOVA esul s sugges ha H5, which
s a es ha ollowe ship s a us is mode a ing he e ec s o
sponso ship disclosu e, inds empi ical suppo in he da a.
We use hese insigh s o es ima e pa simonious OLS
models ha es H1 o H3 and media ion analyses o H4 o
H5. In H1 we expec ed ha compa ed o explici sponso -
ship disclosu e, concealing disclosu e and no disclosu e will
nega i ely impac in luence ’s c edibili y. H2 pos ula ed ha
compa ed o explici disclosu e, all o he disclosu e s a e-
gies will esul in less posi i e b and a i udes, while H3
expec s he same o indi iduals’ pu chase in en ions. To
empi ically es hese h ee hypo heses, we o mula e and
es ima e a pa simonious OLS wi h ollowing speci ica ion:
DV
=𝛽0+𝛽1Female +𝛽2Ac i i y le el +
4
∑
j=2
𝛽3jDisclosu e s a egy
+
4
∑
j
=1
𝛽4jDisclosu e s a egy ×Followe ship s a us +𝛽5Ma ke a iable +
𝜀
Table6 p esen s he co esponding es ima ion esul s o
which all VIF alues a e lowe han 3.3. The esul s indi-
ca e ha , con a y o ou expec a ions, he e a e no s a is i-
cally signi ican e ec s o a ious disclosu e s a egies on
he indi idual componen s o in luence c edibili y, indi-
iduals’ a i udes owa ds he b and, o pu chase in en ions.
Compa ed o explici disclosu e, none o he o he disclosu e
s a egies ha e an impac on he dependen a iables o in e -
es . The e o e, we can conclude ha H1 h ough 3 a e no
suppo ed. Howe e , he esul s pa ially suppo Hypo h-
esis 5, which sugges ed ha ollowe ship s a us mode a es
he impac o a ious sponso ship disclosu es on in luence
c edibili y and b and a i ude, wi h ollowe s expec ed o
espond mo e posi i ely o anspa en s a egies such as
explici disclosu e and genuine ecommenda ions. We ind
subs an ial e idence ha ollowe ship s a us indeed mode -
a es he in luence o disclosu e s a egies on he componen s
o in luence c edibili y, enhancing he impac o each s a -
egy. Howe e , con a y o ou ini ial expec a ion ha ollow-
e s would a o anspa ency, he in e ac ion e ms e eal
ha genuine ecommenda ions wi h impa iali y disclosu e
gene a e he highes in luence us wo hiness among ol-
lowe s (β =.856, p < .001), ollowed by concealing disclo-
su e, which unexpec edly will yield he second highes le el
o in luence us wo hiness (β = .822, p < .001). In u e
con as o ou expec a ions, he in e ac ion e m o explici
disclosu e wi h he ollowe ship s a us will lead o he low-
es le el o in luence us wo hiness (β = .437, p < .05).
Simila pa e ns eme ge o in luence ’s pe cei ed expe ise
and simila i y.
Rega ding he mode a ion e ec o a ious disclosu e
s a egies wi h ollowe ship s a us on indi iduals’ a i ude
owa ds he b and and pu chase in en ion, we ind only
Table 5 Pillai’s ace om
MANOVA analysis wi h
DVs: a i ude owa ds he
b and, pu chase in en ions
and in luence c edibili y
componen s ( us wo hiness,
pe cei ed expe ise, and
simila i y)
e = exac , a = app oxima e
S a is ic d F (d 1, d 2) FP ob > F
Model .462 13 65 3215 5.04 .000 a
Residual 643
Gende ( emale) .064 1 5 580 8.76 .000 e
Ac i i y le el .069 5 25 3215 1.80 .008 a
Disclosu e s a egies (baseline: explici disclosu e)
Concealing disclosu e .004 1 5 639 .45 .810 e
Impa iali y disclosu e .002 1 5 639 .24 .946 e
No disclosu e .006 1 5 639 .78 .567 e
Disclosu e s a egies × ollowe ship s a us
Explici disclosu e × ollowe .054 1 5 639 7.33 .000 e
Concealing disclosu e × ollowe .085 1 5 639 11.88 .000 e
Impa iali y disclosu e × ollowe .085 1 5 639 11.81 .000 e
No disclosu e × ollowe .120 1 5 639 17.43 .000 e
Residual 643
To al 656
Elec onic Ma ke s (2024) 34:6060 Page 18 o 27
Table 6 OLS es ima ions
DV T us wo hiness Pe cei ed expe ise Simila i y A i ude w. he b and Pu chase in en ion
Coe . SE p > z Coe . SE p > z Coe . DSE p > z Coe . SE p > z Coe . SE p > z
T us -
wo hi-
ness
0.428*** 0.031 0.000 0.306*** 0.040 0.000
Expe ise 0.191*** 0.034 0.000 0.204*** 0.047 0.000
Simila -
i y
0.126*** 0.028 0.000 0.243*** 0.039 0.000
Female 0.204 0.109 0.060 0.003 0.111 0.977 0.588*** 0.105 0.000 −0.073 0.073 0.315 0.091 0.091 0.318
Ac i i y
le el on
Ins a-
g am
0.062** 0.026 0.019 0.048** 0.024 0.046 0.012 0.024 0.618 0.019 0.015 0.198 0.001 0.019 0.947
Disclosu e s a egy (baseline: explici disclosu e)
Conceal-
ing
disclo-
su e
−0.185 0.151 0.221 −0.188 0.170 0.268 0.026 0.160 0.869 −0.045 0.114 0.694 −0.024 0.146 0.871
Impa -
iali y
disclo-
su e
−0.130 0.159 0.412 −0.118 0.174 0.498 −0.060 0.166 0.715 0.083 0.112 0.458 0.012 0.140 0.933
No dis-
closu e
−0.142 0.146 0.330 −0.261* 0.157 0.098 −0.046 0.168 0.784 0.052 0.109 0.632 0.030 0.140 0.828
Disclosu e s a egy × ollowe ship (in e ac ion e ec s)
Explici
disclo-
su e ×
ollow-
e s
0.437*** 0.136 0.001 0.498*** 0.143 0.001 0.809*** 0.148 0.000 −0.195** 0.094 0.039 −0.068 0.129 0.599
Conceal-
ing
disc. ×
ollow-
e s
0.822*** 0.157 0.000 0.833*** 0.157 0.000 0.908*** 0.142 0.000 −0.053 0.103 0.610 −0.132 0.128 0.306
Impa -
iali y
disc. ×
ollow-
e s
0.856*** 0.164 0.000 0.688*** 0.158 0.000 0.978*** 0.148 0.000 −0.153 0.095 0.107 −0.185 0.122 0.131
Elec onic Ma ke s (2024) 34:60 Page 19 o 27 60
isola ed suppo o di ec e ec s. Fo indi iduals’ a i ude
owa ds he b and, we ound only one signi ican mode a-
ion e ec o ollowe ship s a us on disclosu e s a egies.
In e es ingly, he es ima ed e ec is nega i e (β = −.195,
p < 0.05). We expec ed ha anspa ency, in he sense o
explici decla a ions o sponso ship, would ha e a posi i e
impac on ollowe s’ a i ude owa ds he b and. Ou da a
con adic s his expec a ion.
In e ms o pu chase in en ions, no disclosing sponso -
ship signi ican ly educes he in en ion o pu chase among
ollowe s (β = −.252, p < 0.05).
Syn hesizing all OLS es ima ion esul s e eals he ol-
lowing insigh : indi iduals’ a i udes owa ds he b and and
pu chase in en ions a e signi ican ly in luenced by in luence
c edibili y componen s (p < .001), which, in u n, a e sig-
ni ican ly in luenced by he in e ac ion be ween disclosu e
s a egy and ollowe ship s a us (p <.001). This insigh begs
o he ques ion o whe he in luence c edibili y compo-
nen s media e he e ec o disclosu e s a egies on hese ou -
comes, as hypo hesized in H4. To es his ela ionship, we
pe o med a mul i a ia e media ion analysis. Speci ically,
we es ima e seemingly un ela ed eg essions in STATA18
o ollowing gene al and simpli ied model s uc u es (see
Fig.6) whe e IV ep esen s he se o independen a iables
composed o he a ious disclosu e s a egies, hei in e ac-
ion e ms wi h he ollowe ship s a us, and DV ep esen s a
ma ke e ou come o in e es (a i ude owa ds he b and o
pu chase in en ion).
Table7 epo s he o al indi ec e ec s o IV on DV
h ough he channels o he indi idual in luence c ed-
ibili y componen s (T us wo hiness, Pe cei ed Expe ise,
and Simila i y). All indi ec e ec s o he IV h ough he
media o a iable on he DV—e.g., he e ec o concealing
disclosu e h ough in luence s us wo hiness on he DV
o in e es (see Fig.7a)—we e compu ed om es ima ions
wi h boo s apped and bias co ec ed in e als om 1000
Table 6 (con inued)
DV T us wo hiness Pe cei ed expe ise Simila i y A i ude w. he b and Pu chase in en ion
Coe . SE p > z Coe . SE p > z Coe . DSE p > z Coe . SE p > z Coe . SE p > z
No
disclo-
su e ×
ollow-
e s
0.770*** 0.150 0.000 0.864*** 0.140 0.000 1.097*** 0.153 0.000 −0.148 0.100 0.140 −0.252** 0.124 0.042
Ma ke
a i-
able
0.016 0.025 0.520 0.017 0.024 0.470 0.034 0.022 0.114 −0.024 0.016 0.130 0.018 0.019 0.354
__cons 2.252*** 0.157 0.000 2.532*** 0.168 0.000 1.362*** 0.161 0.000 0.976*** 0.137 0.000 0.443*** 0.159 0.005
VIF 2.84 2.84 2.84 2.75 2.75
* p < 0.10, ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01
Fig. 6 Media ion analysis model
Elec onic Ma ke s (2024) 34:6060 Page 20 o 27
Table 7 Indi ec e ec s o disclosu e s a egies h ough in luence c edibili y componen s on DVs o in e es (a i ude owa ds b and; in en ion o pu chase)
* indica es s a is ical signi icance, which is gi en i he bias co ec ed (BC) con idence in e als do no con ain 0
IV Media o s: c edibili y
componen s DV: a i ude owa ds b and DV: in en ion o pu chase
Coe . Bias Boo . SE. BC: [95% con . in e al] Coe . Bias Boo . SE. BC: [95% con . in e al]
Explici disclosu e T us wo hiness −0.080 0.002 0.065 −0.216 0.040 −0.057 −0.002 0.049 −0.156 0.038
Expe ise −0.036 0.002 0.033 −0.104 0.025 −0.039 −0.001 0.037 −0.121 0.035
Simila i y 0.003 0.001 0.020 −0.037 0.042 0.006 −0.001 0.041 −0.072 0.093
To al indi ec e ec −0.113 0.004 0.098 −0.314 0.065 −0.090 −0.004 0.101 −0.276 0.126
Impa iali y disclosu e T us wo hiness −0.056 −0.002 0.068 −0.180 0.090 −0.040 −0.001 0.050 −0.137 0.059
Expe ise −0.022 0.000 0.034 −0.091 0.041 −0.024 0.000 0.038 −0.104 0.046
Simila i y −0.007 0.000 0.020 −0.049 0.035 −0.015 −0.002 0.043 −0.102 0.068
To al indi ec e ec −0.086 −0.002 0.105 −0.278 0.140 −0.078 −0.003 0.108 −0.281 0.154
No disclosu e T us wo hiness −0.062 0.002 0.064 −0.182 0.066 −0.044 −0.001 0.045 −0.131 0.044
Expe ise −0.050 0.000 0.032 −0.126 0.004 −0.054 −0.001 0.035 −0.133 0.007
Simila i y −0.006 0.000 0.021 −0.051 0.035 −0.012 −0.002 0.042 −0.096 0.068
To al indi ec e ec −0.119 0.003 0.098 −0.303 0.071 −0.110 −0.004 0.099 −0.285 0.100
Explici disclosu e × ollowe T us wo hiness* 0.189 0.004 0.059 0.078 0.301 0.134 0.002 0.047 0.049 0.238
Expe ise* 0.096 0.001 0.034 0.040 0.174 0.103 0.000 0.038 0.044 0.194
Simila i y* 0.101 0.001 0.032 0.048 0.173 0.200 0.000 0.049 0.114 0.299
To al indi ec e ec * 0.385 0.007 0.095 0.201 0.567 0.437 0.002 0.091 0.266 0.619
Concealing disclosu e × ollowe T us wo hiness* 0.354 0.001 0.074 0.221 0.521 0.252 0.001 0.059 0.150 0.379
Expe ise* 0.160 −0.001 0.042 0.094 0.253 0.171 0.001 0.054 0.082 0.300
Simila i y* 0.114 0.001 0.031 0.059 0.181 0.224 0.001 0.049 0.141 0.337
To al indi ec e ec * 0.627 0.001 0.104 0.417 0.824 0.648 0.004 0.100 0.457 0.842
Impa iali y disclosu e × ollowe T us wo hiness* 0.368 0.003 0.077 0.231 0.537 0.262 0.003 0.061 0.159 0.394
Expe ise* 0.132 0.001 0.038 0.066 0.213 0.141 0.000 0.047 0.069 0.260
Simila i y* 0.122 0.001 0.034 0.061 0.194 0.240 0.002 0.056 0.142 0.361
To al indi ec e ec * 0.621 0.005 0.110 0.396 0.821 0.643 0.005 0.111 0.424 0.866
No disclosu e × ollowe T us wo hiness* 0.333 0.002 0.070 0.209 0.487 0.237 0.002 0.054 0.146 0.357
Expe ise* 0.166 0.001 0.044 0.096 0.272 0.178 0.001 0.051 0.090 0.291
Simila i y* 0.138 0.001 0.039 0.068 0.225 0.272 0.003 0.061 0.170 0.412
To al indi ec e ec * 0.636 0.004 0.107 0.445 0.866 0.687 0.005 0.108 0.486 0.908

Elec onic Ma ke s (2024) 34:60 Page 21 o 27 60
eplica ions. The o al indi ec e ec in Table7 ep esen s
he cumula i e indi ec e ec o an IV h ough all in luence
c edibili y componen s on he DV (see Fig.7b). Ul ima ely,
please no e ha in Table7 s a is ical signi icance o a coe -
icien is es ablished when he bias-co ec ed con idence
in e als do no include ze o. Fo imp o ed eadabili y, we
ha e highligh ed signi ican en ies in he able in g ay.
To ecap, in H4 we p oposed ha in luence c edibili y,
pa icula ly i s us wo hiness componen , would media e
he impac o a ious sponso ship disclosu es on indi idu-
als’ a i udes owa d he b and and hei pu chase in en ions.
The indi ec e ec s p esen ed in Table7 o e pa ial suppo
o his hypo hesis by showing ha only he indi ec e ec s
o he in e ac ion e ms be ween disclosu e and ollowe ship
s a us a e s a is ically signi ican . O he indi ec e ec s a e
no s a is ically signi ican .
When looking close a he es ima ed indi ec e ec s o
a ious disclosu e s a egies on indi iduals’ a i ude owa ds
he b and, i is no iceable ha he indi ec e ec media ed
by he us wo hiness componen is almos double han he
media ion h ough o he componen s (e.g., h ough in lu-
ence s’ pe cei ed expe ise, simila i y). Fo explici disclo-
su e, o ins ance, he indi ec e ec h ough us wo hi-
ness yields βExplici Disc × ollowe | T us wo hiness = .189 (BC [95%
con . in e al] = [.078; .301]). In con as , he indi ec e ec
h ough pe cei ed expe ise and simila i y was es ima ed
o βExplici Disc × ollowe |Pe cei ed expe ise =. 096 (BC [95% con .
in e al] = [.040; .174]) and βExplici Disc × ollowe |Simila i y =
.101 (BC [95% con . in e al] = [.048; .173]), espec i ely.
The same pa e n applies also o he o he signi ican indi-
ec e ec s o he in e ac ion e ms on a i ude owa ds he
b and.
In e ms o indi idual’s pu chase decision, his pa e n
does no eplica e, leading us o conclude ha H5 is sup-
po ed only pa ly.
Discussion
The objec i e o ou s udy was o in es iga e and iden i y
he mos e ec i e disclosu e s a egy om he iewpoin s
o in luence s and ma ke e s. In pu sui o his objec i e, we
speci ically examined he compa a i e e icacy o explici
sponso ship disclosu e and impa iali y disclosu e agains
de ian p ac ices such as concealed disclosu e o no disclo-
su e. In luence s a e d i en by he need o ind an op imal
disclosu e s a egy ha p ese es hei ele ance and a ac s
a la ge ollowing Wies e al. (2022), while ma ke e s a e
ocused on a s a egy ha ein o ces b and messaging, os e s
consume us , and ul ima ely d i es sales (Lou e al. 2019).
Based on da a om wo ield expe imen s and an online su -
ey wi h an expe imen al design, his a icle iden i ies he
op imal disclosu e s a egies om in luence s’ and ma ke e s’
pe spec i es.
F om hein luence s’ pe spec i e One o he mos
“impo an bene i o in luence ma ke ing is i s abili y o
s imula e engagemen wi h he sponso ed con en ” (Boe -
man 2020, p. 200). Fo in luence s, i is essen ial o con-
inuously obse e indi iduals’ engagemen wi h con en and
hus decide no only wha ype o con en use s like bu also
wha disclosu e s a egy is bes sui ed o keep he use s’
engagemen up. Amids he cu en unce ain ies a ound
social media sponso ship disclosu e and he ple ho a o pos-
sibili ies o explici ly disclose and e en y o conceal paid
ad e isemen s, i is mo e han e e c i ical o be in o med
abou he implica ions o di e en disclosu e s a egies on
in luence s’ image and subsequen ami ica ions. This is
pa icula ly he case o nano- and mic o-in luence s, who
in ela ion o mac o-in luence s ha e a ela i ely small (bu
usually dedica ed) ollowe base (Campbell & Fa ell, 2020;
Ta esse & Wood, 2021). A e all, due o he ela i ely small
ollowe base, losing ollowe s o hei a en ion can ha e
se e e consequences o he in luence s’ each and, ul i-
ma ely, hei ca ee s.
The insigh s p esen ed in his a icle indica e ha he
op imal disclosu e s a egy depends on whe he in luenc-
e s seek o imp o e hei c edibili y le els o imp o e he
engagemen o hei iewe ship wi h hei pos s. In luence s
a e o en iewed as opinion leade s who i s and o emos
in o m (Boe man 2020; Dja a o a & T o imenko 2019).
The eby, i seems ha indi iduals gene ally a e okay wi h
in luence s being paid o compensa ed o hei ecommen-
da ion i hey a e anspa en abou i . Assuming ha he
Fig. 7 a (le ) Indi ec e ec
o IV h ough in luence ’s
us wo hiness on DV; b ( igh )
o al indi ec e ec o IV on DV
Elec onic Ma ke s (2024) 34:6060 Page 22 o 27
in luence s’ goal is o inc ease iewe ship engagemen wi h
he p omo ed con en , he esul s in S udy 1 indica e ha
in luence s can enjoy highe le els o use engagemen wi h
hei con en as long as hey label hei con en acco dingly.
As long as in luence s p o ide in o ma ion on sponso ship
o non-sponso ship, he in luence s do no ha e o wo y
abou dec easing engagemen a es due o he employed dis-
closu e s a egy. As S udy 1 shows, he lowes engagemen
a es occu o con en wi h no disclosu e.
In con as , i in luence s a e keen on inc easing hei
c edibili y le els in e ms o pe cei ed us wo hiness,
expe ise, and simila i y wi h he iewe ship, i depends on
whe he in luence s seek o add ess hei ollowe base o
non- ollowe s wi h he espec i e ad e isemen campaign.
Assuming ha ollowe s a e he main g oup in luence s
seek o add ess by ma king genuine ecommenda ions wi h
impa iali y labels, in luence s can enjoy highe le els o
us wo hiness on he pa o ollowe s. In con as , in lu-
ence s mus ake in o accoun ha o sponso ed con en ,
explici sponso ship disclosu e will ha m hei us wo hi-
ness image in on o hei ollowe s. Hence, i mos o
he in luence ’s ecommenda ions a e genuine, in luence s
will enjoy high us wo hiness in on o hei ollowe s by
using he impa iali y disclosu e. I he in luence does no
equen ly p o ide genuine ecommenda ions and is hea ily
in ol ed in sponso ship, hey should an icipa e ha com-
plying wi h he cu en egula ions, which equi e explici
sponso ship disclosu e, will impac hei us wo hiness.
On he con a y, assuming ha in luence s’ s a egic p i-
o i y is o be a o ably pe cei ed by non- ollowe s, anspa -
en disclosu e—speci ically, explici disclosu e on sponso ed
con en —is again he p e e ed choice. This app oach yields
bene i s, especially o in luence s whose con en p edomi-
nan ly in ol es sponso ship ela ions wi h a b and a he
han genuine ecommenda ions. Ou expe imen s indica e
ha non- ollowe s end o be pa icula ly skep ical abou
impa iali y disclosu e.
F om ma ke e s’ pe spec i e In luence ma ke ing is
d i en by he idea ha in luence s a e ela able indi idu-
als who can educa e and in o m a wide audience (Boe man
2020; Dja a o a & T o imenko 2019), pa icula ly, hei ol-
lowe ship. In gene al, ollowe s commonly end o belie e
ha in luence s a e us wo hy sou ces who exp ess hei
hones ecommenda ions. Acco dingly, ollowe s a e also
mo e likely o be pe suaded by in luence s han by o he
ad e ising channels.
Ou s udies indica e ha explici sponso ship beha io
is less a o ably ecei ed by ollowe s when compa ed o
o he disclosu e s a egies. Speci ically, we ound ha genu-
ine ecommenda ions wi h impa iali y disclosu e gene a e
he highes in luence us wo hiness among ollowe s, ol-
lowed by concealing disclosu e.
Addi ionally, no disclosu e eme ges as he s a egy wi h
he mos posi i e impac on ollowe s’ a i udes owa d he
b and and pu chase in en ions. While one migh be emp ed
o in e p e hese indings as an indica ion ha in luence s
should p o ide no disclosu e o conceal hei sponso ship, i
is essen ial o conside ha non-disclosu e iola es he cu -
en egula ions and has po en ial e hical implica ions and
he long- e m e ec s on us be ween in luence s and hei
ollowe s (Bo che s & Enke 2022). A e all, in luence s and
b ands ha e a social esponsibili y owa ds hei audience.
In line wi h he concep o Co po a e Digi al Responsibil-
i y, which emphasizes anspa ency and e hical conduc in
he digi al ealm (< blinded o e iew > 2021), i is c ucial
o b ands o main ain anspa ency, hones y, and e hical
s anda ds in hei digi al ma ke ing e o s. Consequen ly,
building au hen ic ela ionships wi h in luence s and openly
disclosing any compensa ed pa ne ships is also he op imal
s a egy om he ma ke e s’ pe spec i e.
Ma ke e s engage in in luence ma ke ing o le e age
he s ong bond be ween in luence s and ollowe s (Ki e al.
2020). The e o e, om a ma ke e ’s pe spec i e, he op imal
disclosu e s a egy would be i in luence s ma ke p oduc s
as genuine ecommenda ions and use impa iali y disclo-
su e. Ou analyses showed ha o ollowe s, impa iali y
disclosu e would ansla e in o highe le els o in luence
us wo hiness and hus signi ican ly imp o e ollowe s’
a i udes owa d he b and. Hence, om he ma ke e s’ pe -
spec i e, i is ad isable ha ins ead o paying in luence s
o p oduce b and- ela ed con en , ma ke e s need o a ge
he in luence s hemsel es and genuinely con ince hem o
he companies’ p oduc s and b ands. I companies manage
o do so, hey ul ima ely inc ease he chances ha in luenc-
e s impa ially ecommend he p oduc s and b and wi hou
di ec ly being paid.
Theo e ical implica ions F om a heo e ical s andpoin ,
ou wo k highligh s he need o new heo e ical amewo ks
o be e unde s and he complex e ec s o disclosu e s a -
egies on key ou comes. Ou esul s e eal a gap be ween
heo y and p ac ice, whe e many hypo heses based on exis -
ing heo ies did no ma e ialize as expec ed, sugges ing p e-
iously o e looked ac o s. Such key ac o s in luencing he
e ec o sponso ship disclosu e migh include in luence s’
size (e.g., mega, mac o, and nano) and ype (e.g., li es yle
and beau y, i ness and heal h, and gaming), he p oduc p o-
mo ed, and audience s a us ( ollowe e sus non- ollowe ).
In ou s udy wi h a mic o-in luence in he i ness domain,
we ound no di ec e ec o sponso ship disclosu e on in lu-
ence c edibili y, b and a i ude o in en ion o pu chase.
Al hough his ou come con as s ou ini ial expec a ions in
he i s h ee hypo heses, i somewha aligns wi h indings
om Giu edi-Käh e al. (2022) who obse ed ha la ge
in luence s—mega and mac o in luence s—in oke highe
Elec onic Ma ke s (2024) 34:60 Page 23 o 27 60
skep icism han smalle in luence s—mic o and nano in lu-
ence s—when sponso ship is no disclosed. Smalle in lu-
ence s a e gene ally pe cei ed as mo e au hen ic, ende -
ing hei con en mo e c edible (Giu edi-Käh e al. 2022)
and mu ing he impac o sponso ship disclosu es on con-
sume esponses. Addi ionally, a ying indings om o he
esea ch s udies sugges ha also ac o s such as in luence
ype, p oduc appeal, and in luence -p oduc cong uence
ma e . Fo example, in a s udy wi h sus ainabili y in luenc-
e s (“sinn luence s”), Scho n e al. (2022) epo ha p od-
uc s wi h pe sonal bene i appeals (highligh ing enjoymen
o aes he ics) enhance in luence c edibili y and posi i ely
impac consume a i udes and pu chase in en ions mo e
e ec i ely han he ecological appeals o a p oduc . O he
s udies wi h li es yle in luence s p omo ing a ic i e oo h-
pas e (Lee and Kim 2020) o ic i ious in luence s in ood
(Giu edi-Käh e al. 2022) o li e a u e (De Cicco e al.
2021) epo a ying e ec s o sponso ship disclosu e on
in luence c edibili y o consume pe cep ions.
Ano he impo an ac o ha needs o be in es iga ed is
he audience s a us—i.e., ollowe s e sus non- ollowe s. In
ou s udy, we did no ind suppo o di ec e ec s o spon-
so ship disclosu e on he a iables o in e es o non- ol-
lowe s, bu we did obse e signi ican e ec s o ollowe s.
Al hough ou da a does no allow us o del e deepe in he
exac mechanisms d i ing ou obse a ions, p io li e a u e
p esen s a ious po en ial easons. One po en ial eason o
he obse ed di e ence is ha ollowe s and non- ollowe s
exhibi a ying le els o sensi i i y o he in luence ’s mes-
saging. Followe s a e ypically mo e in es ed in he in lu-
ence , ha ing de eloped a sense o amilia i y o e en a
“ iendship” h ough con inuous exposu e o he in luence ’s
con en (Boe man, 2020; Dja a o a & Rushwo h, 2017).
This s onge psychological bond makes hem mo e sensi-
i e o sponso ship anspa ency o concealmen , which can
impac hei pe cep ions o he in luence ’s c edibili y, b and
a i ude, and pu chase in en ion (Ki e al., 2020). In con as ,
non- ollowe s do no sha e his dep h o ela ionship wi h he
in luence and, he e o e, may app oach disclosu e s a e-
gies wi h a mo e neu al o de ached pe spec i e. Wi hou
his pe sonal connec ion, non- ollowe s a e less likely o
iew concealed disclosu e as a b each o us , which could
explain he lack o signi ican e ec s o his g oup. The di -
e ence in emo ional in es men and expec a ions be ween
hese wo audience ypes d i es he di e gen ou comes in
how disclosu e s a egies in luence in luence ma ke ing
campaigns. Thus, he e ec i eness o a disclosu e s a egy
may depend no only on he con en i sel bu also on he
ela ionship be ween he in luence and he audience. Ou
wo k o e s a mo e nuanced unde s anding o how hese wo
use g oups— ollowe s e sus non- ollowe s— espond o
a ious disclosu e s a egies. I shows ha he in luence o
disclosu es on ollowe s and non- ollowe s di e s, allowing
us o d aw dis inc conclusions depending on he audience
analyzed. While exis ing li e a u e acknowledges he impo -
ance o his dis inc ion (e.g., B e es e al. 2021; Lou 2022),
ou esul s emphasize ha his di e en ia ion mus be cen al
o heo e ical discussions in in luence ma ke ing.
Al oge he , he lack o suppo o ou i s h ee hypo h-
eses e lec s he complex in e play o ac o s such as in lu-
ence ype, p oduc cong uence, and appeal ype, which may
no align as uni o mly as p edic ed ac oss con ex s. Hence,
ou esul s emphasize he need o u he explo a ion in o
how speci ic in luence , p oduc , and o he con ex ual a i-
ables media e consume esponses in e ms o in luence and
b and- ela ed ou comes.
Limi a ions Despi e he alue o his a icle’s insigh s on
he op imal disclosu e om an in luence s’ and ma ke e s’
pe spec i e, we mus also no e di e se limi a ions ha apply.
A po en ial limi a ion o he s udy is he use o a single in lu-
ence , as di e en in luence s wi h a ying ollowe bases,
engagemen s a egies, and niche expe ise may p oduce di -
e en ou comes, which may a ec he gene alizabili y o he
esul s. Fu u e esea ch should explo e he impac o sponso -
ship disclosu e ac oss a b oade ange o in luence s, aking
in o accoun a ia ions in ollowe demog aphics, engagemen
s a egies, and niche ma ke s, o be e unde s and how hese
ac o s in luence eal-wo ld consume beha io .
Ano he limi a ion o ou wo k is he epea ed exposu e
o pa icipan s o he same pos h oughou all s udies. While
his app oach aimed o minimize con ounding ac o s and
ocus on he e ec s o in e es , i in oduces he possibili y o
o de e ec s. Pa icipan s may ha e been in luenced by hei
p io exposu e o he pos , leading o po en ial biases in hei
esponses. Al hough we made e o s o add ess his limi a-
ion by spacing ou he pos s e e y 2 weeks, ou s udy design
canno elimina e he po en ial o o de e ec s en i ely. Fo
example, indi iduals who liked he i s pos migh be less
inclined o eac o he same pos again, po en ially impac -
ing hei engagemen and e alua ions.
In con as o he po en ial o de e ec s a ising om pa -
icipan s’ epea ed exposu e o he same pos , we hoped ha
using he same pos would ensu e consis ency ac oss s udies.
We ecognize he dange ha changes in an ad e ising’s
appea ance, wo ding, o aming can lead o di e en ou -
comes. Ne e heless, we u ge u u e esea ch o examine he
e ec s o di e en disclosu e s a egies by using di e en
pos s ac oss expe imen sessions.
Fu he mo e, we no e wo limi a ions inhe en o S udy 2.
Fi s ly, since Ins ag am does no pe mi ex e nal andomized
expe imen s wi hou pa ne ing di ec ly wi h he pla o m,
S udy 2 equi ed pa icipan s o ollow a link om Ins ag am
o an ex e nal websi e. To educe biases and ic ions om
lea ing Ins ag am, he websi e was designed o esemble
a blog, closely mi o ing Ins ag am’s aes he ic, aiming o
Elec onic Ma ke s (2024) 34:6060 Page 24 o 27
c ea e a seamless ansi ion and make he expe ience eel
amilia o pa icipan s. Howe e , despi e ou bes e o s o
minimize ic ion, we acknowledge ha asking pa icipan s
o lea e Ins ag am and access an ex e nal websi e may ha e
in luenced he da a collec ion h ough selec ion bias o sligh
changes in use expe ience and engagemen . Secondly, in
S udy 2 we canno dis inguish be ween ollowe s and non-
ollowe s. Howe e , gi en ha ollowe s and non- ollowe s
eac di e en ly o in luence s’ con en , in es iga ing di -
e ences in sen imen be ween ollowe s and non- ollowe s
migh be a p omising pa h o wa d. This is especially he
case since esea ch on he e ec o disclosu e s a egies and
use sen imen in eal-wo ld se ings is ela i ely sca ce.
In ela ion o S udies 1 and 2, we no e ha we could no
apply ex analysis o ex ac consume s’ sen imen s and had
o ely on isual cues. Al hough p io li e a u e sugges s
ha he used emoji scale is app op ia e o cap u e he sen i-
men and ou esul s co obo a e esul s om p io li e a u e,
u u e esea ch should y o in es iga e he link be ween
disclosu e and consume sen imen by elying on bo h ex-
ual and isual cues.
Ul ima ely, a no able limi a ion o ou hi d s udy is
ha he sample consis ed solely o Ge man pa icipan s.
Recognizing ha cul u al di e ences may in luence how
indi iduals espond o a ious disclosu e s a egies, i is
impo an o u u e esea ch o ex end his wo k by epli-
ca ing ou s udy ac oss di e se cul u al backg ounds. This
b oade app oach will help de e mine he gene alizabili y o
ou indings and po en ially e eal nuanced insigh s in o he
e ec s o disclosu e s a egies in di e en cul u al con ex s.
Concluding ema ks The insigh s p esen ed in his a i-
cle ha e b oade implica ions o in luence s, policy-make s,
ma ke e s, and b ands. Fo in luence s, which a e key in e -
media ies be ween consume s and b ands in digi al ma -
ke s, in luence s play a c i ical ole in shaping consume
beha io , ou esul s sugges ha each in luence should ge
hei p io i ies and s a egic goals igh . They need o bal-
ance main aining us wi h hei ollowe s while adhe ing
o disclosu e egula ions. The challenge lies in aligning hei
ma ke ing s a egies wi h anspa ency equi emen s o sus-
ain long- e m c edibili y and engagemen . Since ou da a
indica es ha con en —i.e., whe he in luence s issue many
genuine ecommenda ions e sus sponso ed con en —bu
also ollowe ship s a us ma e s, he op imal disclosu e s a -
egy, in he end, depends on whe he hey seek o imp o e
hei c edibili y in on o hei ollowe s o non- ollowe s.
Fo bo h ma ke e s and in luence s who s ongly ocus on
hei ollowe ship, genuine ecommenda ions wi h impa ial-
i y disclosu e a e he bes way o ma ke ing. Thus, in luenc-
e s should conside issuing mo e genuine ecommenda ions
han sponso ed con en . Howe e , a shi om sponso ed o
o ganic con en migh equi e in luence s o ind new ways
and business models o gene a e income ha can a leas
pa ly eplace paid collabo a ions wi h b ands.
Fo ma ke e s and b ands, who wo k wi h in luence s
o each a ge audiences in an au hen ic way, ou indings
sugges ha ma ke e s should ocus on os e ing genuine
ela ionships wi h in luence s, encou aging impa iali y dis-
closu es o build us . Al hough social media pla o ms a e
esponsible o en o cing disclosu e ules and main aining
a ma ke place whe e use s can con iden ly engage wi h, i
is also ma ke e s’ and b ands’ esponsibili y o ensu e hei
campaigns emain complian wi h he cu en egula ions.
F om a policy pe spec i e, he insigh s p esen ed in his
a icle ein o ce e o s owa d mo e anspa ency o spon-
so ed con en in in luence ma ke ing. Ou indings poin
o he need o clea e and mo e en o ceable guidelines o
ensu e ha sponso ships a e anspa en ly communica ed,
p e en ing po en ial ha m o consume us and pla o m
c edibili y. I mo e p ecise egula ion is no easible, and
moni o ing compliance wi h he ules can be di icul due
o he e e -g owing numbe o in luence s, anspa ency
egis e s in which companies mus lis hei in luence col-
labo a ions help e ace he blu ed lines be ween o ganic
and sponso ed con en . In he end, while s ic e egula ions
on sponso ship disclosu e may seem challenging o some,
anspa ency o in luence ma ke ing is c i ical o main ain-
ing us and c edibili y in digi al ma ke s.
Funding Open Access unding enabled and o ganized by P ojek
DEAL.
Open Access This a icle is licensed unde a C ea i e Commons A i-
bu ion 4.0 In e na ional License, which pe mi s use, sha ing, adap a-
ion, dis ibu ion and ep oduc ion in any medium o o ma , as long
as you gi e app op ia e c edi o he o iginal au ho (s) and he sou ce,
p o ide a link o he C ea i e Commons licence, and indica e i changes
we e made. The images o o he hi d pa y ma e ial in his a icle a e
included in he a icle’s C ea i e Commons licence, unless indica ed
o he wise in a c edi line o he ma e ial. I ma e ial is no included in
he a icle’s C ea i e Commons licence and you in ended use is no
pe mi ed by s a u o y egula ion o exceeds he pe mi ed use, you will
need o ob ain pe mission di ec ly om he copy igh holde . To iew a
copy o his licence, isi h p://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/.
Re e ences
Abend o h, L. J., & Heyman, J. E. (2013). Hones y is he bes policy:
The e ec s o disclosu e in wo d-o -mou h ma ke ing. Jou nal o
Ma ke ing Communica ions, 19(4), 245–257.
Agung, N. F. A., & Da ma, G. S. (2019). Oppo uni ies and challenges
o ins ag am algo i hm in imp o ing compe i i e ad an age. In e -
na ional Jou nal o Inno a i e Science and Resea ch Technology,
4(1), 743–747.
Ángeles O iedo-Ga cía, M., Muñoz-Expósi o, M., Cas ellanos-
Ve dugo, M., & Sancho-Mejías, M. (2014). Me ic p oposal
o cus ome engagemen in Facebook. Jou nal o Resea ch in
In e ac i e Ma ke ing, 8(4), 327–344. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1108/
JRIM- 05- 2014- 0028