Research

Social Media Influencers’ Traits and FIIB Business Review

1–17

Purchase Intention: A Moderated 2023 Fortune Institute of

International Business
Reprints and permissions:
Mediation Effect of Attitude Towards in.sagepub.com/journals-permissions-india
DOI: 10.1177/23197145231162257
Brand Credibility and Brand Familiarity journals.sagepub.com/home/fib

Shaply Abdul Kareem1 and Pulidindi Venugopal1

Abstract
The prominence of social media influencers (SMI) has dramatically shifted in recent years. SMI enables brands to connect with
users through unique and original content, thereby expanding their reach. In response, this study examined the effects of SMI traits
on purchase intention by incorporating variables, such as attitude towards brand credibility as a mediator and brand familiarity
as a moderator. Specifically, researchers examined the moderated mediation role of brand familiarity on purchase intention. The
conceptual model is based on source credibility and the theory of reasoned action. PLS-SEM and Process Macro analyzed the data of
454 Instagram users. Research shows that SMI trustworthiness, expertise and attitude towards brand credibility improve purchase
intention. Attitudes toward brand credibility mediate attractiveness, expertise and purchase intention. Brand familiarity moderates the
relationship between attitudes towards brand credibility and intention. The moderated mediation effect of brand familiarity improves
the relationship between trustworthiness, expertise and purchase intention. This study contributes to the literature on influencer
marketing. Furthermore, managers and practitioners can strategically benefit from this research.

Keywords
Instagram, PLS-SEM, purchase intention, social media influencers, source credibility

Introduction (Nafees et al., 2021). SMI uses a range of social media

Over the last decade, there has been a substantial change in
social media marketing, driven by a shift toward influencer
marketing (Phua et al., 2017). The influencer marketing
business was worth US$13.8 billion in 2021 and is
anticipated to be worth US$15 billion by 2022 (Statista,
2021). This latest change in SMI has attracted the attention
of retail marketers. This has turned into a new trend called
‘influencer marketing’, in which retail companies engage
with SMI to create branded content that mentions or endorses
the brand and makes customers more likely to buy the goods
(Lou & Yuan, 2019). SMI is an independent endorser that
changes viewers’ attitudes by relying on their own thoughts
and experiences by generating and distributing brand-related
reviews on their social media accounts (De Veirman et al.,
2017; Fernandes et al., 2022; Ge & Gretzel, 2018). Social
media influencers (SMI) and influencer marketing (IM)
are increasing in popularity, particularly on Instagram
platforms, the most prominent of which are YouTube and
Instagram, which regularly connect profiles and share
similar content (Gaenssle & Budzinski, 2020). Onofrei et al.
(2022) revealed that SMI affects perceived credibility and
consumer purchase decisions. Perceived credibility can
enhance brand attitude (Munnukka et al., 2019). Furthermore,
Schouten et al. (2019) showed that influencers are perceived
as more trustworthy endorsers than traditional celebrities,
whereas online celebrities’ personal experiences positively
affect the credibility of their communication (Djafarova &
Rushworth, 2017).
Prior research has shown that emphasizing the effect
of celebrity endorsers’ attractiveness, trustworthiness and
expertise has a significant impact on consumers’ knowledge,
attitudes, intentions and usage (Mohd Suki, 2014; Sheu, 2010;
Thomas & Johnson, 2019). Most studies have focused on
celebrity endorser credibility and the match-up hypothesis
on advertising outcomes. Few studies have focused on factors

1 VIT Business School, Vellore Institute of Technology, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India

Corresponding author:
Pulidindi Venugopal, VIT Business School, Vellore Institute of Technology, Vellore, Tamil Nadu 632014, India.
E-mail: pulidindi.venu@vit.ac.in
2
relevant to effective SMI endorsers (De Veirman et al., 2017;
Kim & Kim, 2021, 2022; Weismueller et al., 2020; Wiedmann
& Von Mettenheim, 2020). Previous research on the
characteristics and behaviours of SMI, in general, has been
limited, and little research has been carried out to evaluate
the effects of SMIs in influencing users to make purchase
decisions. Furthermore, despite numerous studies on celebrity
endorser credibility and its impact on brand attitude (Malodia
et al., 2017; Wang & Scheinbaum, 2017); attitudes towards
advertising (Ong, 2015; Singh & Banerjee, 2018) and attitude
towards brand credibility (Chin et al., 2019), there are few
studies on attitude towards brand credibility and the need to
study more in-depth and particular influences using SMI
traits as suggested by a prior study (Chin et al., 2019). Brand
familiarity will be used as internal information by online
consumers to make purchase decisions. This raises attitudes
towards brands and consumers are more likely to purchase
brands that they perceive to be familiar (Rose et al., 2016).
Online and social media advertising are more effective for
brand familiarity and customer attitude (Ladeira et al., 2022;
Morgan et al., 2021).
This has inspired researchers to address the aforementioned
gap in the literature. This study focused on SMI traits, attitude
towards brand credibility, brand familiarity and purchase
intention. This study is unique because it empirically examined
the relationship between SMI traits and purchase intent in the
context of Instagram users. Attitudes toward brand credibility
are important, and less is known about the interactions of this
variable in understanding users’ purchase intentions. Brand
familiarity was used to describe the distinct relationship
between SMI traits in attitude towards brand credibility and
purchase intent using a moderated mediation model.
Researchers attempted to answer the following question:
RQ1: What are the traits of social media influencers
(SMIs) that influence purchase intention?
RQ2: What is the relationship between SMI traits and
purchase intention through attitude towards
brand credibility?
RQ3: What is the relationship between attitude towards
brand credibility, brand familiarity and purchase
intention?
This current study analyzes the effects of SMI traits on
purchase intention by incorporating variables such as
attitude towards brand credibility as a mediator and brand
familiarity as a moderator. In addition, researchers examined
the moderated mediation role of brand familiarity in relation
to SMI traits and purchase intention through an attitude
towards brand credibility. The proposed model facilitates
the use of the source credibility model (Ohanian, 1990) and
the theory of reasoned action (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980).
Moreover, this study is expected to contribute to the literature
on influencer marketing. Our findings have far-reaching
implications for marketing firms, brand managers, social
media managers, researchers and practitioners.
FIIB Business Review
This article is planned based on the following structure:
The researchers presented the theoretical background and
hypothesis development, followed by the research model.
The next section discusses the methodology, data analysis,
findings, discussions and implications. Finally, limitations
and future research directions are discussed.
Theoretical Foundation and
Hypothesis Development
This section is divided into sub-sections. The first
sub-section describes the fundamental theories/models that
will drive this research. The second sub-section addresses
current research on social media influencers as well as
ideas that have been offered.
Theoretical Foundation
Source Credibility Model
The source credibility model developed by Ohanian (1990),
holds that information originating from reliable sources can
impact the recipient’s attitudes and behaviour. The model
deals with the perceived credibility of a celebrity impacts
customers’ attitudes and behaviours toward the sponsored
goods (Priester & Petty, 2003). Influencers’ attractiveness
depends on how trustworthy they are in their efforts to build
a personal brand and rapport with their audience (Silvera &
Austad, 2004). Recent studies examining the source
credibility model confirmed that all source credibility
sub-dimensions have a positive effect on customers’
purchase intentions. The number of social media users was
found to have a positive influence on source attractiveness,
source trustworthiness and purchase intention (Weismueller
et al., 2020; Wiedmann & Von Mettenheim, 2020). John
et al. (2022) found that source credibility has a significant
impact on behavioural characteristics. This encourages the
use of the source credibility model to explain the differing
attractiveness, trustworthiness and expertise associated with
social media influencers.
Theory of Reasoned Action
The TRA is a rational decision model that investigates
how customers justify their actions. Ajzen and Fishbein
devised TRA in 1980. ‘TRA assumes that an individual’s
behaviour follows reasonably from their beliefs, attitudes,
and intentions’, TRA assists in understanding which factors
drive consumers’ intentions and how their intention for a
particular behaviour can predict, explain, or influence their
actual use (Hoyer et al., 2012). Anridho and Liao (2013),
‘Attitude towards brand credibility is a consumer’s positive
or negative response to a brand in terms of perceived
expertise, trustworthiness, and attractiveness’, TRA can
accurately predict behaviours that are relatively simple, that
is under volitional control (Armitage & Conner, 2001).
Researchers believe that purchasing an item is a voluntary
decision with few constraints. As a result, researchers believe
Kareem and   Venugopal 3
Figure 1.  Theoretical Foundation.
that applying the TRA will yield a valid prediction of
purchase intention. Based on the theoretical framework and
previous findings, it is critical to understand not only the
influence of SMI traits on PI but also the consumer’s attitude
in order to increase the consumer’s PI. Thus, a theoretical
foundation has been developed, as illustrated in Figure 1.
Hypothesis Development
Social Media Influencers (SMI) Traits and Purchase Intention
The source credibility model advocates the perceived amount
of an influencer’s attractiveness, trustworthiness and expertise
having an effect on the purchasing intent (Ohanian, 1990;
Weismueller et al., 2020). Attractiveness is the extent to
which an individual’s outer physical appearance is perceived
as elegant, sexy and attractive (Amos et al., 2008). Previous
research discussed the influence of attractiveness and purchase
intention. Influencer attractiveness and consumers’ attitude
towards brands have a significant positive influence on
consumers’ intention to buy (Arora et al., 2019; Kim & Kim,
2022). Onu et al. (2019) revealed that celebrity physical
attractiveness has a positive significant effect on consumer
purchase intention of selected telecommunication brands.
The influencer’s attractiveness has a beneficial relationship
with the purchase motivation and serves as a selling point
in the beauty and fashion context (Sokolova & Kefi, 2020).
Kim and Kim (2021) empirically demonstrate that physical
attractiveness is not only a strong social exchange factor for
establishing trust in influencer-follower relationships. Our
prediction of the variation of source credibility characteristics
is that attractiveness will be higher in SMI endorsement
situations. Hence, the proposed hypotheses are as follows:
H1a: 
SMI attractiveness has a positive effect on
purchase intention.
Trustworthiness refers to the extent of customer trust in the
information presented through different sources in terms of
authenticity, sincerity and integrity (Wang & Scheinbaum,
2017). Prior research studies the impact of trustworthiness
and purchasing intention (Karunasingha & Abeysekera,
2022; Onu et al., 2019; Phua et al., 2017). The followers’
purchase intention is directly affected by an influencer’s
trustworthiness (Lou & Yuan, 2019; Saima & Khan, 2020;
Özbölük & Akdoğan, 2022). Celebrity trustworthiness has
a positive effect on attitudes toward a brand, purchase
intention and brand credibility (Chung & Cho, 2017; Wang
& Scheinbaum, 2017). Transparency is another factor that
influences trustworthiness in influencer marketing. It can be
accomplished by providing complete product information,
forming opinions and forming partnerships (Audrezet et al.,
2020). Researchers’ assumption is that if an influencer has
been associated with a brand for an extended period of
time, they are perceived to be reliable and trustworthy. As
a result, we proposed that SMI trustworthiness will be the
highest, having the most influence on attitude and intention.
Therefore, the hypothesis is as follows:
H1b: 
SMI trustworthiness has a positive effect on
purchase intention.
Expertise refers to the content features of social media
influencers that reflect better knowledge and expertise
in particular areas than in others (McQuarrie et al., 2013).
Social media users concentrate on a source’s ability in
knowledge or experience when pursuing Instagram
celebrities (Djafarova & Rushworth, 2017). Traditional
celebrities rose to gain fame through their professional
skills, while ‘influencers’ rose to power by successfully
promoting themselves as experts on social media sites
(Khamis et al., 2016). SMIs can demonstrate their expertise
in a field by reviewing a product in a relevant post, which
4
increases purchase intent (Weismueller et al., 2020). The
message has a positive impact on attitude and intention
when the source of the message is viewed to have the
expertise (Kim et al., 2018; Masuda et al., 2022). As a
result, researchers predict that expertise will be higher in
endorsement situations involving social media influencers.
Consequently, the hypothesis is as follows
H1c: SMI expertise has a positive effect on purchase
intention.
Wang and Sun (2010) stated that the underlying consumer
attitude is either directly or indirectly related to product
consumption. Consumers’ attitudes regarding advertising
have become an important element in determining advertising
effectiveness (Mehta, 2000). Gupta and Vohra (2019)
investigated the utilization of social media and evaluated
how it influences customer attitudes and behaviour.
Interactions between SMIs and their followers may foster a
sense of closeness and parasocial relationships, improve
brand credibility and ultimately have a positive impact on
brand attitudes and purchase intentions (Sundermann &
Raabe, 2019). Ong (2015) demonstrated that attitudes towards
advertising have a significant impact on purchase intention.
Paul and Bhakar (2017) established that attitude towards
brand and attitude towards ads both have considerable effects
on the intention to purchase. Based on the arguments,
researchers predict that attitude influences purchase intention.
Therefore, the hypothesis is as follows (Figure 2):
Figure 2.  Research Model.
FIIB Business Review
H1d: Attitude towards brand credibility has a positive
influence on purchase intention.
Attitude Towards Brand Credibility as a Mediator
The role of attitude towards ads and attitude towards the
brand in mediating purchase intention has been extensively
researched. This study investigates the understudied attitude
towards brand credibility. Chin et al. (2019) indicated that
the mediating effect of attitude towards brand credibility is
important in the relationship between endorser credibility
and purchase intention. Ong (2015) investigated the role of
attitude towards advertisement in mediating the relationship
between endorser credibility and purchase intention. Thomas
and Johnson (2017) revealed that source expertise had a
direct and mediated effect on intention. Martín-Consuegra
et al. (2018) observed that brand credibility confirms a
considerable influence on brand purchase intention. In social
media marketing, there is an association between behavioural
characteristics and attitude formation (John et al., 2022).
Within the current literature, there is still limited research
exploring the mediating role of attitude towards brand
credibility between SMI traits and purchase intention. To
fill the identified gaps, the following hypotheses were
developed:
H2a: Attitude towards brand credibility mediates the
relationship between SMI attractiveness and
purchase intention.
Kareem and   Venugopal 5
H2b: Attitude towards brand credibility mediates the
relationship between SMI trustworthiness and
purchase intention.
H2c: Attitude towards brand credibility mediates the
relationship between SMI expertise and purchase
intention.
This study presents a model for analyzing the SMI
traits that influence attitudes towards brand credibility
and purchase intention. Brand familiarity moderates the
relationship between the variables, while attitude towards
brand credibility acts as a mediator. A research model
and hypotheses are presented in Figure 2.
Brand Familiarity as a Moderator
Keller (2004) defined brand familiarity as the power
associated with a brand name in memory. They reported that
the more familiar brand has a higher purchase intention.
Gefen (2000), brand familiarity has a considerable influence
on users’ perceptions of brands or products, and also their
purchasing intentions from the brand. Rhee and Jung (2018)
observed that the magnitude of the association between
ad attitude and brand attitude is moderated by brand
familiarity. Viddy et al. (2019) observed that brand familiarity
has a significant effect on purchase intention. Morgan et al.
(2021) investigated the impact of brand familiarity on
how consumer attitudes are formed. Based on the outset,
the present study hypothesizes the following about the
moderating effects of brand familiarity on the effects of
attitude and purchase intention:
H3: 
Brand Familiarity moderates the relationship
between attitudes towards brand credibility and
Purchase Intention.
Moderated-Mediation Relationships
Catalán et al. (2019) observed that brand familiarity can
influence attitude towards a brand and purchase intention.
Wang et al. (2017) discovered that individuals depend on
information and get a more favourable attitude when it
comes from an attractive source that has a stronger effect
on buying intent. Consumers who are highly familiar with
brand names are more likely to form significant associations
and attitudes towards brands (Huang, 2016). Verhellen
et al. (2015) revealed that the effect between a placement’s
plot connection and prominence and brand attitude is
moderated by brand familiarity. Therefore, it suggests that
if the consumers/users are having the right attitude towards
brand credibility, their intention to purchase becomes
stronger when they have a high level of brand familiarity.
Hence, researchers formulated the hypotheses as follows:
H4a: Brand familiarity will moderate the indirect effect
of SMI attractiveness on purchase intention through
attitude towards brand credibility.
H4b: Brand familiarity will moderate the indirect effect of
SMI trustworthiness on purchase intention through
attitude towards brand credibility.
H4c: Brand familiarity will moderate the indirect effect
of SMI expertise on purchase intention through
attitude towards brand credibility.
Methodology
Data Collection Process
The descriptive design is utilized in this study to get the
intended outcomes. To collect data, a descriptive, cross-
sectional survey approach is utilized. Instagram users in
India are the targeted population. Chen (2021) stated that
Instagram is a popular social media platform for young
people. Researchers identified Instagram users who follow
at least one SMI on Instagram for product reviews and
opinions in order to generate a representative sample. The
researchers employed convenience sampling since it has
been quick and easy to collect samples from consumers
(Sekaran & Bougie, 2020). The limited availability of
samples due to online engagement between influencers
and followers on social media platforms was the basis for
utilising a convenience sampling approach. As a result,
an online survey would be the most convenient option
for gathering accurate information from respondents. So,
Instagram was selected based on its popularity and
followers, and the right respondents were approached
through that platform. Kline (2015) recommended a sample
size of at least ten cases per parameter or item. Because the
study uses a questionnaire with 26 items, a minimum of
260 samples was required. The G*power was utilized by
the researchers to determine the sample size based on prior
researcher recommendations (Cheah et al., 2019; Memon
et al., 2020). According to the G*Power application, with
the inclusion of six predictors, the criteria of power is 0.80,
and the effect size is 0.15, the hypothesized model requires
a minimum sample size of 98 (Faul et al., 2009). According
to Memon et al. (2020), a sample size of 160–300
observations is appropriate for multivariate statistical
procedures such as PLS-SEM.
The researchers chose a product category as consumer
electronics specific to smart personal audio devices, that
is, wireless and true wireless stereo (TWS) headphones.
With the rapid rise of smart phones and on-the-go content
consumption, headphones have emerged as an important
component in the accessories industry. The researchers
chose smart personal audio devices because it is the second
fastest-growing category (Canalys, 2021). Furthermore, the
MIVI brand was chosen for this study by the researchers for
the following reasons: MIVI is a direct-to-consumer (D2C)
brand, MIVI is active on Instagram, and MIVI is endorsed
by SMI. A preliminary pilot study with 30 Instagram users
was conducted to test the language, sequence of questions,
6 FIIB Business Review

sufficiency and validity of a recommended instrument Data Analysis Procedure

(Johanson & Brooks, 2009). In the final study, the online
survey link was distributed through Instagram’s brand page This research applied SPSS and the structural equation
to users who follow Influencers. The filtering question model (SEM) using Smart-PLS to analyse the data and
assisted us in determining if respondents viewed promotional evaluate the hypotheses. First, SPSS 25 was used to
content on Instagram, and only those who answered examine descriptive statistics and correlation coefficients
proceeded with the survey. The researchers obtained a total of all variables. Second, SmartPLS was also employed for
of 468 responses, and 14 responses were removed due to mediation and moderation analysis of the hypothesized
duplication. Finally, 454 responses were included for model because it has superior statistical control for
further data analysis. identifying statistically significant associations (Hair Jr.
et al., 2014). A PLS-SEM is recommended for the complex
model including direct and intervening effects (Hair Jr.
Measures et al., 2017). It was used to conduct confirmatory composite
Source credibility traits, such as attractiveness, trustworthiness analysis (CCA). Based on the CCA model, convergent and
and expertise constituted of fifteen items were measured discriminant validity were examined. Third, investigate the
based on 5-point semantic differential scales (Ohanian, 1990). mediating impact, the PLS algorithm and bootstrapping,
Three items were adapted to measure attitude towards brand which develops a structural model and calculates the lower
credibility (Chin et al., 2019; Tee et al., 2013). Similarly, three & upper confidence intervals of Indirect effects (Puth et al.,
items were adapted to measure purchase intention (Mahrous 2015). Finally, the Process Macro (Hayes, 2017b) was
& Abdelmaaboud, 2016). Five items were adapted to measure performed to explore the predicted moderated-mediation
brand familiarity (Doong et al., 2011; Ha & Perks, 2005). All model using model 14 (Preacher et al., 2007).
remaining scale items used 5-point Likert scales anchored
between ‘strongly disagree’ and ‘strongly agree’. Data Analysis and Results
In this section, descriptive statistics were performed to
Demographic Profile confirm the data normality. The common method bias (CMB)
The survey was completed by 454 users, 54.8% of whom was identified by using the collinearity test and Harman’s
were males, and 45.2% of those who were females. one-factor test (Fuller et al., 2016). The measurement and
Furthermore, 23–32 years of age accounted for 63.37% of structural model were also examined (Hair et al., 2017).
the sample. The vast majority, 61.6%, spend 1–3 h per day
on social media. Wireless/Bluetooth is the most popular Descriptive Statistics
type of headphones or earphones, accounting for 57% of
all purchases. Almost 53% of those polled are willing to It consists of means, SD and correlations of the six variables,
spend between `500 and `2,000 on headphones. such as Attractiveness, Trustworthiness, Expertise, Attitude,
Brand familiarity and Purchase Intention are presented in
Table 2. On a 5-point scale, mean values of less than 2.99,
Table 1.  Demographic Profile. 3–3.99 and greater than 4 are considered low, moderate and
high respectively (Sekaran & Bougie, 2020). In addition, the
Variable Category Frequency %
skewness and kurtosis standards were utilized to ensure that
Gender Male 249 54.84 the data was normal (Hair et al., 2017). Data is considered
Female 205 45.15 normal when the skewness and kurtosis range from −3 to +3
Age (in years) 18–22  53 11.67
(DeCarlo, 1997). In Table 2, the skewness values ranged
23–27 156 34.36
28–32 132 29.07
from −0.138 to −0.950, while the kurtosis values ranged
Above 32 113 24.88 from −0.074 to 1.026. As a result, there was data normality.
Time spend on social 1–2 h/day 124 27.31
media 2–3 h/day 156 34.36 Common Method Bias
3–4 h/day  71 15.63
Above 4 h/day 103 22.68 The Common Method Bias (CMB) approach is used to
Most preferred type of Wired 195 42.95 minimize the social desirability effect. CMB emerges
headphones/earphones Wireless/ 259 57.04 in survey research when all related variables, such as
Bluetooth independent, dependent and intervening variables are
Projected budget for a Less than 500  67 14.75
obtained by a similar approach (Podsakoff & Organ, 1986).
headphones/earphones/ 500–1000 109 24.00
TWS 1000–2000 132 29.07
Researchers used the collinearity test and Harman’s one
More than 2000 146 32.15 factor to confirm the CMB. Kock (2015) posited that CMB
is not a concern when all factor level variance inflation
Kareem and   Venugopal 7

Table 2.  Descriptive Statistics and Correlations.

Variables Mean SD Skewness Kurtosis Attract Trust Expertise Attitude Intention Brand
Attract 2.82 0.77 –0.138 –0.074 1
Trust 3.22 0.76 –0.912 0.957 0.73** 1
Expertise 3.15 0.61 –0.214 0.391 0.47** 0.46** 1
Attitude 3.37 0.89 –0.950 0.488 0.06 0.001 0.22** 1
Intention 3.95 0.71 –0.778 1.026 0.41** 0.38** 0.72** 0.03 1
Brand 3.30 0.85 –0.267 –0.307 0.13** 0.011 0.12** –0.05 0.26* 1
Note: ** p< 0.01 level.

Table 3.  Collinearity Assessment (Inner VIF Values). factor analysis contributed to 29.07% of variance amid
Variable Attitude Intention measures, which is lower than the threshold value of 50%,
Attractiveness 2.236 2.364
showing that the data is devoid of potential biases.
Attitude – 1.995
Brand Familiarity – 1.137 Measurement Model
Expertise 1.306 2.455
Intention – – The model was utilized to examine the relation between
Trustworthiness 2.163 2.234 each observed variable and the predictors. Confirmatory
composite analysis (CCA) is a newly proposed technique
to validate the estimated model when employing PLS-SEM
factors (VIFs) from a full collinearity test are equal to or (Hair et al., 2020). It includes two objectives: (a) to examine
less than 3.3. The VIF values of our factors ranged between the reliability and validity of the components and (b) to
1.13 and 2.45, which is under the suggested threshold determine possible associations between the variables. The
level. Table 3. shows all VIF values were smaller than the Cronbach alpha was used to assess the reliability of the
criterion value, indicating that collinearity was eliminated. instrument (Cronbach, 1951). In all cases, Cronbach’s
To address the possibility of CMB, the study employed alpha was greater than 0.70 (Table 4), which signifies an
Harman’s one factor as a statistical approach (MacKenzie internal consistency (Nunnally, 1994). All of the CR is
& Podsakoff, 2012). A single factor recognized using greater than 0.70, indicating that the measurements are

Table 4.  Measurement Model Results.

Construct ITEMS Coding Loading Cronbach Alpha Composite Reliability Average Variance Extracted
Attractiveness ATT1 0.853 0.811 0.888 0.727
ATT2 0.918
ATT3 0.782
Trustworthiness TR1 0.658 0.800 0.863 0.562
TR2 0.833
TR3 0.864
TR4 0.627
TR5 0.730
Expertise EX1 0.71 0.721 0.848 0.527
EX2 0.706
EX3 0.725
EX4 0.732
EX5 0.754
Attitude towards brand ATA1 0.851 0.765 0.864 0.679
credibility ATA2 0.805
ATA3 0.816
Brand Familiarity BF1 0.886 0.904 0.928 0.723
BF2 0.916
BF3 0.850
BF4 0.851
BF5 0.737
Purchase Intention PI1 0.834 0.913 0.945 0.852
PI2 0.961
PI3 0.913
8 FIIB Business Review

Table 5.  Discriminant Validity (HTMT Ratio).

Attractiveness Attitude Brand Familiarity Expertise Intention Trust
Attractiveness
Attitude 0.201
Brand Familiarity 0.173 0.191
Expertise 0.602 0.754 0.188
Intention 0.482 0.236 0.287 0.714
Trustworthiness 0.610 0.254 0.123 0.559 0.450

Table 6.  Results of R2, Q2 and f 2.
Variable R2 Adjusted Q2 f2
Attractiveness – – 0.000
Trustworthiness – – 0.016
Expertise – – 0.633
Attitude 0.457 0.297 0.147
Intention 0.578 0.476 – the hypotheses were accepted or rejected.
precise and each AVE is larger than 0.5, representing that
the current study has established convergent validity
(Fornell & Larcker, 1981). Furthermore, the Heterotrait–
Monotrait ratio was used to report discriminant validity
(Henseler et al., 2014). Table 5 reveals that the HTMT ratio
is less than 0.85 (Franke & Sarstedt, 2019), showing the
fulfilment of discriminant validity.
Structural Model
The assessment of the structural model is to determine the
predictive relevance, linkages between variables and
strength and quality. The model was evaluated using five
key criteria: (a) R2–coefficient of determination, (b) Beta
value (c) T-statistics, (d) effect size (f 2) and (e) predictive
relevancy (Q 2). Hair et al. (2013) suggested R2 values of
0.70, 0.50 and 0.25 as strong, moderate and weak,
respectively. As a result, the model explained 57.8% of the
variation in purchase intention with an R2 value of 0.578,
which is considered moderate (See Table 6). Cohen (1992)
recommended effect sizes (f 2) of 0.35, 0.15 and 0.02 for
prediction, which is measured as large, medium and small
correspondingly. In predicting purchase intention, expertise
(0.633) indicates a large effect size; attitude (0.147) confirms
a medium effect; and trustworthiness (0.016) exerted a small
effect size. Considerably, the blindfolding procedure showed
that the Q2 value for purchase intention (0.476) was greater
than zero, and the model demonstrated acceptable predictive
relevance (Hair et al., 2011). Additionally, the model fit
indices were assessed using SRMR and Normed Fit Index
(NFI). Henseler et al. (2014) introduce the SRMR as a
goodness of fit (GOF) measure for PLS-SEM that can be
used to avoid model misspecification. The value of SRMR
was 0.061, which is less than the value of 0.08, indicating
a good fit (Hair Jr. et al., 2016). Consequently, for factor
models, the NFI results in values between 0 and 1 (Hair Jr.
et al., 2016). The NFI value was 0.93, which is greater than
0.90, indicating a good fit. To test the provided hypotheses,
the bootstrapping approach with a sample size of 5000 was
utilized (Preacher & Hayes, 2008). Furthermore, Table 7
shows the t-statistics and p-value used to determine whether
The outcome of the result indicates that there is no
effect between SMI attractiveness and PI ( β = –0.009,
t = 0.201, p > 0.01). Hence hypothesis H1a is rejected. The
results establish that SMI trustworthiness is positively
significantly related to purchase intention ( β = 0.123,
t = 2.973, p < 0.01). Hence, hypothesis H1b is accepted.
The outcome of the study ascertains that SMI expertise is
positively and statistically significant to purchase intention
( β = 0.805, t = 19.382, p < 0.01). Thus, hypothesis H1c is
accepted. The results highlighted that attitude and purchase
intention was significant ( β = 0.350, t = 7.792, p < 0.001).
Hence, H1d is supported (Table 7 and See Figure 3)
Mediation Results
The mediation results depicted in Table 8 reveal that
attitude positively mediates the relation between SMI
attractiveness and purchasing intent ( β = 0.069, t = 3.378,
p < 0.01). The mediation is declared to be a full mediation,
as the impact of SMI attractiveness on intention is found to
be significant ( p < 0.01) even after introducing attitude as
a mediating variable. Also in the absence of attitude as a
mediating variable, the effect of SMI attractiveness on
purchase intention is found to be insignificant. Hence
attitude fully mediates the link between SMI attractiveness
and purchase intention. Hence, hypothesis H2a is accepted.
The analysis reveals that attitude does not mediate the
relation between SMI trustworthiness and purchasing
intent ( β = −0.006, t = 0.311, p > 0.01). It is considered a
no mediation as the effect of SMI trustworthiness on
purchase intention was insignificant ( p > 0.01) after the
inclusion of mediating variable. Thus, hypothesis H2b is not
supported. The analysis reveals that attitude influences the
relationship between SMI expertise and purchase intention
( β = −0.260, t = 7.950, p < 0.01). The relationship is
considered as a partial mediation since SMI expertise on
purchase intention was significant ( p < 0.01) after the
inclusion of the variable. Consequently, hypothesis H2c
is accepted.
Kareem and   Venugopal 9

Table 7.  Results of Hypothesis Testing.

Relationships Parameters
Direct effects b SD t-value p-value Decision
H1a: Attractiveness → Purchase intention –0.009 0.046 0.201 0.841 Not supported
H1b: Trustworthiness → Purchase intention 0.123 0.041 2.973 0.003 Supported
H1c: Expertise → Purchase intention 0.805 0.042 19.382 0.000 Supported
H1d: Attitude towards brand credibility → Purchase 0.350 0.045 7.792 0.000 Supported
intention
Note: N = 454; b- standardized regression weights.

Figure 3.  Structural Model.

Table 8.  Results of Indirect Effects.

Mediation Effect b SD t-value p-value Decision
H2a: Attractiveness → Attitude → Purchase Intention 0.069 0.020 3.378 0.001 Full mediation
H2b: Trustworthiness → Attitude → Purchase Intention –0.006 0.020 0.311 0.759 No mediation
H2c: Expertise → Attitude → Purchase Intention –0.260 0.032 7.950 0.000 Partial mediation
Moderation effect b SD t-value p-value Decision
H3: Attitude towards brand credibility*Brand familiarity → Purchase 0.175 0.033 5.306 0.000 Supported
Intention
Note: N = 454; b- standardized regression weights.

Moderation Result Moderated Mediation Results

The moderation results depict in Table 8 indicated that
brand familiarity moderates correlations between attitude
and purchase intention, the impact is higher when brand
familiarity is high. Table 8 shows that the moderation
effect is significant ( β = 0.175, SE = 0.033, p < 0.01),
confirming H3.
Hayes (2017a) Process macro was employed to perform
moderated mediation, result understands the power of the
relationship between SMI source traits and intention
through attitude is conditional on the importance of brand
familiarity. Table 9 depicts the bootstrapping results
that, the conditional indirect effect of SMI attractiveness
10 FIIB Business Review

Table 9.  Moderated Mediation Results.

Relationships b SD LLCI ULCI Result
Conditional indirect effects
H4a: Attractiveness → Attitude → Purchase Intention; 0.016 0.005 –0.012 0.029 Not supported
Brand familiarity
High (0.859) 0.007 0.016 –0.045 0.013 Insignificant
Low (−0.859) 0.003 0.010 –0.011 0.025 Insignificant
H4b: Trustworthiness → Attitude → Purchase Intention; 0.024 0.090 0.010 0.047 Supported
Brand familiarity
High (0.859) 0.232 0.070 0.196 0.412 Significant
Low (−0.859) 0.151 0.050 0.112 0.321 Significant
H4c: Expertise → Attitude → Purchase Intention; 0.018 0.010 0.016 0.022 Supported
Brand familiarity
High (0.859) 0.135 0.012 0.068 0.225 Significant
Low (−0.859) 0.075 0.034 0.060 0.159 Significant

Figure 4.  Simple Slope of Moderation Mediation.

on purchase intention through attitude has been shown
to be unimportant at both higher and lower levels of
brand familiarity. The overall moderated mediation index
( β = 0.016, SE = 0.005, LLCI = −0.012, ULCI = 0.029) for
this indirect effect was established to be insignificant
because the upper and lower CI values contain zero,
representing the lack of moderated mediation relationship.
H4a is not supported.
The conditional indirect effect of trustworthiness on
the purchase intent through attitude has been shown to
be significant at both higher and lower levels of brand
familiarity. The overall moderated mediation ( β = 0.024,
SE = 0.090, LLCI = 0.010, ULCI = 0.047) was established
to be significant since both upper and lower CI values were
above zero. This represents a considerable effect of brand
familiarity on the relationship between trustworthiness
and purchase intent. Further, researchers investigate the
interaction using a simple slope by plotting for +1 SD,
mean, −1SD value of brand familiarity. Although a simple
slope plot (Figure 4) represents the effect of trustworthiness
on purchase intention through attitude becomes stronger
with a high degree of brand familiarity. This shows that
moderated mediation is present, and H4b is supported.
The conditional indirect effect of expertise on the
purchase intent through attitude was established to be
significant at both higher and lower levels of brand
familiarity. The overall moderated mediation ( β = 0.018,
SE = 0.010, LLCI = 0.016, ULCI = 0.022) has been shown
to be significant since both upper and lower CI values are
above zero. This indicates a significant effect of brand
Kareem and   Venugopal 11
Figure 5. Simple Slope of Moderation Mediation.
familiarity on the relationship between expertise and
intention. Furthermore, we investigate the interaction by
using a simple slope by plotting a graph for +1 SD and
−1SD from the mean value of brand familiarity. Despite
simple slope analysis (Figure 5) showed the effect of
expertise on purchase intention through attitude becomes
stronger with a high degree of brand familiarity. This
shows that moderated mediation is present, and H4c is
supported.
Discussions
Social Media Influencers’ Traits
The Influencers’ attractiveness has no effect on purchase
intention. SMI attractiveness cannot impact the intention to
purchase since there are other underpinning variables that
contribute to the purchase. Moreover, our results completely
or moderately contradict previous studies on online shopping
(Arora et al., 2019), and beauty (Sokolova & Kefi, 2020).
Djafarova and Rushworth (2017) established that SMI
attractiveness had a favourable influence on purchase intent
on different social media platforms. Surprisingly, users
of smart audio gadgets judge influencers on traits like
trustworthiness and expertise, with attractiveness being the
least desirable trait for purchase intention. It clearly indicates
that in order to persuade consumers to make a purchasing
decision, they assess the dependability and honesty of the
information provided by the influencers.
The influencer’s trustworthiness has a positive effect on
purchase intention. The consumers considered SMI as a
reliable source of information since the brands fit their own
profiles and were connected to their personal lives. Our
research supports the influencer’s trustworthiness on
purchase intention (Karunasingha & Abeysekera, 2022;
Lou & Yuan, 2019; Özbölük & Akdoğan, 2022; Saima &
Khan, 2020; Wang & Scheinbaum, 2017). These studies
observed that the buyers who read notifications from
content creators are more trustworthy and have a more
positive perception of the promoted brand. It clearly
indicates that the consumers perceive the influencer as
more trustworthy in seeking product-related information.
The influencer’s expertise has a positive impact on
intention. SMI creates content based on its field of expertise
and promotes organic content that influences the fans,
followers and users to buy a brand. Our findings are in
accordance with (Djafarova & Rushworth, 2017; Kim et al.,
2018; Masuda et al., 2022; Weismueller et al., 2020) observed
that SMI expertise has a substantial outcome on purchasing
intention, implying that marketing professionals and media
managers should concentrate on the influencer’s field of
expertise. It also ensures that consumers can get professional
opinions and advice at their convenience to make better
decisions on future purchases. Source trustworthiness and
expertise appeared to be more pertinent than attractiveness.
Attitude Towards Brand Credibility
Our findings disclose that the attitude towards brand credibility
has a positive impact on purchase intention. Thus, suggesting
a significant association between brand credibility attitude
and purchasing intention. When an SMI promotes or creates
content on brands, and posts their reviews on different
platforms, that generates brand credibility and the audience is
favourably considering the influencers. The mediating effect
of attitude towards brand credibility on SMI traits and
12
purchase intention. Attitude fully mediates the association
between SMI attractiveness and purchase intention. Attitude
has a partially mediating link between SMI expertise and the
intention to purchase. Attitude does not mediate the link
between SMI’s trustworthiness and intention. Our results are
consistent with Wang and Scheinbaum (2017); Wang et al.
(2017) support the source credibility and enhance the brand
credibility. The findings contradict Wiedmann and Mattenheim
(2020), who stated that an influencer’s expertise does not have
an impact on brand credibility.
Brand Familiarity
The moderation role of brand familiarity in the association
between attitude towards brand credibility and purchasing
intent was investigated in this study. As a result, brand
familiarity is important in the formation of attitudes and
intentions. Our study, consistent with previous studies
(Gefen, 2000; Ha and Perks, 2005; Morgan et al. 2021),
considered that familiarity had a significant influence on
consumers’ decision-making of brands or products, as well
as their intentions to buy a particular brand. Our research
contradicts that of Hussein and Hassan (2018), who found
brand familiarity has no relationship with brand purchase
likelihood.
The moderated mediation effect results confirm the
indirect effects of brand familiarity on the link between
SMI trustworthiness and purchase intent through attitude.
This finding reveals that consumers’ attitudes towards
brand credibility would have lowered the intention to buy a
product with brand familiarity. So the customers possessing
high brand familiarity would experience purchase intention,
and a weak relationship between attitude and trustworthiness
would exist. Similarly, results confirm the indirect effects
of brand familiarity on the connection between SMI
expertise and purchase intent through attitude. This finding
specifies that expertise on purchase intent through attitude
becomes higher with a high level of brand familiarity.
So customers possessing high brand familiarity would
experience purchase intention.
Implications
This research adds to the existing body of knowledge in
the domains of social media marketing (SMM) and
influencer marketing (IM). In particular, the study focuses
on Instagram, a new type of media that is popular among
young users and aims to understand the relationship
between SMI traits and intentions to purchase.
Theoretical Contribution and Future
Research Areas
The findings of this study were compared to previous studies
on the source credibility model, which is common, and social
FIIB Business Review
media influencers, which is rare. The model for influencers
might also be reduced to two traits: trustworthiness and
expertise. Generally, the findings show that the prerequisites
for influencers are evaluated differently. This is significant for
marketing professionals or practitioners developing influencer
campaigns since, due to the lack of models for influencers,
they frequently employ models designed for celebrities
(Alawadhi & Örs, 2020; Childers et al., 2018; Chin et al.,
2019). The source credibility model and theory of reasoned
action integrated and extended the model using intervening
variables, that is, brand familiarity. As a result, this study
identified the moderating influence of brand familiarity on
attitudes towards brand credibility and purchase intention.
This study adds to the literature by providing concrete
evidence of brand familiarity as an important component
in the influencer marketing approach. Furthermore, the
moderated mediation effects of brand familiarity on SMI traits
and intention through attitude. As a result, the question of how
to modify influencer marketing based on the strength of the
traits and intent is addressed. Finally, the study showed that
the SMI traits and the user’s intention to buy can be predicted
using the TRA and source credibility model.
This study contributes significantly to the field of
influencer marketing, although research has limitations.
The limitations of the study can provide direction for future
research. This study was a cross-sectional survey, and the
results were confined to a certain time period. A longitudinal
study might be used by future researchers to investigate
the relations over time. This study extracted a sample from
an Instagram user’s context using a convenience sampling
approach. Future researchers can focus on other social
media platforms, such as YouTube and TikTok, using a
probability-sampling method. This study focused on one
product category, consumer electronics; future research
may examine other product categories. The current model
may include other SMI traits, such as authenticity, closeness
and interactivity. The model can be improved by adding
moderators like advertisement disclosure and review
ratings to enhance the relationship between SMI traits and
purchase intention. Further, future research may include
control variables, such as age, gender and social media
usage to examine their influence on purchase intention.
Managerial Implications
This study provides direction and guidance to managers
to understand the importance of SMI traits on brand
credibility and purchase intention. According to our findings,
social media managers and practitioners should place a
greater emphasize on trustworthiness and expertise. With
the confirmation of the same, marketers should focus their
marketing and advertising efforts on the positive relationship
between SMI endorsers and purchase intentions.
Influencers should promote branded products that fit
their personal style. In our case, the endorsed product is a
Kareem and   Venugopal 13
lifestyle electronics brand; the SMI trait like attractiveness is
the least preferred trait among other traits. However, the brand
managers have to select the influencers based on the endorsed
product (e.g., in beauty product endorsements, attractiveness
might be one of the most preferred traits). Social media
managers should collaborate with influencers to increase
brand credibility. Managers have to understand the importance
of trusted influencers in building the credibility of a brand. In
order to build a trustworthy brand, firms and influencers have
to be transparency in sharing information, thoughts and
suggestions on brands through ‘live streaming’ with fans and
followers. SMIs with expertise in a specific field of interest
might be encouraged to participate in value co-creation. This
may be an effective strategy for brands to improve the
perceived credibility of influencers. To increase transparency
by inviting consumers to participate in their influencer
marketing strategy (e.g., the Instagram collabs feature
lets users co-create with other users). This might be a
useful strategy for firms keen to understand the credibility
of influencers and boost transparency by encouraging
customers to participate in their promotional campaigns.
Brand managers should prioritize brand familiarity since
it boosts purchase intent among Instagram users. SMI assists
brands in familiarizing themselves through original and
authentic content on social media accounts, which allows
the brand to reach a wider target audience. Social media
managers must monitor quantifiable indicators of influencer
credibility, such as the number of followers, engagement,
reach and comments/likes/shares (Arous et al., 2020). Social
media managers have to customise the SMI promotional
campaign using the platform’s specific features. In the case
of Instagram brand collabs, stories and reels are the most
popular features. Similarly, on You Tube (Shorts, Live, etc.).
Eventually, SMIs are effective promotional communicators
in a variety of contexts (tourism, healthcare, fashion, etc.).
Businesses are striving to capitalise on the success of social
media influencers as a way to attain a wider and more
diversified audience.
Conclusion
This research investigated the effects of SMIs’ traits on
purchase intention. The source credibility model and theory
of reasoned action provide a theoretical basis for investigating
the effects of SMI traits on purchase intention. The model
includes SMI traits, such as attractiveness, trustworthiness
and expertise; an attitude towards brand credibility as a
mediator; brand familiarity as a moderator. The evaluation
of this moderated mediation enabled a comprehensive
explanation of the hypothesized relationship. This study
addresses the three research questions in RQ1, which
examined the traits of social media influencers (SMIs)
that affect purchase intention. The study found that SMI
trustworthiness and expertise affect the purchase intention of
smart personal audio devices, while SMI attractiveness has
no effect on purchase intention. In RQ2, which analysed the
relationship between SMI traits and purchase intention
through an attitude towards brand credibility, the research
confirmed that brand familiarity moderated the relationship
between attitude and purchase intention. In RQ3, which
studied the relationship between attitude towards brand
credibility, brand familiarity and purchase intention, the
study indicated a moderated mediation effect of brand
familiarity that strengthens the indirect relationship between
SMI trustworthiness and expertise and purchase intention
through an attitude towards brand credibility. The research
contributes to the body of literature on influencer marketing.
Further, the research provided insights for marketing firms,
managers and practitioners on how to choose and collaborate
with SMI to strengthen brand credibility, brand familiarity
and purchase intention.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect
to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The authors received no financial support for the research,
authorship and/or publication of this article.
ORCID iDs
Shaply Abdul Kareem https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5712-6008
Pulidindi Venugopal https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0880-7565
References
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and
predicting social behavior. Prentice Hall.
Alawadhi, R., & Örs, M. (2020). Effect of celebrity endorsement
on consumers purchase intention in the mediation effect of
brand image. Journal of Business Research—Turk, 12(1),
454–468. https://doi.org/10.20491/isarder.2020.855
Amos, C., Holmes, G., & Strutton, D. (2008). Exploring
the relationship between celebrity endorser effects and
advertising effectiveness: A quantitative synthesis of effect
size. International Journal of Advertising, 27(2), 209–234.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02650487.2008.11073052
Anridho, N., & Liao, Y. K. (2013). The mediation roles of
brand credibility and attitude on the performance of cause-
related marketing. International Journal of Social Sciences
& Education, 4(1), 226–276.
Armitage, C. J., & Conner, M. (2001). Efficacy of the theory of
planned behaviour: A meta-analytic review. British Journal
of Social Psychology, 40(4), 471–499. https://doi.org/10.13
48/014466601164939
Arora, N., Prashar, S., Parsad, C., & Tata, S. V. (2019). Influence
of celebrity factors, consumer attitude and involvement on
shoppers’ purchase intention using hierarchical regression.
Decision, 46(3), 179–195. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40622-
019-00208-7
Arous, I., Yang, J., Khayati, M., & Cudré-Mauroux, P. (2020).
OpenCrowd: A human-AI collaborative approach for finding
14
social influencers via open-ended answers aggregation.
Proceedings of the Web Conference 2020. https://doi.org/10.
1145/3366423.3380254
Audrezet, A., de Kerviler, G., & Guidry Moulard, J. (2020).
Authenticity under threat: When social media influencers
need to go beyond self-presentation. Journal of Business
Research, 117, 557–569. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.
2018.07.008
Canalys. (2021, April 28). Canalys newsroom—India’s smart
personal audio market bucks flat global trend and jumps
62% in Q3 2021. https://www.canalys.com/newsroom/
global-tws-market-q3-2021
Catalán, S., Martínez, E., & Wallace, E. (2019). Analysing
mobile advergaming effectiveness: The role of flow, game
repetition and brand familiarity. Journal of Product & Brand
Management, 28(4), 502–514. https://doi.org/10.1108/jpbm-
07-2018-1929
Cheah, J., Ting, H., Cham, T. H., & Memon, M. A. (2019).
The effect of selfie promotion and celebrity endorsed
advertisement on decision-making processes. Internet
Research, 29(3), 552–577. https://doi.org/10.1108/intr-12-
2017-0530
Chen, J. (2021, June 10). The most important Instagram statistics
you need to know for 2021. https://sproutsocial.com/insights/
instagram-stats/
Childers, C. C., Lemon, L. L., & Hoy, M. G. (2018). #sponsored
#ad: Agency perspective on influencer marketing campaigns.
Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 40(3),
258–274. https://doi.org/10.1080/10641734.2018.1521113
Chin, P. N., Isa, S. M., & Alodin, Y. (2019). The impact of
endorser and brand credibility on consumers’ purchase
intention: The mediating effect of attitude towards brand and
brand credibility. Journal of Marketing Communications,
26(8), 896–912. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2019.160
4561
Chung, S., & Cho, H. (2017). Fostering parasocial relationships
with celebrities on social media: Implications for celebrity
endorsement. Psychology & Marketing, 34(4), 481–495.
https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21001
Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1),
155–159. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient Alpha and the internal
structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297–334. https://doi.
org/10.1007/bf02310555
De Veirman, M., Cauberghe, V., & Hudders, L. (2017). Marketing
through Instagram influencers: The impact of number
of followers and product divergence on brand attitude.
International Journal of Advertising, 36(5), 798–828. https://
doi.org/10.1080/02650487.2017.1348035
DeCarlo, L. T. (1997). On the meaning and use of kurtosis.
Psychological Methods, 2(3), 292–307. https://doi.
org/10.1037/1082-989x.2.3.292
Djafarova, E., & Rushworth, C. (2017). Exploring the credibility
of online celebrities’ Instagram profiles in influencing
the purchase decisions of young female users. Computers
in Human Behavior, 68, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.
2016.11.009
Doong, H., Wang, H., & Foxall, G. R. (2011). An investigation of
consumers’ webstore shopping: A view of click-and-mortar
company. International Journal of Information Management,
31(3), 210–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2010.06.006
FIIB Business Review
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A. (2009). Statistical
power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and
regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4),
1149–1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/brm.41.4.1149
Fernandes, T., Nettleship, H., & Pinto, L. H. (2022). Judging a
book by its cover? The role of unconventional appearance
on social media influencers effectiveness. Journal of
Retailing and Consumer Services, 66, 102917. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2022.102917
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation
models with unobservable variables and measurement error.
Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39. https://doi.org/10.
2307/3151312
Franke, G., & Sarstedt, M. (2019). Heuristics versus statistics
in discriminant validity testing: A comparison of four
procedures. Internet Research, 29(3), 430–447. https://doi.
org/10.1108/intr-12-2017-0515
Fuller, C. M., Simmering, M. J., Atinc, G., Atinc, Y., & Babin,
B. J. (2016). Common methods variance detection in business
research. Journal of Business Research, 69(8), 3192–3198.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.12.008
Gaenssle, S., & Budzinski, O. (2020). Stars in social media:
New light through old Windows? Journal of Media Business
Studies, 18(2), 79–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/16522354.20
20.1738694
Ge, J., & Gretzel, U. (2018). Emoji rhetoric: A social media
influencer perspective. Journal of Marketing Management,
34(15–16), 1272–1295. https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257x.
2018.1483960
Gefen, D. (2000). E-Commerce: The role of familiarity and
trust. Omega, 28(6), 725–737. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0305-
0483(00)00021-9
Gupta, G., & Vohra, A. V. (2019). Social media usage
intensity: Impact assessment on buyers’ behavioural traits.
FIIB Business Review, 8(2), 161–171. https://doi.org/10.
1177/2319714519843689
Ha, H., & Perks, H. (2005). Effects of consumer perceptions of
brand experience on the web: Brand familiarity, satisfaction
and brand trust. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 4(6),
438–452. https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.29
Hair Jr, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M.
(2016). A primer on partial least squares structural equation
modeling (PLS-SEM). SAGE Publications.
Hair Jr, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Gudergan, S. P.
(2017a). Advanced issues in partial least squares structural
equation modeling. SAGE Publications.
Hair Jr, J.F., Sarstedt, M., Hopkins, L., & G. Kuppelwieser, V.
(2014). Partial least squares structural equation modeling
(PLS-SEM). European Business Review, 26(2), 106–121.
https://doi.org/10.1108/ebr-10-2013-012
Hair, J. F., Howard, M. C., & Nitzl, C. (2020). Assessing
measurement model quality in PLS-SEM using confirmatory
composite analysis. Journal of Business Research, 109,
101–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.11.069
Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T., Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., & Thiele,
K. O. (2017). Mirror, mirror on the wall: A comparative
evaluation of composite-based structural equation modeling
methods. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
45(5), 616–632. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-017-0517-x
Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM:
Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing Theory and
Kareem and   Venugopal 15
Practice, 19(2), 139–152. https://doi.org/10.2753/mtp1069-
6679190202
Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2013). Partial least
squares structural equation modeling: Rigorous applications,
better results and higher acceptance. Long Range Planning,
46(1–2), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2013.01.001
Hayes, A. F. (2017a). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and
conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach
(2nd ed.). Guilford Publications.
Hayes, A. F. (2017b). Partial, conditional, and moderated
moderated mediation: Quantification, inference, and
interpretation. Communication Monographs, 85(1), 4–40.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2017.1352100
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2014). A new
criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-
based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy
of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.
1007/s11747-014-0403-8
Hoyer, W. D., MacInnis, D. J., & Pieters, R. (2012). Consumer
behavior. Cengage Learning.
Huang, G. (2016). Moderating role of brand familiarity in
cross-media effects: An information processing perspective.
Journal of Promotion Management, 22(5), 665–683. https://
doi.org/10.1080/10496491.2016.1154922
Hussein, R., & Hassan, S. (2018). Antecedents of global brand
purchase likelihood: Exploring the mediating effect of
quality, prestige and familiarity. Journal of International
Consumer Marketing, 30(5), 288–303. https://doi.org/10.10
80/08961530.2018.1455549
Johanson, G. A., & Brooks, G. P. (2009). Initial scale
development: Sample size for pilot studies. Educational and
Psychological Measurement, 70(3), 394–400. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0013164409355692
John, S. P., Walford, R., & Purayidathil, J. (2022). Factors
affecting the adoption of social media in marketing of
higher education: An empirical analysis. FIIB Business
Review, 11, 422–437. https://doi.org/10.1177/231971452110
72198
Karunasingha, A., & Abeysekera, N. (2022). The mediating effect
of trust on consumer behavior in social media marketing
environments. South Asian Journal of Marketing, 3(2),
135–149. https://doi.org/10.1108/SAJM-10-2021-0126
Keller, K. L. (2004). Strategic brand management: Building
measuring and managing brand equity (2nd ed.). Oxford
University Press.
Khamis, S., Ang, L., & Welling, R. (2016). Self-branding, ‘micro-
celebrity’ and the rise of social media influencers. Celebrity
Studies, 8(2), 191–208. https://doi.org/10.1080/19392397.
2016.1218292
Kim, D. Y., & Kim, H. (2021). Trust me, trust me not: A nuanced
view of influencer marketing on social media. Journal of
Business Research, 134, 223–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jbusres.2021.05.024
Kim, E., & Kim, Y. (2022). Factors affecting the attitudes and
behavioral intentions of followers toward advertising content
embedded within YouTube influencers’ videos. Journal of
Promotion Management, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/1049
6491.2022.2060414
Kim, S., Kandampully, J., & Bilgihan, A. (2018). The influence
of eWOM communications: An application of online social
network framework. Computers in Human Behavior, 80,
243–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.11.015
Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation
modeling (4th ed.). Guilford Publications.
Kock, N. (2015). Common method bias in PLS-SEM: A Full
Collinearity Assessment Approach. International Journal
of e-Collaboration, 11(4), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijec.
2015100101
Ladeira, W. J., Santiago, J. K., de Oliveira Santini, F., & Pinto, D.
C. (2022). Impact of brand familiarity on attitude formation:
Insights and generalizations from a meta-analysis. Journal of
Product & Brand Management, 31, 1168–1179. https://doi.
org/10.1108/JPBM-10-2020-3166
Lou, C., & Yuan, S. (2019). Influencer marketing: How message
value and credibility affect consumer trust of branded content
on social media. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 19(1),
58–73. https://doi.org/10.1080/15252019.2018.1533501
MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, P. M. (2012). Common method bias
in marketing: Causes, mechanisms, and procedural remedies.
Journal of Retailing, 88(4), 542–555. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.jretai.2012.08.001
Mahrous, A. A., & Abdelmaaboud, A. K. (2016). Antecedents of
participation in online brand communities and their purchasing
behavior consequences. Service Business, 11(2), 229–251.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11628-016-0306-5
Malodia, S., Singh, P., Goyal, V., & Sengupta, A. (2017). Measuring
the impact of brand-celebrity personality congruence on
purchase intention. Journal of Marketing Communications,
23(5), 493–512. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2017.
1322125
Martín-Consuegra, D., Faraoni, M., Díaz, E., & Ranfagni, S.
(2018). Exploring relationships among brand credibility,
purchase intention and social media for fashion brands: A
conditional mediation model. Journal of Global Fashion
Marketing, 9(3), 237–251. https://doi.org/10.1080/20932685.
2018.1461020
Masuda, H., Han, S. H., & Lee, J. (2022). Impacts of
influencer attributes on purchase intentions in social media
influencer marketing: Mediating roles of characterizations.
Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 174, 121246.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121246
McQuarrie, E. F., Miller, J., & Phillips, B. J. (2013). The
megaphone effect: Taste and audience in fashion blogging.
Journal of Consumer Research, 40(1), 136–158. https://doi.
org/10.1086/669042
Mehta, A. (2000). Advertising attitudes and advertising
effectiveness. Journal of Advertising Research, 40(3), 67–72.
https://doi.org/10.2501/jar-40-3-67-72
Memon, M. A., Ting, H., Cheah, J., Thurasamy, R., Chuah, F.,
& Cham, T. H. (2020). Sample size for survey research:
Review and recommendations. Journal of Applied Structural
Equation Modeling, 4(2), i–xx. https://doi.org/10.47263/
jasem.4(2)01
Mohd Suki, N. (2014). Does celebrity credibility influence
Muslim and non-Muslim consumers’ attitudes toward brands
and purchase intention? Journal of Islamic Marketing, 5(2),
227–240. https://doi.org/10.1108/jima-04-2013-0024
Morgan, C., Fajardo, T. M., & Townsend, C. (2021). Show it
or say it: How brand familiarity influences the effectiveness
of image-based versus text-based logos. Journal of the
16
Academy of Marketing Science, 49(3), 566–583. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s11747-020-00760-0
Munnukka, J., Maity, D., Reinikainen, H., & Luoma-aho,
V. (2019). “Thanks for watching”. The effectiveness of
YouTube vlogendorsements. Computers in Human Behavior,
93, 226–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.12.014
Nafees, L., Cook, C. M., Nikolov, A. N., & Stoddard, J. E.
(2021). Can social media influencer (SMI) power influence
consumer brand attitudes? The mediating role of perceived
SMI credibility. Digital Business, 1(2), 100008. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.digbus.2021.100008
Nunnally, J. C. (1994). Psychometric theory 3E. Tata McGraw-
Hill Education.
Ohanian, R. (1990). Construction and validation of a scale to measure
celebrity endorsers’ perceived expertise, trustworthiness, and
attractiveness. Journal of Advertising, 19(3), 39–52. https://
doi.org/10.1080/00913367.1990.10673191
Ong, Z. Q. (2015). The impact of celebrity credibility on
Consumer’s purchase intention toward the footwear
industry in Malaysia: The mediating effect of attitude toward
advertisement. Information Management and Business
Review, 7(4), 55–63. https://doi.org/10.22610/imbr.v7i4.1163
Onofrei, G., Filieri, R., Kennedy, L. (2022). Social media
interactions, purchase intention, and behavioural engagement:
The mediating role of source and content factors. Journal of
Business Research, 142, 100–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jbusres.2021.12.031
Onu, C. A., Nwaulune, J., Adegbola, E., & Nnorom, G.
(2019). The effect of celebrity physical attractiveness and
trustworthiness on consumer purchase intentions: A study
on Nigerian consumers. Management Science Letters,
1965–1976. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2019.7.009
Özbölük, T., & Akdoğan, K. (2022). The role of online source
credibility and influencer identification on consumers’ purchase
decisions. International Journal of Internet Marketing and
Advertising, 16(1/2), 165–185.
Paul, J., & Bhakar, S. (2017). Does celebrity image congruence
influences brand attitude and purchase intention? Journal of
Promotion Management, 24(2), 153–177. https://doi.org/10.
1080/10496491.2017.1360826
Phua, J., Jin, S. V., & Kim, J. (2017). Gratifications of using
Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, or Snapchat to follow brands:
The moderating effect of social comparison, trust, tie strength,
and network homophily on brand identification, brand
engagement, brand commitment, and membership intention.
Telematics and Informatics, 34(1), 412–424. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.tele.2016.06.004
Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. (1986). Self-reports in
organizational research: Problems and prospects. Journal
of Management, 12(4), 531–544. https://doi.org/10.1177/
014920638601200408
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling
strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in
multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods,
40(3), 879–891. https://doi.org/10.3758/brm.40.3.879
Preacher, K. J., Rucker, D. D., & Hayes, A. F. (2007). Addressing
moderated mediation hypotheses: Theory, methods, and
prescriptions. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 42(1),
185–227. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273170701341316
Priester, J. R., & Petty, R. E. (2003). The influence of spokesperson
trustworthiness on message elaboration, attitude strength, and
FIIB Business Review
advertising effectiveness. Journal of Consumer Psychology,
13(4), 408–421. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327663jcp1304_08
Puth, M., Neuhäuser, M., & Ruxton, G. D. (2015). On the
variety of methods for calculating confidence intervals by
bootstrapping. Journal of Animal Ecology, 84(4), 892–897.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2656.12382
Rhee, E. S., & Jung, W. S. (2018). Brand familiarity as a
moderating factor in the ad and brand attitude relationship and
advertising appeals. Journal of Marketing Communications,
25(6), 571–585. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2018.146
1124
Rose, G. M., Merchant, A., Orth, U. R., & Horstmann, F. (2016).
Emphasizing brand heritage: Does it work? And how?
Journal of Business Research, 69(2), 936–943. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.06.021
Saima, & Khan, M. A. (2020). Effect of social media influencer
marketing on consumers’ purchase intention and the mediating
role of credibility. Journal of Promotion Management, 27(4),
503–523. https://doi.org/10.1080/10496491.2020.1851847
Schouten, A. P., Janssen, L., & Verspaget, M. (2019). Celebrity vs.
influencer endorsements in advertising: The role of identification,
credibility, and product-endorser fit. International Journal of
Advertising, 39(2), 258–281. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650487.
2019.1634898
Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. (2020). Research methods for business:
A skill building approach. John Wiley & Sons, Limited.
Sheu, J. (2010). A hybrid dynamic forecast model for analyzing
celebrity endorsement effects on consumer attitudes.
Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 52(9–10), 1554–1569.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcm.2010.06.020
Silvera, D. H., & Austad, B. (2004). Factors predicting the
effectiveness of celebrity endorsement advertisements.
European Journal of Marketing, 38(11/12), 1509–1526.
https://doi.org/10.1108/03090560410560218
Singh, R. P., & Banerjee, N. (2018). A study on exploring
the factors influencing celebrity endorsement credibility.
Global Business Review, 19(2), 494–509. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0972150917713537
Sokolova, K., & Kefi, H. (2020). Instagram and YouTube
bloggers promote it, why should I buy? How credibility and
parasocial interaction influence purchase intentions. Journal
of Retailing and Consumer Services, 53, 101742. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.01.011
Statista. (2021, February 10). Global influencer market size
2021. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1092819/global-
influencer-market-size/
Sundermann, G., & Raabe, T. (2019). Strategic communication
through social media influencers: Current state of research
and desiderata. International Journal of Strategic
Communication, 13(4), 278–300. https://doi.org/10.1080/15
53118x.2019.1618306
Tee, P. K., Gharleghi, B., & Chan, B. Y. F. (2013). Malaysian
young consumer preferences in choosing international fashion
brand. Journal of Human and Social Science Research, 1 (1),
31–38.
Thomas, T., & Johnson, J. (2017). The impact of celebrity expertise
on advertising effectiveness: The mediating role of celebrity
brand fit. Vision: The Journal of Business Perspective, 21(4),
367–374. https://doi.org/10.1177/0972262917733174
Thomas, T., & Johnson, J. (2019). The effect of celebrity
trustworthiness on endorsement effectiveness: A comparison
Kareem and   Venugopal 17

of congruence and hybrid model. Vision: The Journal of
Business Perspective, 23(3), 275–286. https://doi.org/10.
1177/0972262919850922
Verhellen, Y., Dens, N., & De Pelsmacker, P. (2015). Do I
know you? How brand familiarity and perceived fit affect
consumers’ attitudes towards brands placed in movies.
Marketing Letters, 27(3), 461–471. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11002-015-9347-0
Viddy, A., Rafiqoh, Kadang, T., & Angriani, F. (2019). The
effects of brand prestige and brand familiarity with brand
awareness on perceived quality and purchase intention for
users of NMAX yamaha motorcycle in East Kalimantan
Indonesia. Proceedings of the First International Conference
on Materials Engineering and Management—Management
Section (ICMEMm 2018). https://doi.org/10.2991/icmemm-
18.2019.5
Wang, S. W., & Scheinbaum, A. C. (2017). Enhancing brand
credibility via celebrity endorsement. Journal of Advertising
Research, 58(1), 16–32. https://doi.org/10.2501/jar-2017-042
Wang, S. W., Kao, G. H., & Ngamsiriudom, W. (2017).
Consumers’ attitude of endorser credibility, brand and
intention with respect to celebrity endorsement of the airline
sector. Journal of Air Transport Management, 60, 10–17.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2016.12.007
Wang, Y., & Sun, S. (2010). Examining the role of beliefs and
attitudes in online advertising. International Marketing Review,
27(1), 87–107. https://doi.org/10.1108/02651331011020410
Weismueller, J., Harrigan, P., Wang, S., & Soutar, G. N. (2020).
Influencer endorsements: How advertising disclosure and
source credibility affect consumer purchase intention on
social media. Australasian Marketing Journal, 28(4), 160–170.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ausmj.2020.03.002
Wiedmann, K., & Von Mettenheim, W. (2020). Attractiveness,
trustworthiness and expertise—Social influencers’ winning
formula? Journal of Product & Brand Management, 30(5),
707–725. https://doi.org/10.1108/jpbm-06-2019-2442

About the Authors

Shaply Abdul Kareem is a doctoral student and a Teaching and Research Assistant at Vellore Institute
of Technology (VIT) University, Vellore, India. He taught for 8 years before embarking on his research
career. His research interests include consumer behaviour, social media marketing and destination
marketing. He also attended research workshops and presented research papers at national and
international conferences (Amity University, IIM Bodh Gaya, IIM Jammu and Taylor University). He
can be reached at shaply.abdulkareem@vit.ac.in

Dr Pulidindi Venugopal is an enthusiastic marketing professor and a researcher at Vellore Institute of

Technology (VIT) University, Vellore, India. He completed the FDPM at IIM Ahmedabad. He started
his teaching profession at VIT in 2010. He has 72 research articles in prestigious journals, case studies
in prestigious case centres, and 25 book chapters in his possession until 2022. He has also produced
eight doctorates to date and holds two funded research projects sponsored by the Indian Council for
Social Science and Research (ICSSR). He also received six best paper awards at international conferences
organized by well-reputed institutions (Amity University, IIM Bodh Gaya, IIM Jammu and Taylor
University), received research awards for publication in peer-reviewed journals, and received the ‘Excellence in Research
Award’ from the Samagra Vikas Welfare Society for outstanding contributions in the field of education. He can be reached
at pulidindi.venu@vit.ac.in