Virtually responsible? Attribution of responsibility toward human vs. virtual influencers and the mediating role of mind perception

This research examines consumers' attribution of responsibility to virtual influencers in comparison with human influencers, as well as the mechanisms underlying this attribution process. Two online experiments were conducted: Study 1 (N = 305) explored how consumers attribute responsibility to virtual versus human influencers in successful and unsuccessful endorsements, and the mediating role of mind perception in this process. Study 2 (N = 347) aimed to validate the findings of Study 1 using a different stimulus and further extend Study 1 by examining consumers' brand attitudes and intentions to share endorsements by virtual versus human influencers. It also tested whether mind perception continues to mediate between the influencer type and these brand-related outcomes. The findings indicate that consumers are more likely to attribute the success of endorsements to human influencers rather than virtual influencers. Virtual influencers, however, are perceived as less responsible for the outcomes of endorsements, whether successful or unsuccessful. Importantly, mind perception is found to mediate the effect of influencer type on responsibility attribution, brand attitude, and intentions to share. Theoretical and managerial implications of these findings are further discussed.