Human vs. Virtual Influencers: Unveiling the Expectancy Violation Effect of Sponsorship Disclosure on Environmental CSR Communication and Skepticism

While influencers have rapidly grown as today’s brand endorsers and opinion leaders, it is yet fully explored how to utilize influencers in environmental CSR communication, such as promoting 2030 environmental goals, and in mitigating CSR skepticism. The current study conducted a 2 (human vs. virtual influencer) X 2 (sponsorship disclosure vs. no disclosure) between-subject experiment with a total of 330 U.S. adult residents recruited via an online panel service, Prolific. Results of the moderated serial mediation model analyses suggested human influencers induced more source credibility than virtual influencers, while sponsorship disclosure did not significantly influence message credibility. Drawing on expectation violation theory, we found an interaction effect of influencer type and sponsorship disclosure on perceived message credibility, such that the negative effect of sponsorship disclosure was more pronounced for human influencers. Both perceived source and message credibility played a crucial role in enhancing consumer perceptions of CSR outcomes and trust in CSR, as situational CSR skepticism factors, and in turn, mitigating dispositional CSR skepticism. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.