Understanding hedonic and utilitarian responses to product reviews on youtube and purchase intention

Abstract

YouTube has become popular among consumers as an information preference in the decision-making process within the social commerce environment. YouTubers share experiences, information, opinions, and thoughts regarding products or services in product-review content, and consumers’ motivations (hedonic or utilitarian) in reacting to how the content affect their buying behavior. This study investigates hedonic and utilitarian consumer responses to YouTubers’ product reviews that lead to purchase intention. We employed a questionnaire data collection method targeted at consumers who buy products after watching product-review content on YouTube. We collected 384 valid responses and employed structural equation modeling to test the validity and research hypotheses. The results showed that (1) parasocial interaction significantly influences hedonic (transparency, perceived enjoyment) and utilitarian (credibility, informativeness) responses and purchase intention, while (2) hedonic (perceived transparency) and utilitarian (informativeness) responses were insignificant for purchase intention. In addition, hedonic (perceived enjoyment) and utilitarian (credibility) responses have significant effects on purchase intention. Thus, YouTubers’ product-review content on YouTube influences consumer behavior in both hedonic and utilitarian terms. While marketers implement marketing strategies to include products in YouTube content, YouTubers communicate products to consumers. Furthermore, the theoretical and practical contributions of this study are discussed.

Keywords:

• Parasocial Interaction
• Hedonic and Utilitarian
• Purchase Intention
• Social Media Marketing
• Online Consumer Behavior
• YouTube
• YouTubers

PUBLIC INTEREST STATEMENT

YouTube plays a decisive role in determining consumer behavior within the social media environment, allowing users to perform business and social interaction activities within the media. This study aims to provide comprehensive empirical evidence regarding the influence on consumer purchase behavior of product reviews by YouTubers. The study employed parasocial interaction theory to examine how the relationship between the audience and YouTubers affects hedonic and utilitarian responses, integrated into one framework, in relation to purchase intention. Hedonic consumers favored transparency and perceived enjoyment, whereas utilitarian consumers favored informativeness and credibility. These preferences led to different outcomes in response to YouTubers’ product-review content on YouTube. A hedonic preference is more likely to convert perceived enjoyment into purchase intention; utilitarian consumers are more concerned with the credibility of the information.

1. Introduction

Marketers are benefiting from the current movement of social media, which function as a communication medium and as an extended channel for business activities that juxtapose companies and consumers (Zeng & Gerritsen, 2014). Through social media such as YouTube, Facebook, and Instagram, users are able to share reviews, opinions, and thoughts about products or services (Hazari et al., 2017) posted on their social media accounts (Heinonen, 2011; Killian & McManus, 2015). From a business perspective, social media have become a new channel for interacting with consumers in various ways, such as promotions (Leung et al., 2013) and releases of new products, because consumers consider social media to be a channel for information searches (Xiang & Gretzel, 2010) and decision making (Pop et al., 2021). Marketers can thus take advantage of social media figures (i.e., YouTubers and influencers) to communicate with consumers about their products in various ways, such as endorsements (Aw & Labrecque, 2020), promotions (M. T. Liu et al., 2019), and product reviews (Fitriani et al., 2020; Huang, 2015).

Today, one of the most popular social media is YouTube (Coates et al., 2020), a widespread and extensive video-sharing site (Schwemmer & Ziewiecki, 2018). As media figures, YouTubers generate various types of content to interact with their audience, such as video blogging (J. E. Lee & Watkins, 2016), live-streaming (Chen & Lin, 2018; Li et al., 2021), and product reviews (Bi et al., 2019). The advantage for a company of associating products with YouTube content is product communication through video-based social media. YouTubers attract an audience through interactivity, developing a sense of trust so that the audience comes to perceive YouTubers as reliable (De Jans et al., 2018; Zhang et al., 2020). Previous research has treated the relationship between media figures and their audience as an illusory face-to-face illusion relationship, referred to as parasocial interaction (Horton & Richard Wohl, 1956), which affects emotionality (Lim et al., 2020). Research into parasocial interaction has become very popular because of media influencers’ role in marketing on social media (Aw & Labrecque, 2020; Schwemmer & Ziewiecki, 2018). Consequently, this study investigates the parasocial interaction between media figures on YouTube and the audience, in terms of the influence on the latter’s buying behavior as a result of product reviews on YouTube.

The importance of media figures (i.e., YouTubers) in determining consumer behavior is has been recognized as an antecedent and investigated from a consumer behavior perspective. Numerous studies have investigated the role of social media figures using parasocial interaction theory. However, this study investigates consumer responses to product reviews by social media figures on YouTube. This is undoubtedly an antecedent that needs to be examined to understand consumer behavior in social commerce. In addition, investigating the behavioral domain (i.e., hedonic and utilitarian responses) will generate precise results on how marketers can interact with consumers through social media figures to increase sales.

The study investigates behaviors, particularly hedonic and utilitarian reactions (Aw & Labrecque, 2020; Ladhari et al., 2020), on purchase intention toward products or services reviewed by YouTubers (Fitriani et al., 2020). Product reviews on YouTube communicate products and services to consumers on the basis of the experience of the YouTubers (J. Kim et al., 2020). Audience members view the content on YouTube and use it either with a utilitarian or hedonic motivation, affecting their decision making. YouTubers describe the products to consumers and post product-review content on YouTube, inducing consumer awareness of the product, as well as attitudes and perceptions in relation to it (Fitriani et al., 2020). This study employed hedonic and utilitarian responses as domain behaviors appropriate to the essence of the objective to provide a more detailed description of the antecedents of consumer behavior related to YouTube product reviews.

The study provides theoretical and practical contributions to the relationship between parasocial interaction, hedonic and utilitarian behavior, and purchase intention in relation to products and services on YouTube. Furthermore, it contributes to parasocial interaction theory as applied to the YouTube environment and relates it to hedonic and utilitarian behavior and purchase intentions. Practically, it provides an overview of consumer behavior toward product-review content on social media. The study can also help marketers to develop marketing strategies for social media. In addition, the study provides a more practical explanation of purchasing behavior and of the antecedents to product reviews on social media.

2. Literature review and hypothesis development

2.1. Parasocial interaction, youtubers, and hedonic and utilitarian responses

Previous studies have defined parasocial interaction as an illusory face-to-face relationship between an audience and media actors, such as celebrities, artists, and presenters, the illusory nature of the relationship arising from the mediation of technologies such as TV, radio, and other communication media (Horton & Richard Wohl, 1956). The emergence of artificial intelligence–based technologies, such as virtual reality, social media (De Bérail et al., 2019), and video conferencing (Rihl & Wegener, 2019), facilitates illusory relationships with new kinds of media figures (Lombard & Ditton, 1997). De Bérail et al. (2019) identified YouTube as a social media platform conducive to parasocial interactions, creating an asymmetrical relationship between media users and media actors. As a social media platform, YouTube has many viewers and subscribers (Lombard & Ditton, 1997).

YouTube has become popular among its users as an entertainment medium (Boerman & Van Reijmersdal, 2020). Scholars have investigated YouTube as a social media platform dominated by those aged less than 20 years (Tolbert & Drogos, 2019). Following the theory of Horton and Richard Wohl (1956), YouTube facilitates parasocial interaction with the audience in the form of media figures such as YouTubers (Coates et al., 2020; Fägersten, 2017). YouTubers engage in informal communication with their audience and create the illusion of intimate interactions (Fägersten, 2017). YouTubers also take advantage of their role to broadcast information and engage in digital activities that enhance their popularity in the public sphere (Castillo-Abdul et al., 2020; Duffett et al., 2020). Researchers have also noted that YouTubers can influence the parasocial interaction and relationship with their viewers (Lim et al., 2020).

One category of YouTube videos on social media is the product review (Coates et al., 2020; Fitriani et al., 2020; Gerhards, 2019; Ladhari et al., 2020). By taking advantage of the popularity of YouTube media figures (Coates et al., 2020; Rasmussen, 2018; Rihl & Wegener, 2019), companies can use product reviews on YouTube to develop marketing strategies (Fitriani et al., 2020). Hence, YouTubers’ product reviews use various methods to attract an audience’s attention to a product. Viewers are interested in the product-review content and their liking of the YouTuber doing the review, among other factors (Ko & Wu, 2017). In marketing terms, YouTubers’ reviews constitute word-of-mouth communication, using persuasive communication and straightforward language to convince the audience (Aleti et al., 2019; Dekavalla, 2020), enhancing the desirability of the products reviewed by the YouTubers for the audience. Through the bond between YouTubers and viewers on YouTube (Rihl & Wegener, 2019), parasocial interaction product-review content can influence consumers’ purchase intentions (M. Lee & Lee, 2021). For YouTubers, product reviews are a way of increasing audience loyalty and creating sustainable, reciprocal relationships (i.e., through trustworthiness, attractiveness, and credibility; Ko & Wu, 2017).

Entertainment, information, customization, and irritation are dimensions of YouTube advertising that affect consumers’ purchase intentions (Dehghani et al., 2016). In addition, the quality, credibility, and quantity of online word-of-mouth (eWOM) can affect purchase intention (Erkan & Evans, 2016, 2018; Kudeshia & Kumar, 2017). Furthermore, the quality of the information submitted by YouTubers is an essential determinant of purchase intention (Erkan & Evans, 2018; Tsao & Hsieh, 2015). Moreover, the trustworthiness and attractiveness of influencers affect the purchase intentions of the audience (Sokolova & Kefi, 2020). In making video reviews, advertised products or brands (Tsao & Hsieh, 2015) are taken into consideration because the brand effect positively affects customer purchase intentions (Lou & Yuan, 2019). Self-produced videos posted on major social media platforms such as YouTube have been investigated for the impact of prominence (how prominently a brand is used or mentioned), YouTube expertise, brand identification, and purchase intention (Verhellen et al., 2013).

Scholars have also investigated the effect of YouTubers’ product-review content on purchase intention (Castillo-Abdul et al., 2020; Fitriani et al., 2020; De Jans & Hudders, 2020; Shan et al., 2020; Sokolova & Perez, 2021). As a digital technology medium, YouTube has facilitated parasocial interaction in which YouTubers can recommend products (Lou, 2021). As an element of parasocial interaction, the audience has an illusory face-to-face relationship in which with hedonic and utilitarian values are deployed (Fitriani et al., 2020). Consumers with hedonic values perceive product content reviews by YouTubers as transparent disclosures of product-related information and entertainment media (Fitriani et al., 2020; M. Kim et al., 2021; C. Liu et al., 2020; Roggeveen et al., 2015). On the other hand, utilitarian viewers value their visits to YouTuber reviews of product content for the informative media and credible information (Fitriani et al., 2020; Li & Mao, 2015). Thus, the purchase intention of audiences who watch product review activities on YouTube (Fitriani et al., 2020) can be enhanced (J. E. Lee & Watkins, 2016).

Hypothesis 1(a & b): Parasocial interactions with YouTubers in product reviews significantly influence hedonic viewers in terms of (a) transparency and (b) perceived enjoyment.

Hypothesis 2(a & b): Parasocial interactions with YouTubers in product reviews significantly influence utilitarian viewers in terms of (a) credibility and (b) informativeness.

Hypothesis 3: Parasocial interactions with product review YouTubers significantly influences purchase intention

2.2. Hedonic and utilitarian behaviors and purchase intention

Batra and Ahtola (1991) first distinguished between hedonic and utilitarian buying behaviors. Hedonic shopping behavior is founded on the pleasure of shopping, whereas utilitarian behavior values shopping for its functional attributes (Chernev, 2004; Stoel et al., 2004; To et al., 2007). Utilitarian behavior tends not to delay purchases and not switch to other products (Sloot et al., 2005), whereas hedonic behavior focuses on achieving satisfaction in shopping (Chu et al., 2015). The significant difference between hedonic and utilitarian shopping motivations lies in the different purposes behind their value-seeking (O’Brien, 2010) in the products to be purchased (Bridges & Florsheim, 2008; Chiu et al., 2014).

YouTube marketing is adequate if consumers have a positive attitude toward the activities on YouTube and its media figures (Smith et al., 2012; Yang et al., 2010). The benefits provided by YouTubers are the most dominant factor influencing young consumers’ online purchase intentions through YouTube (Sin et al., 2012). YouTubers with expertise review products in their videos (Dehghani et al., 2016). Furthermore, consumers’ purchase intentions are affected by the representative experiences and perceived risk communicated by YouTubers (M. Lee & Lee, 2021). Ease of access influences YouTube use, length of use, entry frequency, and the number of ads viewed, while age influences behavioral responses to watching YouTube (Duffett et al., 2020).

In online social media, consumers are motivated to pay attention to the products reviewed by media figures (Ladhari et al., 2020). According to Fitriani et al. (2020), hedonic audience behavior focuses on seeking information transparency and perceived enjoyment, whereas utilitarian behavior values informativeness and credibility. Companies take advantage of media figures to conduct product reviews and interact with consumers (O’Brien, 2010). Consumers with hedonic motivations are inclined toward media figures who are fun to watch (in terms of atmosphere, attractiveness, and product attributes; Fitriani et al., 2020). By contrast, utilitarian-motivated consumers look for the product values (i.e., product selection) reviewed by YouTubers (Schwemmer & Ziewiecki, 2018). Furthermore, the credibility of media figures can significantly influence hedonic shopping behavior. Hedonic and utilitarian consumer motivations to watch product reviews by YouTube media figures influence purchase intention, hence the following research hypotheses:

Hypothesis 4(a & b): Hedonic viewing in terms of (a) perceived transparency and (b) enjoyment significantly influences the purchase intention of products reviewed on YouTube.

Hypothesis 5(a & b): Utilitarian viewing in terms of (a) credibility and (b) informativeness significantly influences the purchase intention of products reviewed on YouTube.

3. Research methodology

3.1. Measurement and questionnaire development

The questionnaire consisted of three major parts: respondents’ demographics; respondents’ perceptions of YouTubers’ product reviews on social media (i.e., YouTube); and questionnaire items filled out by the respondents. The questionnaire items were designed for each variable by modifying previous research on parasocial interaction (De Bérail et al., 2019; Sakib et al., 2020; Sokolova & Kefi, 2020), hedonic and utilitarian motivation (Fitriani et al., 2020), and purchase intention (Sokolova & Kefi, 2020). Two items were used for parasocial interaction, eight items for hedonic motivations (i.e., perceived transparency, perceived enjoyment), nine items for utilitarian motivations (i.e., credibility, informativeness) items, and two items for purchase intention, making a total of 21 items.

3.2. Data collection and sample profile

This study used a quantitative research design to collect responses, using a probability sampling method. The sample was determined using convenience sampling, in which the respondents were requested to fill out the questionnaire at their own convenience. With the questionnaire being distributed randomly through online methods, we generated a sample of respondents who had experience of purchasing products as a result of product-review content on YouTube. Therefore, while employing the convenient sampling technique, we also restricted respondents who did not meet the qualifying criteria, eliminating their responses as invalid, before analyzing the valid responses. We distributed the questionnaires through various social media platforms, such as Gmail, Facebook, and WhatsApp, for self-administration. Initially, we received 419 responses, of which 384 responses were considered valid. The respondents comprised 270 females and 114 males. Of these, 341 were single, and 43 were married. In terms of education level, 210 had a bachelor’s degree, 160 had a senior high school education or equivalent, 12 had a master’s degree, and two had a PhD. The majority of respondents, 356, were aged 19–34 years, while 28 were above 35 years. In terms of occupation, 285 were undergraduate students, 50 were private employees, 23 were government employees, 7 worked for state-owned enterprises, and 13 were master’s and doctoral students.

With regard to the characteristics of respondents’ parasocial interaction with YouTubers posting product reviews, 173 respondents watched YouTube 2–5 times a day, 123 respondents watched it once a day, and 88 respondents watched it 6 to 10 times a day. With regard to time spent, 331 respondents spent 1–3 hours a day, and 53 respondents spent 4–7 hours a day. With regard to product category most viewed, 104 watched mostly education reviews, 58 watched mostly foods review, 52 watched mostly cosmetics reviews, 46 watched mostly tourism reviews, and 42 watched mostly games and toys reviews, with the remaining 63 respondents accounting for household goods, sports equipment, cell phones, and fashion. With regard to purchases, 365 respondents had made from 1 to 5 purchases based on YouTubers’ recommendations, with the remaining 19 respondents making purchases 6–10 times (Table 1).

Table 1. Respondents’ profiles

Variables	Criteria	Frequency	Percentage (%)
Gender	Male	114	30
	Female	270	70
Marital Status	Married	43	11
	Single	341	89
Educational Level	Senior High School or Equivalent	160	41
	Bachelor’s	210	55
	Master’s	12	3
	Doctoral	2	1
Age (years)	19 or below	101	26
	20–24	209	54
	25–29	28	7
	30–34	18	5
	35–39	11	3
	40–44	7	2
	45 or above	10	3
Occupation	Undergraduate Student	285	74
	Master’s Student	10	3
	Doctoral Student	3	1
	Government Employee	23	5
	State-Owned Enterprise Employee	7	2
	Private Employee	50	13
	Entrepreneur	6	2
Frequency of watching YouTube per day	1 time or below	123	32
	2–5 times a day	173	45
	6–9 times a day	38	10
	10 times or more	50	13
Time spent watching YouTube per day	1 hour or below	170	44
	2–3 hours	161	42
	4–5 hours	31	8
	5–6 hours	10	3
	7 hours or above	12	3
Product review category most watched	Cosmetic	52	13
	Household Goods	3	1
	Games and Toys	42	11
	Electronic Devices	14	4
	Sport Equipment	22	6
	Education	104	27
	Cell Phone	7	2
	Computer Devices	5	1
	Foods	58	15
	Tourism	46	12
	Fashion	31	8
Buying frequency based on YouTubers’ recommendations	1 time or below	261	68
	2–5 times	104	27
	6–9 times	8	2
	10 times or above	11	3

3.3. Data analysis

Structural equation modeling was employed to analyze the data. The measurement model evaluated convergent validity using Composite Reliability (CR), factor loadings, Average Variance Extracted (AVE), and Cronbach’s alpha. Discriminant validity was estimated using the Fornell-Larcker criterion (Fornell & Larcker, 1981) and the heterotrait-monotrait (HTMT) ratio. In addition, hypothesis testing was performed on the structural model. We conducted data analysis using Smart-PLS 3.0.

4. Results

4.1. Measurement model

The measurement model aimed to test reliability and internal consistency with CR ≥ 0.70 and Cronbach’s alpha ≥ 0.70. The results showed that the indicators for each construct had strong reliability and internal consistency, as shown in Table 2. Second, the measurement model tested for convergent and discriminant validity. The values of factor loadings ≥ 0.70, CR ≥ 0.70, and AVE ≥ 0.50 were used to evaluate the convergent validity of the study, as shown in Table 3.

Table 2. Construct validity and internal consistency

Constructs	Items	FL	CA
Parasocial Interaction	I look forward to watching her videos and reading her post and comments.	0.939	0.867
	I would follow her and interact with her on other social networking sites.	0.940
Perceived Transparency	Explanations given by the YouTubers can be easily understood.	0.874	0.934
	Explanations given by the YouTubers are not confusing.	0.925
	Explanations given by the YouTubers are not wordy.	0.889
	The YouTubers do not use jargon or terms that are difficult to understand.	0.908
	I understand what the YouTubers are saying.	0.848
Perceived Enjoyment	I feel happy to see the YouTubers’ reviews.	0.935	0.920
	I find it fun to see the YouTubers’ reviews.	0.952
	I am interested in seeing the YouTubers’ reviews.	0.938
Informativeness	I can find out the complete physical form of the product being reviewed.	0.858	0.940
	I can find out the nature and characteristics of the product being reviewed.	0.904
	I can find out the quality of the product being reviewed.	0.906
	I can find out the function of the product being reviewed.	0.913
	I can understand how the product is used/consumed.	0.908
Credibility	I can trust the information provided by the YouTubers.	0.910	0.935
	I feel that the information provided by the YouTubers is in accordance with reality.	0.933
	I feel that the information provided by the YouTubers is not biased.	0.913
	I can rely on the information from the YouTubers.	0.901
Purchase Intention	I would purchase the products reviewed by the YouTubers in the future.	0.963	0.920
	I would encourage people close to me to buy the products reviewed by the YouTubers.	0.961

FL = Factor Loadings, ≥ 0.70; CA = Cronbach’s Alpha, ≥ 0.70.

Table 3. Discriminant validity fornell-larcker criterion

	CR	AVE	CI	IN	PSI	PE	PI	TR
Credibility	0.938	0.883	0.914
Informativeness	0.950	0.791	0.740	0.898
Parasocial Interaction	0.959	0.887	0.570	0.447	0.940
Perceived Enjoyment	0.954	0.807	0.733	0.679	0.532	0.942
Purchase Intention	0.953	0.836	0.727	0.573	0.525	0.626	0.962
Transparency	0.961	0.926	0.732	0.723	0.509	0.778	0.569	0.889

Note: CR = Composite Reliability, ≥ 0.70; AVE = Average Variance Extracted, ≥ 0.50.

Discriminant validity was assessed using the Fornell-Larcker criterion and the heterotrait-monotrait ratio. First, according to the Fornell-Larcker criterion, the square root value of the AVE should be greater than the correlation between each construct (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). According to the results, discriminant validity was well performed and satisfactory, with the value of the square root of AVE being greater than the correlation between constructs. Discriminant validity with the Fornell-Larcker criterion is shown in Table 3.

The HTMT is recognized as a new criterion for assessing discriminant validity, capable of effectively testing cross-loadings of constructs and high sensitivity (Henseler et al., 2015). The suggested value for testing HTMT is ≤ 0.85 (Henseler et al., 2015). As shown in Table 4, the results of the discriminant validity test with HTMT were satisfactory.

Table 4. Discriminant validity heterotrait–monotrait ratio

	CI	IN	PSI	PE	PI	TR
Credibility	—
Informativeness	0.788	—
Parasocial Interaction	0.633	0.494	—
Perceived Enjoyment	0.784	0.724	0.591	—
Purchase Intention	0.784	0.614	0.588	0.674	—
Transparency	0.783	0.774	0.563	0.834	0.612	—

Suggested value for Heterotrait–Monotrait Ratio ≤ 0.85 (Henseler et al., 2015).

4.2. Structural model

A structural model was used to test the proposed conceptual framework’s model fit and to assess the research hypothesis. The results of the model fit exhibited in figure 2 show that the value of SRMR = 0.035, d_ULS = 0.290, d_G = 0.418, x² = 1107.1, and NFI = 0.881; these are satisfactory according to the model fit suggested (Hair et al., 2017; Li-tze & Bentler, 1998). The study also assessed R-square for the explanatory power of the proposed research framework (Figure 1). Hedonic motivation (perceived transparency, R² = 0.259, and perceived enjoyment, R² = 0.283), utilitarian motivation (credibility, R² = 0.324, and informativeness, R² = 0.200), and purchase intention (R² = 0.560) were higher than the R² = 0.10 suggested by Falk and Miller (1992).

Figure 1. Proposed research framework.

Figure 2. Structural equation modeling and hypothesis results. Dashed lines represent insignificant effects; P-values: < 0.001, P ***; < 0.01, P**; SRMR = 0.035; d_ULS = 0.290; d_G = 0.418; X² = 1107.1; NFI = 0.881

Table 5 and Figure 2 show the scores for parasocial perceptions of transparency (T = 10.058; P = 0.000) and perceived enjoyment (T = 10.208; P = 0.000), indicating that both aspects of Hypothesis 1, concerning the impact of parasocial interaction on perceived transparency (H1a) and perceived enjoyment (H1b), are supported. Next, the results of parasocial interaction with credibility (T = 13.090; P = 0.000) and informativeness (T = 8.730; P = 0.000) indicate that both aspects of Hypothesis 2, concerning the impact of parasocial interaction on credibility (H2a) and informativeness (H2b), are supported. The results for parasocial interaction on purchase intention (T = 0.725; P = 0.469) indicate that Hypothesis 3, concerning the impact of parasocial interaction on purchase intention (H3), is supported. Furthermore, the scores for transparency (T = 0.725; P = 0.469) and perceived enjoyment (T = 1.991; P = 0.047) on purchase intention indicate that, with regard to Hypothesis 4, the impact of transparency on purchase intention (H4a) is not supported, whereas the impact of perceived enjoyment is (H4b). Lastly, the scores for credibility (T = 6.320; P = 0.000) and informativeness (T = 0.462; P = 0.644) on purchase intention indicate that Hypothesis 5 is supported in terms of the impact of credibility on purchase intention (H5a) but not for informativeness (H5b).

Table 5. Hypothesis result

Causal Relations	Path Coefficients	T-Value	P-Value	Conclusion
Parasocial interaction ➔ Transparency	0.509	10.058	0.000	Supported (H1a)
Parasocial Interaction ➔ Perceived Enjoyment	0.532	10.208	0.000	Supported (H1b)
Parasocial Interaction ➔ Credibility	0.570	13.090	0.000	Supported (H2a)
Parasocial Interaction ➔ Informativeness	0.447	8.730	0.000	Supported (H2b)
Parasocial Interaction ➔ Purchase Intention	0.140	2.131	0.034	Supported (H3)
Transparency ➔ Purchase Intention	−0.058	0.725	0.469	Unsupported (H4a)
Perceived Enjoyment ➔ Purchase Intention	0.185	1.991	0.047	Supported (H4b)
Credibility ➔ Purchase Intention	0.526	6.320	0.000	Supported (H5a)
Informativeness ➔ Purchase Intention	0.038	0.462	0.644	Unsupported (H5b)

5. Discussion

This study aimed to investigate parasocial interaction, hedonic and utilitarian motivations, and purchase intention in relation to the parasocial relationship between YouTubers and their audience, specifically in the product-review content category. The audience was categorized as either hedonic or utilitarian in terms of responses to the content of product reviews by YouTubers (Jin & Ryu, 2020). The results showed a significant impact of parasocial interaction on hedonic and utilitarian motivations and purchase intention. However, hedonic (transparency) and utilitarian (informativeness) motivations did not significantly affect purchase intention, but hedonic (perceived enjoyment) and utilitarian (credibility) motivations did have a significant effect on purchase intention, as supported by previous research (Labrecque, 2014; Sokolova & Kefi, 2020; Xiang et al., 2016).

Hedonic motivations responded to product reviews in terms of perceived transparency and enjoyment (Fitriani et al., 2020; Tseng & Lee, 2018). Perceived transparency concerns the information about a product given in reviews posted on YouTube in video format. Thus, YouTubers are perceived as transparent on the basis of the information in their review videos. Their reviews will thus attract a hedonically motivated audience as long as they perceive the information as highly transparent. Another hedonic motivation studied was perceived enjoyment. For their product reviews, YouTubers create videos that are highly attractive, using customized music (Cockrill, 2011), looking physically attractive, and displaying social presence (Shin et al., 2019; M. T. Liu et al., 2019), as well as using advanced video-editing features to create creative content. Thus, hedonically motivated consumers who watch YouTube videos of product reviews derive enjoyment from their viewing.

The study also considered the effect of parasocial interaction on utilitarian motivations for product reviews. In responding to product-review content on YouTube, utilitarian behavior focuses on the shopping goal task and the usefulness of what is conveyed by the YouTubers. The study examined utilitarian motivations in terms of credibility and informativeness. Informativeness refers to the extent to which consumers search for specific goals while watching videos, such as product information, authenticity, explanation clarity, product quality, and product functions, as well as how the product is used, as demonstrated by YouTubers. Credibility refers to perceived consumer trust in the information conveyed, confirmation bias, information bias, and reliance (Fitriani et al., 2020).

Parasocial interaction was confirmed to significantly influence purchase intention. Parasocial interaction is an illusory relationship that exists between an audience and YouTubers in which the latter attractively entertain the audience to develop emotional engagement. Thus, while watching reviews, consumers exhibit stickiness in their behavior and are pleased when emotional engagement is established. This study explored parasocial interaction in terms of the desire to visit videos and interact with YouTubers. The results obtained were also in line with previous research where parasocial interaction perceived by the audience led to purchase intention (Corrêa et al., 2020; Jin & Ryu, 2020; J. Kim et al., 2020).

Ultimately, hedonic (perceived enjoyment) and utilitarian (credibility) motivations arising during the parasocial interactions with YouTubers had a significant effect on purchase intention. Consumers who have perceived enjoyment of YouTuber videos and regard the information obtained as highly credible are influenced in their buying behavior. However, hedonic (perceived transparency) and utilitarian (informativeness) factors have non-significant influences on purchase intention. Thus, product content reviews by YouTubers have a greater impact when doing so in an enjoyable way and when conveying the truth about the product reviewed. Such behavior can significantly increase product purchases based on YouTube product review recommendations.

6. Theoretical and practical implications

We have highlighted that parasocial interaction, as perceived by hedonic and utilitarian consumers, influences buying behavior in the social media commerce environment. Since YouTubers reviews are posted online, the fact that hedonic and utilitarian motivations operate differently needs to be taken into consideration. Nonetheless, consumers’ attention toward product-review content on YouTube should be considered by marketers as a strategy to increase purchases. Moreover, social media platforms have shown increased potential for social commerce, providing scope for marketers to insert their products into media figures’ content on social media, with the aim of integrating them into the parasocial interaction between audience and YouTubers to increase sales. This study provides a specific depiction of hedonic and utilitarian consumers to understand their buying behavior within social media as a practical contribution. Specifically, marketers can determine when to use social media influencers such as YouTubers in a marketing strategy to promote products requiring an emphasis on emotional engagement or accurate information about the product, given the significant results from this study for perceived enjoyment and credibility.

Furthermore, the practical contribution of product-review content is indispensable in determining consumer buying behavior. YouTubers’ activities in generating product-review content affect hedonic and utilitarian consumers. Although several constructs did not significantly affect purchase intention, parasocial interaction with YouTubers significantly affected transparency, enjoyment, credibility, and informativeness. This shows that consumers who respond to reviews feel that the information conveyed is comprehensive and represents the truth about the product. Marketers can consider adopting products for review as communication channels and allowing YouTubers to share experiences with their followers about the company’s products more effectively.

The theoretical findings demonstrate the relationship between parasocial interaction and hedonic and utilitarian behavior on YouTube. Previous research on parasocial interaction pertains to the effect of parasocial interaction on purchase intention (Corrêa et al., 2020; Jin & Ryu, 2020; J. Kim et al., 2020; Sokolova & Kefi, 2020; Sokolova & Perez, 2021). In addition, while adopting hedonic (transparency and perceived enjoyment) and utilitarian (credibility and informativeness) motivations from previous research (Fitriani et al., 2020), the contribution of this research clearly emphasizes how hedonic and utilitarian motivations toward content review products affect purchase intentions, and thus the contribution of parasocial interactions in affecting purchase intention.

7. Limitations and directions for future research

This study provides an essential finding regarding the impact of parasocial interaction on purchase intention via hedonic and utilitarian motivations. YouTube is the central social media platform observed in this study; however, consumers may use several video-based social media platforms (such as Instagram, Facebook, and TikTok) to search for product reviews. Therefore, we acknowledge that this as a limitation of this study. For this reason, future research should conduct a study of parasocial interaction in product reviews while also considering social media behavior in terms of its functions. The reason for the focus on YouTube was to generate a brief conclusion for this investigation. In addition, the sample structure in this study was based on age, dominated by the age category of under 30 years. It did not precisely specify respondents’ buying power. Future research including buying power could investigate the effect of perceived transparency and informativeness variables on purchase intention more accurately. Ultimately, the study also used a convenience sampling technique that did not generate specific observations. Hence, it is strongly suggested that future research use a purposive random sampling technique to produce a sample that provides more detailed information.

Author statement

All persons who meet authorship criteria are listed as authors, and all authors certify that they have participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for the content

Author contributions

Conceptualization: P. H. S.; A.D.K.S.; E.O

Methodology: A.D.K.S.; E.O

Software: P.H.S.; A.D.K.S.

Validation: Y.K.S.; A.I.S.S.

Formal Analysis: A.D.K.S.; E.O.; L.H.

Investigation: P.H.S.; Y.K.S.; L.H.; A.I.S.S.

Resource: P.H.S.; A.D.K.S.

Data Curation: A.D.K.S.; E.O.

Writing-Original Draft: A.D.K.S.; E.O.; L.H.; A.I.S.S.

Writing & Review Editing: P.H.S.; A.D.K.S.; E.O.; Y.K.S.

Visualization: A.D.K.S.; E.O.; Y.K.S.

Supervision: P.H.S.; A.D.K.S.

Project Administration: P.H.S.; A.D.K.S.

Funding Acquisition: P.H.S.

References

• Aleti, T., Pallant, J. I., Tuan, A., & van Laer, T. (2019). Tweeting with the stars: Automated text analysis of the effect of celebrity social media communications on consumer word of mouth. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 48, 17–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2019.03.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aw, E. C. X., & Labrecque, L. I. (2020). Celebrity endorsement in social media contexts: Understanding the role of parasocial interactions and the need to belong. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 7(23), 89. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCM-10-2019-3474
   Google Scholar
• Batra, R., & Ahtola, O. T. (1991). Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian sources of consumer attitudes. Marketing Letters, 2(2), 159–170. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00436035
   Google Scholar
• Bi, N. C., Zhang, R., & Ha, L. (2019). Does valence of product review matter? The mediating role of self-effect and third-person effect in sharing youtube word-of-mouth (vWOM). Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, 13(1), 79–95. https://doi.org/10.1108/JRIM-04-2018-0049
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boerman, S. C., & Van Reijmersdal, E. A. (2020). Disclosing influencer marketing on YouTube to children: The moderating role of para-social relationship. Frontiers in Psychology, 10(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03042
   Google Scholar
• Bridges, E., & Florsheim, R. (2008). Hedonic and utilitarian shopping goals: The online experience. Journal of Business Research, 61(4), 309–314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2007.06.017
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castillo-Abdul, B., Romero-Rodríguez, L. M., & Larrea-Ayala, A. (2020). Kid influencers in Spain: Understanding the themes they address and preteens’ engagement with their youtube channels. Heliyon, 6(9), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e05056
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, C. C., & Lin, Y. C. (2018). What drives live-stream usage intention? The perspectives of flow, entertainment, social interaction, and endorsement. Telematics and Informatics, 35(1), 293–303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2017.12.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chernev, A. (2004). Goal–attribute compatibility in consumer choice. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 14(1–2), 141–150. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327663jcp1401&2_16
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chiu, C. M., Wang, E. T., Fang, Y. H., & Huang, H. Y. (2014). Understanding customers’ repeat purchase intentions in B2C e‐commerce: The roles of utilitarian value, hedonic value and perceived risk. Information Systems Journal, 24(1), 85–114. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2575.2012.00407.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chu, W., Roh, M., & Park, K. (2015). The effect of the dispersion of review ratings on evaluations of hedonic versus utilitarian products. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 19(2), 95–125.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coates, A. E., Hardman, C. A., Halford, J. C. G., Christiansen, P., & Boyland, E. J. (2020). “It’s just addictive people that make addictive videos”: Children’s understanding of and attitudes towards influencer marketing of food and beverages by youtube video bloggers. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(2), 449. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17020449
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cockrill, A. (2011). The future of music retailing. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 2(18), 119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2010.12.005
   Google Scholar
• Corrêa, S. C. H., Soares, J. L., Christino, J. M. M., de Sevilha Gosling, M., & Gonçalves, C. A. (2020). The influence of youtubers on followers’ use intention. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, 14(2), 173–194. https://doi.org/10.1108/JRIM-09-2019-0154
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Bérail, P., Guillon, M., & Bungener, C. (2019). The relations between youtube addiction, social anxiety and parasocial relationships with YouTubers: A moderated-mediation model based on a cognitive-behavioral framework. Computers in Human Behavior, 99, 190–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.05.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Jans, S., Cauberghe, V., & Hudders, L. (2018). How an advertising disclosure alerts young adolescents to sponsored vlogs: The moderating role of a peer-based advertising literacy intervention through an informational vlog. Journal of Advertising, 47(4), 309–325. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2018.1539363
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Jans, S., & Hudders, L. (2020). Disclosure of vlog advertising targeted to children. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 52, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2020.03.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dehghani, M., Niaki, M. K., Ramezani, I., & Sali, R. (2016). Evaluating the influence of youtube advertising for attraction of young customers. Computers in Human Behavior, 59, 165–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.01.037
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dekavalla, M. (2020). Gaining trust: The articulation of transparency by you tube fashion and beauty content creators. Media, Culture & Society, 42(1), 75–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443719846613
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duffett, R. G., Edu, T., Negricea, I. C., & Zaharia, R. M. (2020). Modelling the effect of YouTube as an advertising medium on converting intention-to-purchase into purchase. Transformations in Business & Economics, 19(1), 112–132.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erkan, I., & Evans, C. (2016). The influence of eWOM in social media on consumers’ purchase intentions: An extended approach to information adoption. Computers in Human Behavior, 61, 47–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erkan, I., & Evans, C. (2018). Social media or shopping websites? The influence of eWOM on consumers’ online purchase intentions. Journal of Marketing Communications, 24(6), 617–632. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2016.1184706
   Google Scholar
• Fägersten, K. B. (2017). The role of swearing in creating an online persona: The case of youtuber pewdiePie. Discourse, Context & Media, 18, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2017.04.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Falk, R. F., & Miller, N. B. (1992). A primer for soft modeling. University of Akron Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fitriani, W. R., Mulyono, A. B., Hidayanto, A. N., & Munajat, Q. (2020). Reviewer’s communication style in youtube product-review videos: Does it affect channel loyalty? Heliyon, 6(9), e04880. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e04880
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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/10.1177/002224378101800104
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gerhards, C. (2019). Product placement on youtube: an explorative study on youtube creators’ experiences with advertisers. Convergence, 25(3), 516–533. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856517736977
   Google Scholar
• Hair, J., Hollingsworth, C. L., Randolph, A. B., & Chong, A. Y. L. (2017). An updated and expanded assessment of PLS-SEM in information systems research. Industrial Management and Data Systems, 117(3), 442–458. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-04-2016-0130
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hazari, S., Bergiel, B. J., & Sethna, B. N. (2017). Hedonic and utilitarian use of user-generated content on online shopping websites. Journal of Marketing Communications, 23(6), 572–591. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2016.1143383
   Google Scholar
• Heinonen, K. (2011). Consumer activity in social media: Managerial approaches to consumers’ social media behavior. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 10(6), 356–364. https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.376
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horton, D., & Richard Wohl, R. (1956). Mass communication and para-social interaction. Psychiatry, 19(3), 215–229. https://doi.org/10.1080/00332747.1956.11023049
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang, L. S. (2015). Trust in product review blogs: The influence of self-disclosure and popularity. Behaviour & Information Technology, 34(1), 33–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2014.978378
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jin, S. V., & Ryu, E. (2020). “I’ll buy what she’s# wearing”: The roles of envy toward and parasocial interaction with influencers in instagram celebrity-based brand endorsement and social commerce. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 55(7), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102121
   Google Scholar
• Killian, G., & McManus, K. (2015). A marketing communications approach for the digital era: managerial guidelines for social media integration. Business Horizons, 58(5), 539–549. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2015.05.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, J., Kang, S., & Lee, K. H. (2020). How social capital impacts the purchase intention of sustainable fashion products. Journal of Business Research, 117, 596–603. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.10.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, M., Song, D., & Jang, A. (2021). Consumer response toward native advertising on social media: The roles of source type and content type. Internet Research. https://doi.org/10.1108/INTR-08-2019-0328.
   Google Scholar
• Ko, H. C., & Wu, W. N. (2017, July). Exploring the determinants of viewers’ loyalty toward beauty youtubers: A parasocial interaction perspective. In Proceedings of the 2017 international conference on education and multimedia technology (pp. 81–86). https://doi.org/10.1145/3124116.3124130.
   Google Scholar
• Kudeshia, C., & Kumar, A. (2017). Social eWOM: Does it affect the brand attitude and purchase intention of brands? Management Research Review, 40(3), 310–330. https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-07-2015-0161
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Labrecque, L. I. (2014). Fostering consumer-brand relationships in social media environments: The role of parasocial interaction. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 28(2), 134–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2013.12.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ladhari, R., Massa, E., & Skandrani, H. (2020). YouTube vloggers’ popularity and influence: The roles of homophily, emotional attachment, and expertise. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 54(5), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.102027
   Google Scholar
• Lee, J. E., & Watkins, B. (2016). YouTube vloggers’ influence on consumer luxury brand perceptions and intentions. Journal of Business Research, 69(12), 5753–5760. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.04.171
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, M., & Lee, H. H. (2021). Do parasocial interactions and vicarious experiences in the beauty youtube channels promote consumer purchase intention? International Journal of Consumer Studies, 00, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12667
   Google Scholar
• Leung, D., Law, R., Van Hoof, H., & Buhalis, D. (2013). Social media in tourism and hospitality: A literature review. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 30(1–2), 3–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2013.750919
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, M., & Mao, J. (2015). Hedonic or utilitarian? Exploring the impact of communication style alignment on user’s perception of virtual health advisory services. International Journal of Information Management, 35(2), 229–243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2014.12.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, Y., Li, X., & Cai, J. (2021). How attachment affects user stickiness on live streaming platforms: A socio-technical approach perspective. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 60, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102478
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lim, J. S., Choe, M. J., Zhang, J., & Noh, G. Y. (2020). The role of wishful identification, emotional engagement, and parasocial relationships in repeated viewing of live-streaming games: A social cognitive theory perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 108(7), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106327
   Google Scholar
• Li-tze, H., & Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3(4), 424–453. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.3.4.424
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, C., Zhang, Y., & Zhang, J. (2020). The impact of self-congruity and virtual interactivity on online celebrity brand equity and fans’ purchase intention. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 29(6), 783–801. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBM-11-2018-2106
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, M. T., Liu, Y., & Zhang, L. L. (2019). Vlog and brand evaluations: The influence of parasocial interaction. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 21(2), 419–436. https://doi.org/10.1108/APJML-01-2018-0021
   Google Scholar
• Lombard, M., & Ditton, T. (1997). At the heart of it all: The concept of presence. Journal of Computer-mediated Communication, 3(2). JCMC321. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.1997.tb00072.x
   Google Scholar
• Lou, C. (2021). Social media influencers and followers: Theorization of a trans-parasocial relation and explication of its implications for influencer advertising. Journal of Advertising, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2021.1880345
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   Google Scholar
• O’Brien, H. L. (2010). The influence of hedonic and utilitarian motivations on user engagement: The case of online shopping experiences. Interacting with Computers, 22(5), 344–352. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intcom.2010.04.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pop, R. A., Săplăcan, Z., Dabija, D. C., & Alt, M. A. (2021). The impact of social media influencers on travel decisions: The role of trust in consumer decision journey. Current Issues in Tourism, 25(5), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2021.1895729
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rasmussen, L. (2018). Parasocial interaction in the digital age: An examination of relationship building and the effectiveness of youtube celebrities. The Journal of Social Media in Society, 7(1), 280–294.
   Google Scholar
• Rihl, A., & Wegener, C. (2019). YouTube celebrities and parasocial interaction: Using feedback channels in mediatized relationships. Convergence, 25(3), 554–566. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856517736976
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roggeveen, A. L., Grewal, D., Townsend, C., & Krishnan, R. (2015). The impact of dynamic presentation format on consumer preferences for hedonic products and services. Journal of Marketing, 79(6), 34–49. https://doi.org/10.1509/jm.13.0521
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sakib, M. N., Zolfagharian, M., & Yazdanparast, A. (2020). Does parasocial interaction with weight loss vloggers affect compliance? The role of vlogger characteristics, consumer readiness, and health consciousness. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 52(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.01.002
   Google Scholar
• Schwemmer, C., & Ziewiecki, S. (2018). Social media sellout: The increasing role of product promotion on youTube. Social Media + Society, 4(3), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305118786720
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shan, Y., Chen, K. J., & Lin, J. S. (2020). When social media influencers endorse brands: The effects of self-influencer congruence, parasocial identification, and perceived endorser motive. International Journal of Advertising, 39(5), 590–610. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650487.2019.1678322
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shin, M., song, S. W., Kim, S. J., & Biocca, F. (2019). The effects of 3D sound in a 360-degree live concert video on social presence, parasocial interaction, enjoyment, and intent of financial supportive action. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 126, 81–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2019.02.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sin, S. S., Nor, K. M., & Al-Agaga, A. M. (2012). Factors affecting Malaysian young consumers’ online purchase intention in social media websites. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 40, 326–333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.03.195
   Google Scholar
• Sloot, L. M., Verhoef, P. C., & Franses, P. H. (2005). The impact of brand equity and the hedonic level of products on consumer stock-out reactions. Journal of Retailing, 81(1), 15–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2005.01.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, A. N., Fischer, E., & Yongjian, C. (2012). How does brand-related user-generated content differ across youtube, facebook, and twitter? Journal of Interactive Marketing, 26(2), 102–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2012.01.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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(3), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.01.011
   Google Scholar
• Sokolova, K., & Perez, C. (2021). You follow fitness influencers on youtube. But do you actually exercise? How parasocial relationships, and watching fitness influencers, relate to intentions to exercise. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 58(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102276
   Google Scholar
• Stoel, L., Wickliffe, V., & Lee, K. H. (2004). Attribute beliefs and spending as antecedents to shopping value. Journal of Business Research, 57(10), 1067–1073. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(03)00016-X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• To, P. L., Liao, C., & Lin, T. H. (2007). Shopping motivations on internet: A study based on utilitarian and hedonic value. Technovation, 27(12), 774–787. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2007.01.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tolbert, A. N., & Drogos, K. L. (2019). Tweens’ wishful identification and parasocial relationships with youtubers. Frontiers in Psychology, 10(12), 1–51. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02781
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tsao, W. C., & Hsieh, M. T. (2015). eWOM persuasiveness: Do eWOM platforms and product type matter? Electronic Commerce Research, 15(4), 509–541. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10660-015-9198-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tseng, T. H., & Lee, C. T. (2018). Facilitation of consumer loyalty toward branded applications: The dual-route perspective. Telematics and Informatics, 35(5), 1297–1309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2018.03.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verhellen, Y., Dens, N., & De Pelsmacker, P. (2013). Consumer responses to brands placed in youtube movies: The effect of prominence and endorser expertise. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 14(4), 287–303.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xiang, L., Zheng, X., Lee, M. K., & Zhao, D. (2016). Exploring consumers’ impulse buying behavior on social commerce platform: The role of parasocial interaction. International Journal of Information Management, 36(3), 333–347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2015.11.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xiang, Z., & Gretzel, U. (2010). Role of social media in online travel information search. Tourism Management, 31(2), 179–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2009.02.016
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang, C., Hsu, Y. C., & Tan, S. (2010). Predicting the determinants of users’ intentions for using youtube to share video: Moderating gender effects. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 13(2), 141–152. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2009.0105
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zeng, B., & Gerritsen, R. (2014). What do we know about social media in tourism? A review. Tourism Management Perspectives, 10, 27–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2014.01.001
   Google Scholar
• Zhang, H., Xu, H., & Gursoy, D. (2020). The effect of celebrity endorsement on destination brand love: A comparison of previous visitors and potential tourists. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 17(9), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2020.100454.
   Google Scholar

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

The authors received no direct funding for this research.

Notes on contributors

Pantas H. Silaban

Pantas H. Silaban works as an associate professor and is Director of the Graduate School at University HKBP Nommensen. He has been associated with academia since 1986. His research areas are based on marketing and tourism. His current research projects are green marketing, viral marketing, and tourism marketing.

Andri Dayarana K. Silalahi

Andri Dayarana K. Silalahi is a PhD student in the Department of Business Administration at the Chaoyang University of Technology, Taichung, Taiwan.

Edgar Octoyuda

Edgar Octoyuda is a PhD student in the Department of Business Administration at Chaoyang University of Technology, Taichung, Taiwan.

Yuni Kartika Sitanggang

Yuni Kartika Sitanggang is a student at University HKBP Nommensen, Medan, Indonesia.

Lamtiur Hutabarat

Lamtiur Hutabarat is a student at University HKBP Nommensen, Medan, Indonesia.

Ade Irma Suryani Sitorus

Ade Irma Suryani Sitorus is a student at University HKBP Nommensen, Medan, Indonesia.