To be real or not to be real? The effect of genuine (vs. non-genuine) depictions of social media influencers on followers’ well-being and brand purchase intention

Criticized for the idealized lives portrayed on social media (e.g., Instagram), a growing number of social media influencers are now embracing genuineness, showcasing unfiltered and less sophisticated pictures of themselves. The current research investigated this trend by examining how genuine (vs. non-genuine) visual self-presentations by influencers affect their followers’ purchase intention and, importantly, their well-being. With an experiment (n = 171) and a quasi-experiment with an ex-post facto design (n = 154), we demonstrate that influencers’ genuineness (vs. non-genuineness) not only benefits promoted brands but also followers’ well-being. Specifically, genuine (vs. non-genuine) influencers induce fewer upward comparisons, which, in turn, increases followers’ self-esteem, well-being, and purchase intention. Investigating the role of gender, we show that, while males also tend to purchase more products when recommended by genuine (vs. non-genuine) male influencers, the mediating process through social comparison does not occur. Combining psychosocial and marketing perspectives, this study expands various streams of research on social media influencers and offers pragmatic contributions that reconcile managers, social media influencers, and public policy makers. More genuineness in pictures, using fewer filters and beauty artifices, provides benefits for all. Finally, we suggest future research directions as ways to further reconcile these two perspectives