How argument quality shapes consumer conformity on social media
-
DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.21511/im.21(3).2025.22
-
Article InfoVolume 21 2025, Issue #3, pp. 289-301
- 112 Views
-
8 Downloads
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Type of the article: Research Article
Abstract
The research on influencer marketing often treats social influence as a monolithic concept, overlooking the distinct persuasion mechanisms that underlie it. This study addresses that gap by disentangling social influence into two pathways: informational and normative, within the context of Vietnam, an emerging market with a characteristic collectivist culture. A theoretical model is proposed wherein influencer trustworthiness and expertise affect purchase intention through these pathways, moderated by argument quality. The study is based on survey data from 301 followers of social media influencers in Ho Chi Minh City. This sample was purposefully selected, as young, predominantly university-educated individuals are the primary consumers of influencer content and drivers of influencer-led marketing activities, making their responses a relevant lens for understanding persuasion dynamics in this demographic. Acknowledging its specific scope, the findings are not for direct global generalization but offer contextualized insights into a non-Western market, providing a valuable counterpoint to existing literature. The results show that both informational and normative influences positively affect purchase intention, with trustworthiness being a stronger predictor than expertise. The study’s most unique contribution is revealing the asymmetric moderating role of argument quality: it significantly strengthens the relationship between normative social influence and purchase intention. Still, it does not affect the informational influence path. This discovery suggests that in a collectivist context, a logical argument’s power is amplified when it aligns with the consumer’s desire for social conformity. This distinction advances persuasion theory by clarifying how source credibility and message content interplay differently across social influence mechanisms.
- Keywords
-
JEL Classification (Paper profile tab)M30, M31
-
References50
-
Tables5
-
Figures1
-
- Figure 1. Research framework
-
- Table 1. Demographic information
- Table 2. Reliability and convergent validity
- Table 3. HTMT
- Table 4. VIF, R2, Q2
- Table 5. PLS-SEM results
-
- Babu, E., Joseph, N. M., & Aboobaker, N. (2024). Unveiling the Impact of Influencer Attributes on Purchase Intention of Gen Z: The Moderating Role of Parasocial Interaction. Global Business Review, 09721509241280996.
- Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1989). On the use of structural equation models in experimental designs. Journal of Marketing Research, 26(3), 271-284.
- Cheah, J. H., Ting, H., Cham, T. H., & Memon, M. A. (2019). The effect of selfie promotion and celebrity endorsed advertisement on decision-making processes: A model comparison. Internet Research, 29(3), 552-577.
- Chetioui, Y., Benlafqih, H., & Lebdaoui, H. (2020). How fashion influencers contribute to consumers’ purchase intention. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal, 24(3), 361-380.
- Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. In Modern methods for business research. Psychology Press.
- Cho, V., & Chan, D. (2021). How social influence through information adoption from online review sites affects collective decision making. Enterprise Information Systems, 15(10), 1562-1586.
- Chung, N., & Han, H. (2017). The relationship among tourists’ persuasion, attachment and behavioral changes in social media. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 123, 370-380.
- Clark, R. A., & Goldsmith, R. E. (2006). Global innovativeness and consumer susceptibility to interpersonal influence. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 14(4), 275-285.
- Dang, H. M., Le, T., Chau, C., Nguyen, P. T., & Weiss, B. (2025). Individualism and Collectivism as Moderators of Relations between Adverse Childhood Experiences and Adolescent Aggressive Behavior. Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology, 53(4), 569-581.
- DeVellis, R. F., & Thorpe, C. T. (2021). Scale Development: Theory and Applications. Sage Publications.
- Erdogan, B. Z. (1999). Celebrity endorsement: A literature review. Journal of Marketing Management, 15(4), 291-314.
- Fu, J. R., Lu, I. W., Chen, J. H. F., & Farn, C.-K. (2020). Investigating consumers’ online social shopping intention: An information processing perspective. International Journal of Information Management, 54, 102189.
- Hair, F. Jr, J., Sarstedt, M., Hopkins, L., & G. Kuppelwieser, V. (2014). Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM): An Emerging Tool for Business Research. European business review, 26(2), 106-121.
- Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review, 31(1), 2-24.
- Hair, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Mena, J. A. (2012). An assessment of the use of partial least squares structural equation modeling in marketing research. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 40(3), 414-433.
- Henderson, K. S., & Shteynberg, R. V. (2020). Plea decision-making: the influence of attorney expertise, trustworthiness, and recommendation. Psychology, Crime & Law, 26(6), 527-551.
- Henningsen, D. D., & Henningsen, M. L. M. (2003). Examining Social Influence in Information-Sharing Contexts. Small Group Research, 34(4), 391-412.
- 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.
- Hovland, C. I., Janis, I. L., & Kelley, H. H. (1953). Communication and Persuasion.
- Hu, X., Chen, X., & Davison, R. M. (2019). Social support, source credibility, social influence, and impulsive purchase behavior in social commerce. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 23(3), 297-327.
- Huang, Y. C., Jim Wu, Y. C., Wang, Y. C., & Boulanger, N. C. (2011). Decision making in online auctions. Management Decision, 49(5), 784-800.
- Huang, Y. M. (2020). What drives students to continue using social mindtools? The perspectives of social support and social influence. Computers in Human Behavior, 111, 106447.
- Jiménez-Castillo, D., & Sánchez-Fernández, R. (2019). The role of digital influencers in brand recommendation: Examining their impact on engagement, expected value and purchase intention. International Journal of Information Management, 49, 366-376.
- Kaplan, M. F. (1989). Task, situational, and personal determinants of influence processes in group decision making. In E. J. Lawler & B. Markovsky (Eds.), Advances in group processes (Vol. 6, pp. 87-105). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
- Kim, Y. A., & Srivastava, J. (2007). Impact of social influence in e-commerce decision making. In Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Electronic Commerce (pp. 293-302).
- Kline, R. B. (2023). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. 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.
- Kuan, K. K., Zhong, Y., & Chau, P. Y. (2014). Informational and normative social influence in group-buying: Evidence from self-reported and EEG data. Journal of Management Information Systems, 30(4), 151-178.
- 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, 102027.
- Lee, S. S., & Johnson, B. K. (2022). Are they being authentic? The effects of self-disclosure and message sidedness on sponsored post effectiveness. International Journal of Advertising, 41(1), 30-53.
- Li, C. Y. (2013). Persuasive messages on information system acceptance: A theoretical extension of elaboration likelihood model and social influence theory. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(1), 264-275.
- Liang, X., Hu, X., Islam, T., & Mubarik, M. S. (2021). Social support, source credibility, social influence, and solar photovoltaic panels purchase intention. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28(41), 57842-57859.
- Lin, K. Y., & Lu, H. P. (2011). Why people use social networking sites: An empirical study integrating network externalities and motivation theory. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(3), 1152-1161.
- Lou, C., & Kim, H. K. (2019). Fancying the new rich and famous? Explicating the roles of influencer content, credibility, and parental mediation in adolescents’ parasocial relationship, materialism, and purchase intentions. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 2567.
- Lu, J., Yao, J. E., & Yu, C. S. (2005). Personal innovativeness, social influences and adoption of wireless Internet services via mobile technology. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 14(3), 245-268.
- Malik, A. Z., Thapa, S., & Paswan, A. K. (2023). Social media influencer (SMI) as a human brand–a need fulfillment perspective. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 32(2), 173-190.
- National Statistics Office (2024). Area, population and population density by province by Cities, provinces, Year and Items.
- 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.
- Ozuem, W., Willis, M., Howell, K., Lancaster, G., & Ng, R. (2021). Determinants of online brand communities’ and millennials’ characteristics: A social influence perspective. Psychology & Marketing, 38(5), 705-932.
- Pham, A. D., Dao, T. T., Pham, P. M., Pham, Y. H., Nguyen, H. T., & Pham, L. N. (2024). How does conformity shape influencer marketing in the food and beverage industry? A case study in Vietnam. Journal of Internet Commerce, 23(2), 172-203.
- Pham, M., Vo, N. K. T., Tran, S. S. T., To, H. H. T., & Lam, B. Q. (2023). How does herd behaviour impact the purchase intention? Explore the moderating effect of risk aversion in the context of Vietnamese consumers. Acta Psychologica, 241, 104096.
- Ru, X., Qin, H., & Wang, S. (2019). Young people’s behaviour intentions towards reducing PM2. 5 in China: Extending the theory of planned behaviour. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 141, 99-108.
- Saima, & Khan, M. A. (2021). Effect of social media influencer marketing on consumers’ purchase intention and the mediating role of credibility. Journal of Promotion Management, 27(4), 503-523.
- Sardar, S., & Vijay, T. S. (2025). Social Media Influencers and Purchase Intention: A Review and Research Agenda. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 49(3), e70046.
- Shen, Y.-C., Huang, C. Y., Chu, C.-H., & Liao, H.-C. (2010). Virtual community loyalty: An interpersonal-interaction perspective. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 15(1), 49-74.
- Sussman, S. W., & Siegal, W. S. (2003). Informational influence in organizations: An integrated approach to knowledge adoption. Information Systems Research, 14(1), 47-65.
- Thangavel, P., Pathak, P., & Chandra, B. (2021). Millennials and Generation Z: a generational cohort analysis of Indian consumers. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 28(7), 2157-2177.
- Tseng, S. Y., & Wang, C. N. (2016). Perceived risk influence on dual-route information adoption processes on travel websites. Journal of Business Research, 69(6), 2289-2296.
- van Reijmersdal, E. A., Walet, M., & Gudmundsdóttir, A. (2024). Influencer marketing: explaining the effects of influencer self-presentation strategies on brand responses through source credibility. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 42(7), 1214-1233.
- Zaman, K., Nawaz Khan, S., Abbas, M., & AbdAlatti, A. (2024). Effect of social media influencers on brand preferences through trust: Moderating role of emotional attachment. Innovative Marketing, 20(2), 128-139.