Are social media users more likely to follow the recommendations of human or virtual influencers? What psychological mechanisms drive their engagement? To find out, four researchers — including Isabella Seeber from Grenoble Ecole de Management — combined neuroimaging observations with tests conducted on around a hundred participants. Their verdict: the human influencer remains the most persuasive.
Interview with Isabella Seeber, Associate Professor at Grenoble Ecole de Management (GEM)
Can you explain what virtual influencers (VIs) are?
They are social media accounts that represent a virtual character — most often human-like — and share content generated by AI. The most well-known in France, Lil Miquela, has 2.4 million followers on Instagram. She shares her daily life, posts stories, promotes major brands, and so on.
While virtual influencers are less prevalent than human influencers (HIs), they are on the rise: they’re cheaper, easier to control and adapt to different products, and less likely to be involved in scandals. That’s why companies find them appealing.
But are they more persuasive to consumers?
There’s a wealth of academic research on this topic — but the findings are contradictory. Likewise, there’s an ongoing debate about the psychological mechanisms that lead a user to follow or reject a virtual influencer.
To move forward, we needed a different approach. So, our study combined neuroimaging* with traditional tests. While participants viewed images of either virtual or human influencers, we recorded their brain responses — which occur within milliseconds. Drawing on previous neuroscience research, we were able to interpret the nature of these reactions — such as surprise, cognitive effort, or positive/negative emotions.
What did you discover?
Brain imaging and behavioral tests both point to three key mechanisms explaining why we tend to follow human influencers more than virtual ones. First, users feel that human content better aligns with their expectations; they feel closer to the influencer. Second, they experience more positive emotions toward human influencers, which boosts trust. Lastly, they require less cognitive effort to process "human" content, which lowers their skepticism toward the influencer.
In that case, how do you explain the success of virtual influencers?
Given their broad reach and the practical advantages mentioned — cost, control, etc. — organizations have pragmatic reasons for using them.
Moreover, our findings could help make virtual influencers more effective. For example, by targeting audiences already familiar with virtual characters, such as video game players, to reduce the element of surprise. Or by ensuring that social media posts link product promotions with positive emotions.
*Electroencephalography and functional near-infrared spectroscopy.
Publication
Nissen, Anika; Conrad, Colin; Seeber, Isabella; and Newman, Aaron J., (2025): "Why Do We Follow Virtual Influencer Recommendations? Three Theoretical Explanations from Brain Data Tested with Self-Reports"
Bio Snapshot
Isabella Seeber is an Associate Professor in the "Information Systems for Society" research team at Grenoble Ecole de Management. Her research focuses on AI-based conversational agents in team collaboration, team- and crowd-based innovation, digital nudging, and digitalization in knowledge management.
Associated GEM Programs
▶ MSc Innovation & Entrepreneurship
- GEM Research
- Digital marketing
