Influencer Efficacy and the Fan Effect in Green Food Branding: The Mediating Role of Perceived Quality
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. Influencer Efficacy
| Source | Factors Driving Influencer Efficacy |
|---|---|
| Balabanis and Chatzopoulou [27] | trust, expertise, homophily, attractiveness, authority, approachability, and inspirational |
| Ki et al. [28] | inspiration, expertise, similarity, and enjoyability |
| Ryu and Han [21] | communication skills, expertise, influence, and authenticity |
| Wang and Chen [29] | credibility, attractiveness, professionalism, interactivity |
| Wiedmann and Von Mettenheim [30] | influencer attractiveness, trustworthiness and expertise |
| Hugh et al. [14] | influencer professionalism, trustworthiness, similarity |
| Barta et al. [31] | originality, quality, quantity and humor |
| Han and Balabanis [13] | credibility, trustworthiness, expertise and authenticity |
| Lin et al. [23] | professionalism, product involvement, interactivity and popularity |
2.2. Perceived Quality
2.3. Brand Fan Effect
3. Theoretical Analysis and Research Hypotheses
3.1. Influencer Efficacy and Brand Fan Effect
3.2. Influencer Efficacy and Perceived Quality
3.3. Perceived Quality and the Brand Fan Effect
4. Research Methods
4.1. Sample Selection and Data Collection
4.2. Measurement of Variables
4.3. Reliability and Validity Test
4.4. Common Method Bias
4.5. Model Hypothesis Testing
4.6. Testing of Mediating Effects
5. Conclusions and Implications
5.1. Research Conclusions
5.2. Implications
5.2.1. Theoretical Implications
5.2.2. Practical Implications
5.3. Limitations and Future Prospects
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
| Factor | Category | Number | Percentage (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | Male | 188 | 45.1% |
| Female | 229 | 54.9% | |
| Age | Under 22 years old | 142 | 34.0% |
| 23–35 years old | 128 | 30.7% | |
| 36–44 years old | 97 | 23.3% | |
| 45–60 years old | 37 | 8.9% | |
| Over 60 years old | 13 | 3.1% | |
| Education | Junior high school and below | 32 | 7.7% |
| High school, technical secondary school | 57 | 13.7% | |
| Junior College | 81 | 19.4% | |
| Undergraduate | 182 | 43.6% | |
| Postgraduate and above | 65 | 15.6% | |
| Monthly income | 3000 yuan and below | 160 | 38.4% |
| 3001–6000 yuan | 131 | 31.4% | |
| 6001–9000 yuan | 97 | 23.3% | |
| 9001 yuan and above | 29 | 6.9% |
| Variable | Items |
|---|---|
| professionalism | I consider [influencer] to be an expert on [field of expertise] |
| I consider [influencer] to be sufficiently experienced in [field of expertise] | |
| I consider [influencer] to have a lot of knowledge about [field of expertise] products | |
| I consider [influencer] to be competent in making assertions about [field of expertise] products | |
| trustworthiness | I feel [influencer] is dependable |
| I feel [influencer] is honest | |
| I feel [influencer] is sincere | |
| I feel [influencer] is trustworthy | |
| similarity | [influencer] and I have a lot in common |
| [influencer] and I are a lot alike | |
| [influencer] and I easily identify with each other | |
| [influencer] resonates with me. | |
| perceived quality | Be able to fully understand the cost performance of the product |
| Fully understand the social attributes of the product | |
| Be able to accept the burden of purchasing this product | |
| The first impression of the product and its introduction was good | |
| brand fan effect | Because the influencer’s recommendations for this brand have become part of my daily life |
| Because of the influencer’s recommendation, I will give priority to this brand | |
| Because the influencer’s recommendation motivates me to repurchase this brand’s products. | |
| Because the influencer’s recommendation leads me to use and update this brand’s products. |
References
- George, A.; Shibu, M.; Joseph, E.T.; Sunny, P. Impact of social media influencer marketing on customer purchase intention in the fashion industry: A systematic literature review. Front. Commun. 2025, 10, 1676901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vu, V.C.; Wang, S.; Keating, B.W.; Chen, E.Y. Increasing social media stickiness through parasocial interaction and influencer source credibility. Australas. Mark. J. 2025, 33, 352–370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, H.; Wang, B. The power of interaction: Fan growth in livestreaming E-Commerce. J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2025, 20, 203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Olfat, M.; Kirkham, R. It’s more delicious because I like you: Commercial food influencers’ follower satisfaction, retention and repurchase intention. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 2025, 125, 384–413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, B.; Wang, W. Live commerce retailing with online influencers: Two business models. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2023, 255, 108715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, J.; Zhang, Z.; Zhang, X.; Ishfaq, M.; Zhong, J.; Li, W.; Zhang, F.; Li, X. Green food development in China: Experiences and challenges. Agriculture 2020, 10, 614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qi, X.; Ploeger, A. Explaining Chinese consumers’ green food purchase intentions during the COVID-19 pandemic: An extended Theory of Planned Behaviour. Foods 2021, 10, 1200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, Y.; Shan, B. The influence mechanism of green advertising on consumers’ purchase intention for organic foods: The mediating roles of green perceived value and green trust. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2025, 9, 1515792. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lassoued, R.; Hobbs, J.E. Consumer confidence in credence attributes: The role of brand trust. Food Policy 2015, 52, 99–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schrobback, P.; Zhang, A.; Loechel, B.; Ricketts, K.; Ingham, A. Food credence attributes: A conceptual framework of supply chain stakeholders, their motives, and mechanisms to address information asymmetry. Foods 2023, 12, 538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mladenovic, M.; van Trijp, H.; Piqueras-Fiszman, B. (Un) believably green: The role of information credibility in green food product communications. Environ. Commun. 2024, 18, 743–760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ko, Y.; Phua, J. Effects of eco-labels and perceived influencer expertise on perceived healthfulness, perceived product quality, and behavioral intention. J. Curr. Issues Res. Advert. 2024, 45, 369–387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Han, J.; Balabanis, G. Meta—Analysis of social media influencer impact: Key antecedents and theoretical foundations. Psychol. Mark. 2024, 41, 394–426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hugh, D.C.; Dolan, R.; Harrigan, P.; Gray, H. Influencer marketing effectiveness: The mechanisms that matter. Eur. J. Mark. 2022, 56, 3485–3515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carlson, B.D.; Donavan, D.T.; Deitz, G.D.; Bauer, B.C.; Lala, V. A customer-focused approach to improve celebrity endorser effectiveness. J. Bus. Res. 2020, 109, 221–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Delbaere, M.; Michael, B.; Phillips, B.J. Social media influencers: A route to brand engagement for their followers. Psychol. Mark. 2021, 38, 101–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Harrigan, P.; Daly, T.M.; Coussement, K.; Lee, J.A.; Soutar, G.N.; Evers, U. Identifying influencers on social media. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2021, 56, 102246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reinikainen, H.; Munnukka, J.; Maity, D.; Luoma-Aho, V. ‘You really are a great big sister’—Parasocial relationships, credibility, and the moderating role of audience comments in influencer marketing. J. Mark. Manag. 2020, 36, 279–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Witek, L.; Kuźniar, W. Green purchase behaviour gap: The effect of past behaviour on green food product purchase intentions among individual consumers. Foods 2023, 13, 136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheng, L.; Cui, H.; Zhang, Z.; Yang, M.; Zhou, Y. Study on consumers’ motivation to buy green food based on meta-analysis. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2024, 8, 1405787. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ryu, E.A.; Han, E. Social media influencer’s reputation: Developing and validating a multidimensional scale. Sustainability 2021, 13, 631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Trivedi, J.; Sama, R. The effect of influencer marketing on consumers’ brand admiration and online purchase intentions: An emerging market perspective. J. Internet Commer. 2020, 19, 103–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, W.; Cai, Y.; Su, Y.; Lin, Q.; Lai, Q. Influence of key opinion leader on the brand advocacy of agricultural product: Taking Taobao live streaming as an example. Curr. Psychol. 2025, 44, 9390–9406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yuan, D.H.; Wang, Q.; Zhu, L.Y. A literature review of brand evangelism. Foreign Econ. Manag. 2016, 38, 61–72. [Google Scholar]
- Ohanian, R. Construction and validation of a scale to measure celebrity endorsers’ perceived expertise, trustworthiness, and attractiveness. J. Advert. 1990, 19, 39–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jin, S.V.; Muqaddam, A.; Ryu, E. Instafamous and social media influencer marketing. Mark. Intell. Plan. 2019, 37, 567–579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Balabanis, G.; Chatzopoulou, E. Under the influence of a blogger: The role of information—Seeking goals and issue involvement. Psychol. Mark. 2019, 36, 342–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ki, C.-W.C.; Cuevas, L.M.; Chong, S.M.; Lim, H. Influencer marketing: Social media influencers as human brands attaching to followers and yielding positive marketing results by fulfilling needs. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2020, 55, 342–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, P.; Chen, W. The influence of opinion leader characteristics on consumers’ purchase intention in a mobile E-commerce webcast context. WHICEB 2022 Proc. 2022, 12, 306–307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wiedmann, K.-P.; Von Mettenheim, W. Attractiveness, trustworthiness and expertise–social influencers’ winning formula? J. Prod. Brand Manag. 2021, 30, 707–725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barta, S.; Belanche, D.; Fernández, A.; Flavián, M. Influencer marketing on TikTok: The effectiveness of humor and followers’ hedonic experience. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2023, 70, 103149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, Y.S.; Chang, C.H. Towards green trust: The influences of green perceived quality, green perceived risk, and green satisfaction. Manag. Decis. 2013, 51, 63–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mitra, D.; Golder, P.N. How does objective quality affect perceived quality? Short-term effects, long-term effects, and asymmetries. Mark. Sci. 2006, 25, 230–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zeithaml, V.A. Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: A means-end model and synthesis of evidence. J. Mark. 1988, 52, 2–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brucks, M.; Zeithaml, V.A.; Naylor, G. Price and brand name as indicators of quality dimensions for consumer durables. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2000, 28, 359–374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vraneševic, T.; Stančec, R. The effect of the brand on perceived quality of food products. Br. Food J. 2003, 105, 811–825. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Snoj, B.; Pisnik Korda, A.; Mumel, D. The relationships among perceived quality, perceived risk and perceived product value. J. Prod. Brand Manag. 2004, 13, 156–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, J.; Tao, J.; Chu, M. Behind the label: Chinese consumers’ trust in food certification and the effect of perceived quality on purchase intention. Food Control 2020, 108, 106825. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Roh, T.; Seok, J.; Kim, Y. Unveiling ways to reach organic purchase: Green perceived value, perceived knowledge, attitude, subjective norm, and trust. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2022, 67, 102988. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, X.L.; Meng, R.; Xu, J.Z. Research on the formation of brand fan effect in new media environment. Oper. Res. Manag. Sci. 2021, 30, 218. [Google Scholar]
- Xu, K. A study on the correlation and interaction between celebrity effect and fan economy. Star 2024, 27, 133–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, X. The case study of marketing strategies by fan economy. Organization 2022, 34, 520–527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, A.; Shim, K. Antecedents of microblogging users’ purchase intention toward celebrities’ merchandise: Perspectives of virtual community and fan economy. J. Psychol. Res. 2020, 2, 11–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, M.; Kim, J. How does a celebrity make fans happy? Interaction between celebrities and fans in the social media context. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2020, 111, 106419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Misra, A.; Dinh, T.D.; Ewe, S.Y. The more followers the better? The impact of food influencers on consumer behaviour in the social media context. Br. Food J. 2024, 126, 4018–4035. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Connelly, B.L.; Certo, S.T.; Ireland, R.D.; Reutzel, C.R. Signaling theory: A review and assessment. J. Manag. 2011, 37, 39–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Szabo, S.; Webster, J. Perceived greenwashing: The effects of green marketing on environmental and product perceptions. J. Bus. Ethics 2021, 171, 719–739. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, C.; Galliers, R.D.; Shin, N.; Ryoo, J.-H.; Kim, J. Factors influencing Internet shopping value and customer repurchase intention. Electron. Commer. Res. Appl. 2012, 11, 374–387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peng, L.; Zhang, W.; Wang, X.; Liang, S. Moderating effects of time pressure on the relationship between perceived value and purchase intention in social E-commerce sales promotion: Considering the impact of product involvement. Inf. Manag. 2019, 56, 317–328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Apiraksattayakul, C.; Papagiannidis, S.; Alamanos, E. Shopping via Instagram: The influence of perceptions of value, benefits and risks on purchase intentions. Int. J. Online Mark. 2017, 7, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chi, T.; Chen, Y. A study of lifestyle fashion retailing in China. Mark. Intell. Plan. 2020, 38, 46–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yoo, B.; Donthu, N.; Lee, S. An examination of selected marketing mix elements and brand equity. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2000, 28, 195–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kline, R.B. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, 3rd ed.; The Guildford Press: New York, NY, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Henseler, J.; Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M. A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2015, 43, 115–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Podsakoff, P.M.; MacKenzie, S.B.; Lee, J.-Y.; Podsakoff, N.P. Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J. Appl. Psychol. 2003, 88, 879–903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cohen, J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences; Erlbaum: Hillsdale, NJ, USA, 1988. [Google Scholar]
- Lu, H.-H.; Chen, C.-F.; Tai, Y.-W. Exploring the roles of vlogger characteristics and video attributes on followers’ value perceptions and behavioral intention. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2024, 77, 103686. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shah, S.A.; Shoukat, M.H.; Jamal, W.; Shakil Ahmad, M. What drives followers-influencer intention in influencer marketing? The perspectives of emotional attachment and quality of information. Sage Open 2023, 13, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

| Fitting Index | CMIN | DF | CMIN/DF | GFI | AGFI | RMSEA | IFI | TLI | CFI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fitting standard | --- | --- | <3 | >0.9 | >0.8 | <0.05 | >0.9 | >0.9 | >0.9 |
| Result of the operation | 280.409 | 160 | 1.753 | 0.937 | 0.917 | 0.043 | 0.979 | 0.975 | 0.979 |
| Variable | Item Number | Standardized Factor Loading | AVE | CR |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| professionalism | IP1 | 0.822 | 0.615 | 0.864 |
| IP2 | 0.746 | |||
| IP3 | 0.805 | |||
| IP4 | 0.760 | |||
| trustworthiness | IT1 | 0.852 | 0.739 | 0.919 |
| IT2 | 0.875 | |||
| IT3 | 0.853 | |||
| IT4 | 0.859 | |||
| similarity | IS1 | 0.852 | 0.715 | 0.909 |
| IS2 | 0.818 | |||
| IS3 | 0.866 | |||
| IS4 | 0.846 | |||
| perceived quality | PQ1 | 0.788 | 0.621 | 0.867 |
| PQ2 | 0.736 | |||
| PQ3 | 0.809 | |||
| PQ4 | 0.816 | |||
| brand fan effect | BF1 | 0.833 | 0.686 | 0.897 |
| BF2 | 0.807 | |||
| BF3 | 0.809 | |||
| BF4 | 0.863 |
| Variable | Professionalism | Trustworthiness | Similarity | Perceived Quality | Brand Fan Effect |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| professionalism | 0.784 | ||||
| trustworthiness | 0.467 | 0.860 | |||
| similarity | 0.531 | 0.506 | 0.846 | ||
| perceived quality | 0.418 | 0.474 | 0.465 | 0.788 | |
| brand fan effect | 0.599 | 0.560 | 0.675 | 0.621 | 0.828 |
| Professionalism | Trustworthiness | Similarity | Perceived Quality | Brand Fan Effect | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| professionalism | — | ||||
| trustworthiness | 0.403 | — | |||
| similarity | 0.482 | 0.487 | — | ||
| perceived quality | 0.345 | 0.456 | 0.468 | — | |
| brand fan effect | 0.543 | 0.558 | 0.676 | 0.671 | — |
| Variable Relation | Standardization Coefficient | Standard Error | T-Value | p | Hypotheses |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Professionalism → brand fan effect | 0.256 | 0.053 | 5.170 | 0.000 | H1(+): S |
| Trustworthiness → brand fan effect | 0.112 | 0.041 | 2.463 | 0.013 | H2(+): S |
| Similarity → brand fan effect | 0.355 | 0.049 | 7.061 | 0.000 | H3(+): S |
| Professionalism → perceived quality | 0.166 | 0.064 | 2.563 | 0.011 | H4(+): S |
| Trustworthiness → perceived quality | 0.291 | 0.051 | 4.725 | 0.000 | H5(+): S |
| Similarity → perceived quality | 0.267 | 0.059 | 4.051 | 0.000 | H6(+): S |
| Perceived quality → brand fan effect | 0.333 | 0.052 | 6.981 | 0.000 | H7(+): S |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Yin, Y.; Han, C.; Zhang, S. Influencer Efficacy and the Fan Effect in Green Food Branding: The Mediating Role of Perceived Quality. Sustainability 2025, 17, 11305. https://doi.org/10.3390/su172411305
Yin Y, Han C, Zhang S. Influencer Efficacy and the Fan Effect in Green Food Branding: The Mediating Role of Perceived Quality. Sustainability. 2025; 17(24):11305. https://doi.org/10.3390/su172411305
Chicago/Turabian StyleYin, Yue, Chunjia Han, and Siyu Zhang. 2025. "Influencer Efficacy and the Fan Effect in Green Food Branding: The Mediating Role of Perceived Quality" Sustainability 17, no. 24: 11305. https://doi.org/10.3390/su172411305
APA StyleYin, Y., Han, C., & Zhang, S. (2025). Influencer Efficacy and the Fan Effect in Green Food Branding: The Mediating Role of Perceived Quality. Sustainability, 17(24), 11305. https://doi.org/10.3390/su172411305
