The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/2040-7122.htm

JRIM
16,3 “I want to be as trendy as
influencers” – how “fear of missing
out” leads to buying intention for
346 products endorsed by social
Received 28 April 2021
Revised 21 June 2021
media influencers
11 August 2021
Accepted 22 August 2021 Thi Cam Tu Dinh and Yoonjae Lee
Department of Business Administration, Yeungnam University,
Gyeongsan, Republic of Korea

Abstract
Purpose – As social media use rises, the impact of social media influencers on customer buying decisions
increases, due to customers viewing influencers as ideal role models who they try to imitate. Nevertheless, this
phenomenon is still under-researched. This study examined the impact of the imitation of influencers on
customer buying intention toward endorsed products, which is mediated by social comparison, materialism
and the fear of missing out (FOMO).
Design/methodology/approach – An online survey of 243 respondents was conducted via Amazon’s
Mechanical Turk platform. This study employed structural equation modeling to test for direct and indirect
effects among the constructs.
Findings – The results revealed that imitation of influencers has a significant impact on social comparison,
materialism and FOMO, which affect buying intention toward endorsed products. The analysis results
highlight the critical role of FOMO in explaining buying intention toward endorsed products in the context of
social media influencers.
Originality/value – This study proposes a new theoretical model and empirically tests the power of
influencers to affect consumer buying intention for endorsed products. It also explains the influencers’ effects
through FOMO, which have hardly been examined in earlier research although it is an important factor in
understanding customer behavior. The implications are discussed for the academic literature and for online
marketing strategies in marketing and advertising management.
Keywords Social media influencer, Imitation of influencers, FOMO, Social comparison, Materialism,
Buying intention
Paper type Research paper

Introduction
With the growth of social networking platforms, interactions and communication with
customers have become increasingly important. Activities on social media platforms allow
brands to grow directly through brand pages and advertisements or indirectly via
communities where customers can participate and engage (Wang, 2021). Companies use
celebrities to attract customers to their brand, but, nowadays, mass media celebrities are not
alone in being able to gain worship from audiences. A new type of celebrity, called
influencers, can affect an audience’s attitude through social network service (SNS) platforms
using blogs, vlogs and tweets (Freberg et al., 2011). Social media influencers share similarities
with traditional celebrities. The main difference is that influencers are more accessible and
appear more trustworthy (Abidin, 2016). Therefore, they can attract an audience with higher
commitment, reach an audience with a high conversion rate, and build connections with
Journal of Research in Interactive
Marketing followers and customers (Shen, 2021). In other words, social media influencers can help
Vol. 16 No. 3, 2022
pp. 346-364
companies connect to their customers at a deeper level with personalized experiences and
© Emerald Publishing Limited
2040-7122
spread brand-related messages effectively. Thus, SNS influencers are of interest to marketers
DOI 10.1108/JRIM-04-2021-0127 and researchers.
 The number of social media influencers has been increasing, which has been one of the Influencer and
strongest impacts on consumer behavior in recent decades. About 80% of marketers use FOMO
social media influencers as an effective means of attracting customer attention and
promoting their business (Ward, 2017). Influencers cultivate relationships with their audience
via SNS platforms, such as YouTube, Facebook and Instagram, by presenting their opinions
after testing products or brands and organizing events (giveaways, discounts) to promote or
give advice about endorsed products. A total of sixty percent of YouTube subscribers
reported that they would follow influencers’ advice on what to buy (O’Neil and Blumenstein, 347
2016). Social media influencers are considered channels for achieving customer interaction.
By buying influencer-endorsed products, followers feel they are up to date with the latest
trends and capture “cheap moments” with famous people. They adore social media
influencers, consider influencers to be their idealized self-images (La Ferle and Chan, 2008),
and imitate them by following their recommendations. Despite the need to explore this
phenomenon, few studies have focused on it.
Research related to influencers has examined consumption in various contexts in four
major streams: the credibility of the source, source attractiveness (Kim et al., 2018; Khan et al.,
2019; Bern
e and Marzo, 2020), the congruence or match-up model (Lim et al., 2017; Khan et al.,
2019; Lou and Kim, 2019) and the meaning transfer model (Lim et al., 2017; Shan et al., 2020).
Studies explore influencer power with various consequences, including changing customer
attitudes (Hung, 2014), purchase intention (Lim et al., 2017; Khan et al., 2019; Shan et al., 2020),
product engagement and brand content engagement (Gretzel, 2018; Bern
e and Marzo, 2020;
Shan et al., 2020). Influencers are effective sources for building positive relationships with
customers because they transfer brand messages to their followers. However, to the best of
our knowledge, no studies have focused on customers’ imitation of influencers, which is the
main motivation of customers when purchasing endorsed products. To further understand
the motivation of consumers to buy products under the influence of influencers, this study
proposes a latent process from the imitation of influencers to customer buying intention
mediated by social comparison, the fear of missing out (FOMO) and materialism.
FOMO is a well-established and important concept in consumer behavior, especially in the
social media marketing context. In previous research, FOMO is described as a psychological
concept related to the anxiety a person feels when using social media platforms
(Przybylski et al., 2013). FOMO is also referred to as a fear that other people may have
better experiences or rewards and encourages people to use social media as a way to satisfy
needs (Przybylski et al., 2013). Although it stems from a concept related to the online context,
in recent research, FOMO may explain both online behaviors (Beyens et al., 2016) and offline
behaviors (Kang et al., 2019). FOMO is a powerful consumer motivation (Herman, 2011) that
can explain consumer purchasing behavior (Hodkinson, 2016), especially in SNS contexts
under the effects of influencer marketing. Despite the importance of FOMO in buying
intention toward endorsed products, few studies in this research area have explained the
effect of influencer imitation on FOMO. Hence, the mediation role of FOMO on customer
behavior, especially in explaining the underlying process of customers’ buying decisions in
an online context, needs to be explored. To fill this gap, this study examines FOMO as a
channel for individuals with the desire to imitate their favorite influencers to go through to
make a buying decision.
Social comparison and materialism are intermediate steps between the imitation of social
media influencers and the consumption of endorsed products. People innately judge
themselves compared to others or analyze themselves in relation to others’ information
(Festinger, 1954). When interacting with others, people compare themselves to them,
particularly to those who are better off, and SNS platforms provide a fertile ground for such
activities. Gilbert’s (2000) research showed that upward social comparison occurs when
people compare themselves to others who are perceived as being better off, like social media
JRIM influencers. Through the sharing of content, influencers create opportunities for a brand to
16,3 enhance engagement with their consumers and for customers with a high imitation of
influencers to compare themselves with idealized media images (Schiffman and Kanuk, 2004).
The interaction between influencers and their followers stimulates customer desire for
possessions and material values. Kasser et al. (2004) confirmed that individuals learn about
materialistic values on TV through the effect of mass media influencers. They compare their
possessions with others as an expression of self that arouses material value and compulsive
348 buying behavior (Tsang et al., 2014).
Previous research has suggested the effect of influencer endorsement on buying intention
(Hermanda et al., 2019; Lim et al., 2017; Saima and Khan, 2021), but little research has focused
on the imitation feeling created when social media users interact with social media influencers
(Corr^ea et al., 2020). Due to the lack of knowledge regarding the effect of social media
influencers on customer behavior, this study provides a new explanation for understanding
the underlying decision process of customers purchasing endorsed products under the
influence of social media influencers. It helps expand the literature on FOMO and social media
influencers in marketing and provides suggestions for marketers and social media
influencers to develop their campaigns effectively. Moreover, to further explore the power
of imitation of influencers on customer buying decisions, this study tested the impacts of the
imitation of influencers, social comparison, materialism and FOMO on customer buying
intention. Although FOMO is considered an emerging consumer phenomenon (Good and
Hyman, 2020b; Hodkinson, 2016; Çelik et al., 2019; Kang et al., 2019), FOMO is still a new
concept in the marketing context, and no quantitative research has yet examined the
influencer effect through FOMO. Therefore, this study examined the effects of influencers on
customer intention to purchase endorsed products, which is mediated by FOMO. We also
examined the mediating role of materialism and social comparison, which may intensify the
influence of SNS influencers on buying intention. Previous studies have mentioned the effects
of mass media celebrities on social comparison and materialism (Lou and Kim, 2019;
Islam et al., 2018; La Ferle and Chan, 2008). In this study, social comparison and materialism
are the results of social-media-influencer imitation and the mediators in the motivation
process inside customer buying decisions.

Theoretical background and hypothesis

Influencer imitation phenomenon
Influencers are content creators who have a substantial number of followers and interact with
their followers via social media platforms by offering insights into their everyday lives, their
experiences with products and brands, and their opinions about life events or campaigns
through SNS platforms, such as YouTube, Facebook and Instagram (Lou and Yuan, 2019).
Such content allows customers to enjoy their content and change their attitudes and
behaviors. Influencer marketing can be defined as a type of marketing strategy that focuses
on using key opinion leaders (KOLs) to transfer a brand’s messages to a larger audience
(Byrne et al., 2017). Al-Emadi and Ben Yahia (2020) suggested the characteristics of social
media KOLs on social media visual platforms, who motivate customers to engage with them
on social media platforms, include content quality and actual and idealized image
congruence. Thus, in this research, we considered influencers as a communication tool
that can provide product information for a vast network of followers to shape, endorse and
spread trendy products (De Veirman et al., 2017).
Although influencers have certain distinct differences from celebrities, they also share
some of the attributes of celebrities. Social media influencers communicate with their
followers by sharing their lifestyles, product experiences and new trends, thereby shaping
followers’ attitudes and spreading trends. Social media influencers can be KOLs, who are
innovative and extroverted and share and try new products or trends to spread their ideas to Influencer and
others and influence others’ product adoption (Akdevelioglu and Kara, 2020). FOMO
Influencer marketing is considered a highly effective means of attracting consumer
interest, product attention, brand awareness and loyalty. A larger number of followers means
greater power in shaping followers’ attitudes and purchase intentions. Followers consider
celebrities or influencers as idealized self-images. SNS influencers’ followers want to improve
their appearance to be similar to their favorite influencers, make changes by using products
used by influencers, and experience whatever influencers did to get the same values and 349
imitate influencers (Chan, 2008).
The imitation of an influencer is the desire of followers who want to improve or perfect
personal traits to resemble their favorite influencers (La Ferle and Chan, 2008). In other words,
followers desire to imitate their influencers in terms of physical appearance, attitude, or
lifestyle by using or experiencing whatever influencers did or claimed to have done.
An audience that shares bonds with their idols on social media is more likely to follow the
influencers’ choices to build identity and shape feelings of self-esteem (Boon and Lomore,
2001). Followers develop strong emotions about influencers, even when face-to-face
interactions are lacking (La Ferle and Chan, 2008).
McCracken’s (1989) meaning transfer model proposes that a celebrity’s cultural meaning
transfers that meaning into endorsed products and brands that drive endorsement outcomes.
Endorsers transfer the meaning of their images to the endorsed brands. The desired meaning
moves from influencers to a product and then to customers by watching the content and
consuming such endorsed products. Through the created and shared content, the images of
social media influencers are transferred to endorsed products and brands (De Veirman et al.,
2017). Khan et al. (2019) also proved that the perceived credibility of a celebrity affects
consumers’ attitudes and behavior toward an endorsed product. Therefore, influencers who
complement product features can be considered spokespersons of brands, as influencers can
transfer positive attitudes from consumers to endorsed brands. When people have a
favorable attitude toward a specific product, this can lead to an intention to buy that product
(Chen, 2007). A better impression of endorsed products leads to higher buying intention.
Influencer endorsements directly affect customer buying intention and buying behavior
(Lim et al., 2017).

Imitation of influencer, social comparison and materialism

According to Festinger’s social comparison theory, social comparison involves considering
others as sources for comparison to know who we are, how we perform, and to understand
our abilities, social status and performance. It affects thinking, emotions and behaviors in a
social context (Festinger, 1954). Social comparison can be defined as the sensitivity
experienced when comparing others’ behavior, the degree of uncertainty about oneself and
interest in reducing self-uncertainty (Gibbons and Buunk, 1999). Social comparison can be
divided into upward and downward comparisons. Individuals can compare themselves to
targets who are better off or superior, which is called upward social comparison, or make
downward comparisons to those who are worse-off or inferior (Festinger, 1954). This research
focuses on upward comparison because influencers feature characteristics that their
followers do not have but wish to have (Saul, 2016).
Social comparison in an online context is more conspicuous than it is offline (Appel et al.,
2016). Social media platforms are ideal grounds for people to compare themselves with others,
and they motivate users to compare their lives to the images found on social media.
Richins (2004) also noticed that social comparison repeatedly appears between audiences and
advertising models. After being exposed to celebrities on SNS platforms, audiences are more
likely to have an upward social comparison with that celebrity (Seo and Hyun, 2018).
Influencers, who serve as role models, are the main objects of people’s comparison when
JRIM interacting with them via social media. Deep exposure to idealized and attractive images
16,3 through a SNS can lead customers to experience upward social comparison. Engagement in
social comparison with influencers resulting from frequent interaction with influencers can
lead to a range of outcomes for customers. Therefore, this study proposes the following
hypothesis:
H1. The imitation of influencers is positively associated with social comparison to
350 influencers.
The admiration of celebrities is a global phenomenon (Islam et al., 2018). Consumers consider
famous people to be trustworthy sources and follow their recommendations. They are also
prone to celebrity endorsements. Therefore, to follow a celebrity endorsement, individuals
usually compare themselves to others in terms of aspects of material possessions, especially
in the online context, because, nowadays, people favor displaying their material possessions
on the Internet. The imitation of celebrity models positively affects materialism, which has
the same results as those in Kasser et al. (2004), in which customers exposed to materialistic
models and values experience feelings of insecurity.
Materialism refers to the belief that a happy and successful life depends on acquiring and
possessing materials (Richins and Dawson, 1992). In consumer behavior research,
materialism is defined as the importance of worldly possessions. They assume that
possessions are central to their lives, and material value is the source of satisfaction and
dissatisfaction (Ger and Belk, 1996). Materialism consists of three components: acquisition
centrality, the role of acquisition in happiness and the role of possessions in defining success
(Richins and Dawson, 1992). According to Richins and Dawson (1992), acquisition centrality
is the belief that possessions and acquisition play a central role in life. This dimension
emphasizes that the things that they own are crucial to them and their life goals.
Acquisition as the pursuit of happiness refers to the overestimation of the roles played by
possessions and acquisition in satisfaction and well-being. People with a high level of
materialism consider possessions to be the most significant source of satisfaction and
dissatisfaction. Possession-defined success refers to the belief that people determine their
own and others’ success through the number and quality of possessions accumulated.
Materialistic people prefer to value possessions for the money they cost rather than the
satisfaction they yield.
Celebrities are symbolic of wealthy, successful and happy people (Hannell, 2019), so they
are idealized images that others desire to follow (Chan and Zhang, 2007). Chan’s (2008)
research also proved that the more an individual imitates their favorite celebrities, the more
important they will consider material possessions. Peers, family, celebrities and social media
influencers are sources for individuals to learn about materialistic values (Vansteenkiste et al.,
2006). Using celebrities in advertising is a way to attract prospective consumers and increase
materialism (McCracken, 1989). Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis:
H2. The imitation of influencers is positively associated with materialism.

Social comparison, FOMO and buying intention

Przybylski et al. (2013) defined FOMO as “a pervasive apprehension that others may be
having rewarding experiences from which one is absent.” Any definition of FOMO always
consists of emotional anxiety, “a pervasive apprehension,” or “a desire to stay continually
connected with peers’ activities.” In social media marketing, FOMO relates to the private and/
or social self, a feeling that individuals can experience when they fear missing out on
experiences and being left behind (Zhang et al., 2020). The anxiety associated with social
media influencers and others is about experiencing better things or a desire to remain
connected with others, which can be considered as a form of FOMO (Przybylski et al., 2013).
To avoid falling behind on trends, people usually compare their materialistic objects to those Influencer and
of others and then consume products that can improve their status. FOMO
Previous studies explored FOMO in various contexts, including social media marketing,
psychology, academia and management information systems. In the popular press, FOMO is
usually applied to consumer experimental consumption trends and social media use behavior
(Hedges, 2014). Consumers constantly check SNS platforms to avoid being left out of potential
rewards or experiences. In academic areas, FOMO is considered as consumer motivation to
buy or consume products, especially under the effect of scarcity (Herman, 2011). 351
In psychology, FOMO consistently relates to feelings of loneliness and jealousy, self-
concepts that motivate individuals to explore social media as a method of obtaining
fulfillment. FOMO also mediates relationships between SNS use addiction, social comparison,
depressive symptoms and self-concepts.
Social comparison is a mediator of the relationship between imitation of social media
influencers and FOMO. The desire to retain influencers motivates followers to compare
themselves with their ideal images, which leads to FOMO on the endorsed products that
influencers use. People with a high social comparison orientation are more likely to develop
FOMO in social media contexts (Reer et al., 2019). High social comparison is especially
common among people with low self-esteem, including those suffering depression, anxiety or
stress (Gibbons and Buunk, 1999), which are dimensions of FOMO. When individuals
compare themselves to others, they are likely to experience FOMO, which is depicted as the
FOMO on experiences others are enjoying (Buglass et al., 2017). As a result of the comparison
with others (Reer et al., 2019), FOMO motivates people to improve their social status by
consuming the products favored by others (Taylor, 2019). In particular, frequent exposure to
influencers on social media leads to a comparison with influencers and a feeling that others
have better things and experiences. FOMO also develops when people fail to keep up to date
with trends, so they are left out of their community and fall behind (Kang et al., 2019).
Therefore, when consumers repeatedly compare themselves with others in social media
contexts, the FOMO on things that can give them social inclusion is strengthened
(Buglass et al., 2017). Accordingly, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H3. Social comparison to an influencer is positively associated with FOMO on endorsed
products.
Influencers are often the first to share new trends or products that attract followers. Through haul
product videos on SNS platforms, influencers promote newly launched products from a brand
and give their opinions that stimulate followers’ buying intention. Social media influencers play a
vital role in brand promotion. They attract their followers to the endorsed products in their shared
content, which leads followers to become potential customers of the brand. In this process, FOMO
plays a mediating role from engagement with influencers to buying endorsed products. FOMO
has been seen as a situational motivator for individuals (Good and Hyman, 2020a). It motivates
people to do things to stay up to date and not feel left out, as they might regret it. Çelik et al. (2019)
reported that FOMO could increase impulsive purchasing, leading to post-purchase regret in
retail stores. FOMO increases customer concerns, so it urges them to make purchases (Kang et al.,
2019). Another research also proved that advertising using FOMO appeal on hedonic services
could increase the likelihood of customers purchasing that service (Good and Hyman, 2020a), and
customers are more willing to pay for the products or experiences that they consider cannot be
missed (Zhang et al., 2020). Therefore, in this study, the effects of social comparison to social media
influencers on customer buying intention are mediated by FOMO, and the following hypothesis is
established:
H4. The FOMO on endorsed products is positively associated with endorsed product
buying intention.
JRIM Social comparison, materialism with buying intention
16,3 As mentioned above, social media platforms are places where people display material
possessions (Islam et al., 2018). Social comparison theory indicates that individuals usually
compare their material possessions and significant items with others to determine their social
status (Saunders, 2001). As a result, customers purchase products not only for utilitarian
purposes, but also as material symbols. The more they engage in social comparison with
idealized media images, the more exaggerated and unrealistic their expectations of that
352 model’s life are. The gap between desirable and actual life provokes cravings for material
possessions (Sirgy, 1998). Chan and Prendergast (2007) also found that materialistic values
were the main outcome of celebrity imitation and social comparison with media celebrities.
In other words, social comparison is a stepping-stone from the influencer’s imitation of
materialistic aspirations and trying to fulfill those desires through consumption.
Consumers who make upward social comparisons proved to be more materialistic than
those who made downward comparisons and those who did not (Zheng et al., 2018).
The comparison between individuals and celebrities has been proven to arouse materialism
and increase compulsive buying among people (Tsang et al., 2014). From these points, this
study hypothesizes the following:
H5. Social comparison to an influencer is positively associated with materialism.
Materialism is the belief that improvement in quality of life is gained from the consumption of
material goods. Materialism is a consistent predictor of buying intention. Recent research has
claimed that, after comparison to social media celebrities, materialism is more likely to
increase. Social comparison with social media influencers evokes materialistic desires, which,
in turn, predicts consumer buying intention. Materialism has been proven to push customers
to purchase products (Islam et al., 2018) and purchase counterfeit products (Nguyen and
Nguyen, 2017). With social media users, influencers positively predict users’ buying
intentions toward influencer-promoted products (Lou and Kim, 2019). Materialism acts as a
mediator between the imitation of influencers, social comparison and buying endorsed
products. In summary, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H6. Materialism is positively associated with buying intention toward endorsed
products.
Based on the previous empirical and theoretical background, the model used in this study is
shown in Figure 1.

Research methodology
Sampling
Our survey was conducted using Amazon’s Mechanical Turk (MTurk) platform, which uses
human intelligence to complete surveys and experiments for researchers. The subjects of this
study were people living in the USA. A filter question was used, “Do you have favorite beauty
influencers?” This identified those who did not have a favorite beauty influencer, who were
not questioned further. Thus, 5.8% (15 surveys) of the respondents were excluded from
this study.
Respondents who had a favorite beauty influencer were asked to answer questions related
to their thoughts on influencers, motivators and buying intention. A pretest with 50
participants was performed, and the pretest data showed that the questionnaire was suitable
for further data collection. A total of 243 questionnaires were used for the analysis.
In this study, beauty influencers were selected as the research objects. Influencers are
interested in several areas, including fashion and beauty, food, high-tech, health and fitness,
and games, but in this study, we focused on beauty influencers who are the most prototypical
 Influencer and
FOMO
FOMO
H4
H3

Imitation of H1 Social 353

Buying
influencers comparison intention
H 6
2 H
H5

Materialism Figure 1.
Research model

examples of influencer marketing (Belanche et al., 2020). Beauty influencers are the most
popular influencers and usually share their tips to help their followers enhance their
appearance. Approximately 43% of consumers follow beauty influencers (Trosch, 2020).
Participants were required write down the names of their beauty influencers to make them
think about their favorite beauty influencers before beginning the questionnaire.
Respondents listed various names of beauty influencers that they follow. The main SNS
platforms where participants connected with their favorite influencers included YouTube,
Instagram and Facebook, matching previous research results. Influencers usually show
consumer products they have used, provide their opinions or simply promote them online
through the use of SNS platforms.
The total sample used in this study was 243, comprising 130 female respondents (53.5%)
and 113 male respondents (46.5%). Respondents’ ages ranged from 18 to 50, matching the
leading social media user demographic in the USA (Chaffey, 2021), with respondents in their
30s accounting for the highest proportion (48.6%). Table 1 presents the demographic
characteristics of the respondents.

Measurement
Each variable in this study was measured based on previous studies and refined to meet the
purpose of the study. The study employed seven-point Likert scales to measure the level of
statement agreement (from one, meaning “strongly disagree,” to seven, meaning “strongly
agree”). The total number of questions in this survey was 31, which included questions on
exclusion, social media platforms, demographic questions and 27 questions designed for five

Item Characteristics Frequency Ratio

Gender Male 113 46.5

Female 130 53.5
Age Under 20 3 1.2
20s 70 28.8 Table 1.
30s 118 48.6 Demographic
40s 51 21.0 characteristics
50 1 0.4 (n 5 243)
JRIM constructs: imitation of influencers, social comparison, FOMO, materialism and buying
16,3 intention.
Imitation was measured using three statements from Kasser et al.’s (2004) research, which
was applied to measure the imitation of media celebrities (La Ferle and Chan, 2008). In this
study, we used this scale in the context of influencers, due to the similarities between media
celebrities and social media influencers, as mentioned above. The inter-item reliability in
previous studies was 0.77.
354 Upward social comparison with influencers was modified from Solberg et al. (2002).
Participants answered questions about the upward social comparison they experienced while
using SNSs in terms of lifestyle and material possessions. This measurement was used in
other research with high reliability (α 5 0.96) (Seo and Hyun, 2018).
Although Przybylski et al.’s (2013) scale is the common measurement scale for FOMO, it is
usually used for specific personal characteristics. In this study, eight items from the
situational FOMO scale developed by Good and Hyman (2020a) were used to explore FOMO
on endorsed products in the social media influencer context. This measurement was
empirically tested with high reliability (α 5 0.94).
Materialism was measured using Richins and Dawson’s (1992) conceptualization about
the belief that material possessions are an indicator of a successful life. In this study, the
shortened version of materialism redeveloped by Richins (2004) was used to measure their
agreement with statements assessing materialistic value. In previous research, this scale
reported a Cronbach’s alpha value of 0.81.
Buying intention was developed by Liu and Brock (2011) and edited in Khan et al.’s (2019)
research for celebrity-endorsed product purchase intentions. The Cronbach’s alpha in
previous research was 0.82. This study adopted the measurement in the influencer context,
with three statements indicating the endorsed product buying intention.
The specific contents of measurement items are shown in Appendix.

Results
This study used analysis of moment structure (AMOS) 23.0 to test the measurement model
and structural model. We first evaluated the measurement model through convergent
validity, factor loading coefficient, reliability by composite reliability (CR) and average
variance extracted (AVE), and discriminant validity. Subsequently, we tested the proposed
hypothesis with the structural model and explored the mediating roles of social comparison,
FOMO and materialism in this research model.

Measurement model
The convergent validity, reliability and discriminant validity of the measurement were
assessed using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Results found that the chi-square test was
significant (χ 2 (df 5 314) 5 572.9, p < 0.05). The model fit was assessed through three
different indices: the root mean square error approximation (RMSEA), comparative fit index
(CFI) and Tucker–Lewis Index (TLI). The results show that this model presented an
acceptable model fit with RMSEA 5 0.058, CFI 5 0.945 and TLI 5 0.938. The factor loadings
are presented in Table 2, and convergent validity was verified. Only when all factor loading
values were greater than 0.60, was convergent validity accepted (Hair et al., 2018). The lowest
factor loading in our study was 0.711, indicating that convergent validity was met.
The reliability of the constructs is accepted if CR values are greater than 0.70 and AVE values
exceed 0.50 (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). All values of CR and AVE surpassed this threshold,
which means that the reliability of this measurement was acceptable.
In terms of discriminant validity, the square roots of the AVE values exceeded the
correlations between the constructs, indicating that discriminant validity was satisfied
(Table 3).
Construct Item Mean SD Factor loading CR AVE
Influencer and
FOMO
Imitation of influencer IM1 5.88 1.05 0.782 0.807 0.582
IM2 5.81 1.09 0.724
IM3 5.77 1.13 0.781
Social comparison SC1 5.96 1.09 0.711 0.910 0.560
SC2 5.88 1.12 0.731
SC3 5.84 1.14 0.719 355
SC4 5.91 1.04 0.803
SC5 5.86 1.12 0.785
SC6 5.92 1.12 0.746
SC7 5.76 1.24 0.726
SC8 5.92 1.06 0.758
FOMO FO1 5.07 1.65 0.853 0.958 0.742
FO2 5.13 1.64 0.853
FO3 5.19 1.63 0.871
FO4 5.12 1.57 0.832
FO5 5.17 1.60 0.852
FO6 5.09 1.61 0.881
FO7 5.05 1.81 0.863
FO8 5.16 1.59 0.884
Materialism MA1 5.59 1.25 0.757 0.864 0.559
MA2 5.57 1.32 0.766
MA3 5.61 1.30 0.771
MA4 5.67 1.22 0.723
MA5 5.69 1.19 0.721
Buying intention BI1 5.63 1.16 0.797 0.862 0.582
BI2 5.49 1.24 0.826
BI3 5.67 1.15 0.840
Note(s): SD, standard deviation; CR, composite reliability; AVE, average variance extracted; IM, imitation of
social media influencers, SC, social comparison; FOMO, fear of missing out; MA, materialism; BI, buying Table 2.
intention Scale reliabilities

IM SC FOMO MA BI

Imitation of influencer 0.763

Social comparison 0.598*** 0.748
FOMO 0.542*** 0.221** 0.861
Materialism 0.674*** 0.559*** 0.655*** 0.748 Table 3.
Buying intention 0.682*** 0.460*** 0.696*** 0.709*** 0.821 Correlation matrix and
Note(s): ***p < 0.001; **p < 0.01; square of AVE are reflected in italic in the diagonal, IM, imitation of social discriminant
media influencers, SC, social comparison; FOMO, fear of missing out; MA, materialism; BI, buying intention assessment

Structural model and hypothesis testing

This study tests the fit of the research model before continuing to examine the causal
relationships between variables. Figure 2 shows that the chi-square is significant, with
χ 2 (df 5 318) 5 700.924 (p < 0.05). Root mean square error approximation 5 0.071,
CFI 5 0.919 and TLI 5 0.910, indicating an acceptable fit for our hypothesized model, which
represents a positive sign of the model in analyzing our research hypotheses.
Consistent with our hypotheses, the imitation of influencers positively affects social
comparison and materialism, supporting H1 and H2. This reveals that followers imitating
influencers were more likely to compare themselves with influencers and were more likely to
JRIM
16,3 FOMO

0.269***
356
Imitation of 0.612*** Social Buying
influencers comparison intention

0.264**

Materialism

: Significant path
Figure 2.
Research results
Note(s): *: p < 0.05; **: p < 0.01; ***: p < 0.001

increase their level of materialism as a result. The relationship between social comparison
and FOMO is also significant, with a standardized beta value of 0.42 (significant at 0.01),
which supports H3. This indicates that individuals who make a social comparison are likely
to experience the fear and anxiety of missing out on products endorsed by influencers. Social
comparison was a positive predictor of materialistic value (β 5 0.264, p < 0.01), which
supports H5. Respondents who perceived a higher level of social comparison with influencers
were more materialistic. Finally, there are also positive, significant relationships between
FOMO, materialism, and buying intention, supporting H4 and H6. People with a high level of
FOMO and materialism are likely to develop a strong tendency to buy products endorsed by
influencers. The results of this study are presented in Figure 2 and Table 4.

Mediation effects
To shed light on whether social comparison, FOMO, and materialism mediate the
relationship between imitation of social media influencers and customer buying intention,
mediation analysis was run to test the indirect effects, with 2,000 bootstrapped samples to
estimate the 95% bias-corrected confidence intervals (CIs). Mediation relationships were

Hypothesis Estimate t-test p Conclusion

H1. Imitation of influencers → social comparison 0.612 7.414 *** Supported

H2. Imitation of influencers → materialism 0.529 5.641 *** Supported
H3. Social comparison → FOMO 0.269 3.883 *** Supported
Table 4. H4. FOMO → buying intention 0.473 7.522 *** Supported
Hypotheses of the H5. Social comparison → materialism 0.264 3.240 ** Supported
proposed H6. Materialism → buying intention 0.503 7.046 *** Supported
theoretical model Note(s): ***p < 0.001; **p < 0.01; H1 → H6, Hypothesis 1 → Hypothesis 6; FOMO, fear of missing out
only accepted when the lower and upper bounds of the bootstrap CIs of the indirect effects Influencer and
between the predictor and the outcome did not include zero (Preacher and Hayes, 2004). FOMO
The results in Table 5 show that all paths were significant. Social comparison mediated
the relationship between imitation and materialism (95% CI: [0.028, 0.402]), imitation, and
FOMO (95% CI: [0.089, 0.498]). The mediating role of FOMO was also proven. Social
comparison → FOMO → buying intention was significant with a 95% CI: [0.072, 0.248].
There were indirect effects between imitation and buying intention and between social
comparison and buying intention through materialism (95% CI: [0.105, 0.519]; 95% CI: 357
[0.029, 0.348], respectively). The results confirmed that social comparison, materialism,
and FOMO have mediation roles in the relationship between the imitation of influencers
and customer buying intention.

Discussion
This research was conducted to examine the relationship between the imitation of influencers
and buying intention through the effects of social comparison, FOMO, and materialism.
This study provides a new lens through which to explain the power of influencer effects,
especially the influencer imitation phenomenon, on the purchase intention toward products
endorsed by influencers. The results are summarized as follows:
This study established that the imitation of influencers increases the level of materialism
of followers because followers learn about materialism by interacting with influencers on
social media platforms and by following the influencer’s product recommendations.
Therefore, materialism mediated the effects of imitation of social media influencers on
followers’ buying intentions of endorsed products. Depending on the idea that social media
influencers would have happier and more successful lives, followers will try to use the
endorsed products with the desire to be like influencers. Consistent with previous research
results, imitation of social media influencers can be a positive predictor of material values.
Social comparison to social media influencers is a steppingstone from the imitation of
social media influencers to FOMO and materialism. Influencers are idealized images that
followers desire to reflect. Those who imitate social media influencers tend to make upward
social comparisons in terms of knowledge, appearance, or lifestyle aspects. This finding
supports the social comparison theory and previous research that found that the greater the
desire of people to associate with social media influencers, the more they compare themselves
to better off influencers (Festinger, 1954; Seo and Hyun, 2018) for self-appraisal.
The interaction between influencers and their followers promoted upward social
comparisons, which then motivated materialistic possession and the anxiety of missing
out on trendy products.

Parameter Estimate Lower Upper p Conclusion

IM → SC → FO 0.266 0.089 0.498 0.002 Indirect effect

IM → SC → FO → BI 0.076 0.029 0.159 0.001 Indirect effect
SC → FO → BI 0.140 0.072 0.248 0.001 Indirect effect
IM → SC → MA 0.156 0.028 0.402 0.048 Indirect effect
IM → SC → MA → BI 0.079 0.016 0.240 0.036 Indirect effect
IM → MA → BI 0.260 0.105 0.519 0.001 Indirect effect
SC → MA → BI 0.146 0.029 0.348 0.044 Indirect effect
Note(s): IM, imitation of social media influencers, SC, social comparison; FO, fear of missing out; MA, Table 5.
materialism; BI, buying intention Mediation effects
JRIM As hypothesized, social comparison with social influencers positively impacts
16,3 materialism. Individuals usually make social comparisons between their possessions and
those of social media influencers in the belief that materialistic possessions are an important
indicator of a successful and happy life. In other words, individuals who treasure materialistic
possessions are more likely to engage in social comparisons. Social media influencers
congregate their followers and allow them to dream of the products they recommend via their
shared content.
358 As a result of social comparison to social media influencers, the FOMO on trendy products
motivated the buying intention of customers to purchase. Individuals can decide to compare
themselves with others who are better off than themselves or with idealized media images,
leading to the feeling of FOMO. When they compare themselves with influencers, with a
desire to be similar to their favorite influencers, they usually fear missing out on endorsed
products. FOMO is the result when people compare themselves to others. High social
comparison orientation is prevalent among people with low self-esteem, so social
comparisons can be seen as a means of reducing self-related uncertainty (Gibbons and
Buunk, 1999). With the FOMO on endorsed products, people would buy them because
influencers recommend such items and because they are trendy products as has been proven
in previous research.
Furthermore, materialism plays a mediating role between the imitation of influencers and
the intention to purchase an endorsed product. Those who make social comparisons with
social media influencers think material values are a sign of happiness and success, and then
purchase products promoted by influencers. The more consumers desire materialistic
possessions, the more they will engage in consumption behaviors to satisfy that need.
Therefore, materialism is a positive predictor of endorsed product intentions. The desire to
imitate social media influencers is related to consumers’ materialistic thinking, which then
alters the intention to purchase endorsed products.

Theoretical contribution
Our research contributes to existing works on influencers, social comparison theory and
FOMO. Although the imitation of famous people is a global phenomenon (Islam et al., 2018)
that is related to the deep engagement between followers and influencers, no research has yet
focused on its effects on recommended products. This study provides a new theoretical model
by empirically testing a new process, in which influencers’ power can affect purchase
intention toward products, and all hypotheses in the proposed model are accepted. Moreover,
this study also supports theories of social comparison and the meaning transfer model
(Festinger, 1954; McCracken, 1989) in the social media influencer context, while most previous
studies focused on social norms contexts and traditional celebrity endorsement (De Veirman
et al., 2017; Seo and Hyun, 2018). Second, this study introduces a new perspective of FOMO as
an important construct in the social media marketing and social media influencer contexts
that have been proposed and empirically tested. This brings a new theoretical perspective to
influencers, FOMO, and buying intention toward endorsed products. FOMO is an important
construct in the online context (Beyens et al., 2016), but there have been no studies on the
influence of FOMO on purchase intention toward influencer-endorsed products. This study
uses FOMO in the influencer research context and develops a premise for using FOMO to
explain the role of influencers in customers’ purchase intentions. Third, this study affirms the
mediating roles of materialism and upward social comparison in the context of social media
influencers. While previous studies mentioned upward social comparison to consumer
communities or mass media celebrities (Chan, 2008; Seo and Hyun, 2018), this research
applied social comparison theory to the context of social media influencers. Moreover, this
study applied and expanded the effects of imitation of influencers on customers’ purchase
intention, whereas previous studies only dealt with the effect on materialism.
Practical implications Influencer and
The proposed model has several practical implications for marketers and social media FOMO
influencers in developing effective marketing plans. This study explains the underlying
process of buying decisions under the influence of influencers, which is considered an effective
marketing tool. Social media influencers can help change consumer–brand relationships in a
positive way. The interaction between social media influencers and their followers through
their content-sharing communities can transfer brand-related messages and persuade followers
to purchase products and services (Wang, 2021). Therefore, this study suggests that marketing 359
practitioners can consider choosing social media influencers for advertising campaigns for
successful marketing communication. Marketers need to choose social media influencers who
have a high number of followers and a considerable impact on their online communities to
increase customers’ desire to imitate them and consume endorsed products. Moreover, this
study proved that FOMO plays an important role in customer buying intention, so that
marketers, advertisers and even social media influencers should be able to induce FOMO to
establish customer engagement. By catching new trends and satisfying customer needs, social
media influencers and advertisers can encourage social comparisons to influencers in their
posts, which, in turn, increases materialism and evokes FOMO in customers. Influencers and
marketers who want to engage with customers on social media platforms should promote
FOMO-related thoughts, such as events stressing the scarcity of products and the fun and
excitement one can have when owning such endorsed products. FOMO appeal in posts can help
increase customers’ anxiety about falling behind and the belief that they can fulfill their needs
by consuming endorsed products.

Limitations and future research

This study had several limitations. First, the survey considered beauty influencers as
representatives of social media influencers. Various types of social media influencers can
affect customers, such as gaming influencers. To overcome this limitation and broaden the
results, future studies can explore other types of influencers to obtain more robust findings.
Furthermore, the data were collected using the MTurk platform in the USA. Thus, the effects
of social media influencers need to be tested by other respondents to determine the differences
in other cultures. This study focused on people aged 18–50. Further studies should be more
open to the under-18s, who are very active on social media. Finally, this study examined
aspects of the effects of customer imitation of influencers on customer buying intention, but
the actual behavior of consumers was beyond the scope of this research. Future studies
should examine the proposed model on actual purchasing behavior. In this study, FOMO and
materialism are used to explain endorsed product buying intention, which serves as a
suggestion for future studies, so that other factors can be adopted to replace, combine or
improve study models.

References
Abidin, C. (2016), “Visibility labour: engaging with influencers’ fashion brands and #OOTD
advertorial campaigns on Instagram”, Media International Australia, Vol. 161 No. 1, pp. 86-100.
Akdevelioglu, D. and Kara, S. (2020), “An international investigation of opinion leadership and social
media”, Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 71-88.
Al-Emadi, F.A. and Ben Yahia, I. (2020), “Ordinary celebrities related criteria to harvest fame and
influence on social media”, Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, Vol. 14 No. 2,
pp. 195-213.
Appel, H., Gerlach, A.L. and Crusius, J. (2016), “The interplay between Facebook use, social
comparison, envy, and depression”, Current Opinion in Psychology, Vol. 9, pp. 44-49.
JRIM ~ez-S
anchez, S. (2020), “Followers’ reactions to influencers’ Instagram
Belanche, D., Flavi
an, M. and Ib
an
posts”, Spanish Journal of Marketing - ESIC, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 37-54.
16,3
Bern
e, C. and Marzo, M. (2020), “Exploring how influencer and relationship marketing serve corporate
sustainability”, Sustainability, Vol. 12, p. 4392.
Beyens, I., Frison, E. and Eggermont, S. (2016), “‘I don’t want to miss a thing’: adolescents’ fear of
missing out and its relationship to adolescents’ social needs, Facebook use, and Facebook
related stress”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 64, pp. 1-8.
360
Boon, S. and Lomore, C. (2001), “Admirer-celebrity relationships among young adults”, Human
Communication Research, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 432-465.
Buglass, S.L., Binder, J.F., Betts, L.R. and Underwood, J.D.M. (2017), “Motivators of online
vulnerability: the impact of social network site use and FOMO”, Computers in Human
Behavior, Vol. 66, pp. 248-255.
Byrne, E., Kearney, J. and MacEvilly, C. (2017), “The role of influencer marketing and social
influencers in public health”, Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, Vol. 76, OCE3, p. E103.
Çelik, I.K., Eru, O. and Cop, R. (2019), “The effects of consumer FOMO tendencies on impulse buying
and the effects of impulse buying on post- purchase regret: an investigation on retail stores”,
Broad Research in Artificial Intelligence and Neuroscience, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 124-138.
Chaffey, D. (2021), “Global social media research summary 2021”, available at: https://www.
smartinsights.com/social-media-marketing/social-media-strategy/new-global-social-media-
research/ (accessed 7 June 2021).
Chan, K. (2008), “Social comparison, imitation of celebrity models and materialism among Chinese
youth”, International Journal of Advertising, Vol. 27, pp. 799-826.
Chan, K. and Prendergast, G. (2007), “Materialism and social comparison among adolescents”, Social
Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, Vol. 35, pp. 213-228.
Chan, K. and Zhang, C. (2007), “Living in a celebrity-mediated social world: the Chinese experience”,
Young Consumers: Insight and Ideas for Responsible Marketers, Vol. 8, pp. 139-152.
Chen, M.F. (2007), “Consumer attitudes and purchase intentions in relation to organic foods in Taiwan:
moderating effects of food-related personality traits”, Food Quality and Preference, Vol. 18,
pp. 1008-1021.
Corr^ea, S.C.H., Soares, J.L., Christino, J.M.M., Gosling, M.D.S. and Gonçalves, C.A. (2020), “The
influence of youtubers on followers’ use intention”, Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing,
Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 173-194.
De Veirman, M., Cauberghe, V. and Hudders, L. (2017), “Marketing through Instagram influencers: the
impact of number of followers and product divergence on brand attitude”, International Journal
of Advertising, Vol. 36 No. 5, pp. 798-828.
Festinger, L. (1954), “A theory of social comparison processes”, Human Relations, Vol. 7 No. 2,
pp. 117-140.
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable
variables and measurement error”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39-50.
Freberg, K., Graham, K., McGaughey, K. and Freberg, L.A. (2011), “Who are the social media
influencers? A study of public perceptions of personality”, Public Relations Review, Vol. 37 No. 1,
pp. 90-92.
Ger, G. and Belk, R.W. (1996), “Cross-cultural differences in materialism”, Journal of Economic
Psychology, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 55-77.
Gibbons, F.X. and Buunk, B.P. (1999), “Individual differences in social comparison: development of a
scale of social comparison orientation”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 76
No. 1, pp. 129-142.
Gilbert, P. (2000), “The relationship of shame, social anxiety and depression: the role of the evaluation
of social rank”, Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Vol. 7, pp. 174-189.
Good, M.C. and Hyman, M.R. (2020a), “Direct and indirect effects of fear-of-missing-out appeals on Influencer and
purchase likelihood”, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 564-576.
FOMO
Good, M.C. and Hyman, M.R. (2020b), “‘Fear of missing out’: antecedents and influence on purchase
likelihood”, Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 330-341.
Gretzel, U. (2018), “Influencer marketing in travel and tourism”, in Sigala, M. and Gretzel, U. (Eds),
Advances in Social Media for Travel, Tourism and Hospitality: New Perspectives, Practice and
Cases, Routledge, pp. 147-156.
361
Hair, J.F., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E. and Black, W.C. (2018), Multivariate Data Analysis, 8th ed.,
Cengage Learning, Boston.
Hannell, B. (2019), “Celebrity, aspiration and contemporary youth: education and inequality in an era
of austerity”, Celebrity Studies, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 309-311.
Hedges, K. (2014), “Do you have FOMO: fear of missing out?”, available at: https://www.forbes.com/
sites/work-in-progress/2014/03/27/do-you-have-fomo-fear-of-missing-out/?sh5113b3ccb4ec4
(accessed 22 January 2021).
Herman, D. (2011), “Understending FOMO”, available at: http://fomofearofmissingout.com/fomo
(accessed 6 January 2021).
Hermanda, A., Sumarwan, U. and Tinaprillia, N. (2019), “The effect of social media influencer on brand
image, self-concept, and purchase intention”, Journal of Consumer Science, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 76-89.
Hodkinson, C. (2016), “‘Fear of missing out’ (FOMO) marketing appeals: a conceptual model”, Journal
of Marketing Communications, Vol. 25, pp. 1-24.
Hung, K. (2014), “Why celebrity sells: a dual entertainment path model of brand endorsement”, Journal
of Advertising, Vol. 43, pp. 155-166.
Islam, T., Sheikh, Z., Hameed, Z., Khan Ikram, U. and Azam Rauf, I. (2018), “Social comparison,
materialism, and compulsive buying based on stimulus-response-model: a comparative study
among adolescents and young adults”, Young Consumers, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 19-37.
Kang, I., Cui, H. and Son, J. (2019), “Conformity consumption behavior and FOMO”, Sustainability,
Vol. 11 No. 17, p. 1.
Kasser, T., Ryan, R.M., Couchman, C.E. and Sheldon, K.M. (2004), “Materialistic values: their causes
and consequences”, Psychology and consumer culture: the Struggle for a Good Life in a
Materialistic World, American Psychological Association, Washington, DC, pp. 11-28.
Khan, M., Memon, Z. and Kumar, S. (2019), “Celebrity endorsement and purchase intentions: the role of
perceived quality and brand loyalty”, Market Force, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 99-120.
Kim, S., Choe, J.Y. and Petrick, J.F. (2018), “The effect of celebrity on brand awareness, perceived
quality, brand image, brand loyalty, and destination attachment to a literary festival”, Journal
of Destination Marketing and Management, Vol. 9, pp. 320-329.
La Ferle, C. and Chan, K. (2008), “Determinants for materialism among adolescents in Singapore”,
Young Consumers: Insight and Ideas for Responsible Marketers, Vol. 9, pp. 201-214.
Lim, X.J., Radzol, A.R.M., Cheah, J.-H. and Wong, M.W. (2017), “The impact of social media influencers
on purchase intention and the mediation effect of customer attitude”, Asian Journal of Business
Research, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 19-36.
Liu, M. and Brock, J. (2011), “Selecting a female athlete endorser in China: the effect of attractiveness,
match-up, and consumer gender difference”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 45,
pp. 1214-1235.
Lou, C. and 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 Psychology, Vol. 10, pp. 25-67.
Lou, C. and Yuan, S. (2019), “Influencer marketing: how message value and credibility affect consumer
trust of branded content on social media”, Journal of Interactive Advertising, Vol. 19 No. 1,
pp. 58-73.
JRIM McCracken, G. (1989), “Who is the celebrity endorser? Cultural foundations of the endorsement
process”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 16, pp. 310-321.
16,3
Nguyen, M. and Nguyen, L. (2017), “Antecedents of the intention and behavior toward purchase of
counterfeit luxury goods in an emerging economy: a study of young Vietnamese consumers”,
Organizations and Markets in Emerging Economies, Vol. 8, pp. 207-224.
O’Neil, H.C. and Blumenstein, H. (2016), “Why Youtube stars are more influential than traditional
celebrities”, available at: https://www.thinkwithgoogle.com/consumer-insights/youtube-stars-
362 influence (accessed 23 December 2020).
Preacher, K.J. and Hayes, A.F. (2004), “SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in
simple mediation models”, Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, Vol. 36
No. 4, pp. 717-731.
Przybylski, A., Murayama, K., DeHaan, C. and Gladwell, V. (2013), “Motivational, emotional, and
behavioral correlates of fear of missing out”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 29,
pp. 1841-1848.
Reer, F., Tang, W.Y. and Quandt, T. (2019), “Psychosocial well-being and social media engagement:
the mediating roles of social comparison orientation and fear of missing out”, New Media and
Society, Vol. 21 No. 7, pp. 1486-1505.
Richins, M. (2004), “The material values scale: a re-inquiry into its measurement properties and the
development of a short form”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 31, pp. 209-219.
Richins, M. and Dawson, S. (1992), “A consumer values orientation for materialism and its
measurement”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 19, pp. 303-316.
Saima and Khan, M.A. (2021), “Effect of social media influencer marketing on consumers’ purchase
intention and the mediating role of credibility”, Journal of Promotion Management, Vol. 27
No. 4, pp. 503-523.
Saul, H. (2016), “Instafamous: meet the social media influencers redefining celebrity”, available at:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/instagram-model-natasha-oakley-iskra-lawrence-
kayla-itsines-kendall-jenner-jordyn-woods-a6907551.html (accessed 12 January 2021).
Saunders, S. (2001), “Fromm’s marketing character and rokeach values”, Social Behavior and
Personality: An International Journal, Vol. 29, pp. 191-195.
Schiffman, L.G. and Kanuk, L.L. (2004), Consumer Behavior, Pearson, New Jersey, Pearson
Prentice Hall.
Seo, M. and Hyun, K.D. (2018), “The effects of following celebrities’ lives via SNSs on life satisfaction:
the palliative function of system justification and the moderating role of materialism”, New
Media & Society, Vol. 20 No. 9, pp. 3479-3497.
Shan, Y., Chen, K.J. and 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, Vol. 39 No. 5, pp. 590-610.
Shen, Z. (2021), “A persuasive ewom model for increasing consumer engagement on social media:
evidence from Irish fashion micro-influencers”, Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing,
Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 181-199.
Sirgy, M.J. (1998), “Materialism and quality of life”, Social Indicators Research, Vol. 43 No. 3,
pp. 227-260.
Solberg, E., Diener, E., Wirtz, D., Lucas, R. and Oishi, S. (2002), “Wanting, having, and satisfaction:
examining the role of desire discrepancies in satisfaction with income”, Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, Vol. 83, pp. 725-734.
Taylor, D.G. (2019), Social Media Usage, FOMO, and Conspicuous Consumption: An Exploratory
Study: An Abstract, Springer International Publishing, pp. 857-858.
Trosch, D. (2020), “11 different types of influencers you should know about”, available at: https://
www.fourstarzz.com/post/different-types-of-influencers (accessed 2 June 2021).
Tsang, J.A., Carpenter, T.P., Roberts, J.A., Frisch, M.B. and Carlisle, R.D. (2014), “Why are materialists Influencer and
less happy? The role of gratitude and need satisfaction in the relationship between materialism
and life satisfaction”, Personality and Individual Differences, Vol. 64, pp. 62-66. FOMO
Vansteenkiste, M., Duriez, B., Simons, J. and Soenens, B. (2006), “Materialistic values and well-being
among business students: further evidence of their detrimental effect1”, Journal of Applied
Social Psychology, Vol. 36, pp. 2892-2908.
Wang, C.L. (2021), “New frontiers and future directions in interactive marketing: inaugural editorial”,
Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 1-9. 363
Ward, T. (2017), “5 influencer marketing trends that will dominate 2017”, available at: https://www.
forbes.com/sites/tomward/2017/02/13/5-influencer-marketing-trends-that-will-dominate-2017/?
sh57334bad2293a (accessed 12 January 2021).
Zhang, Z., Jim
enez, F.R. and Cicala, J.E. (2020), “Fear of missing out scale: a self-concept perspective”,
Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 37 No. 11, pp. 1619-1634.
Zheng, X., Baskin, E. and Peng, S. (2018), “The spillover effect of incidental social comparison on
materialistic pursuits: the mediating role of envy”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 52,
pp. 1107-1127.

Appendix

Constructs Items Sources

Imitation of I want to be as stylish as influencers Kasser et al.

influencers I want to be as trendy as influencers (2004)
I aspire to the lifestyle of influencers
Social comparison Influencer can afford a better dwelling (apartment, house, etc.) than Solberg et al.
me (2002)
Influencer can afford to travel more than me
Influencer can afford better food and drink than me
Influencer can afford more expensive entertainment than me
Influencer can afford better transportation (car, bus, etc.) than me
Influencer can afford better and more clothes than other me
Influencer can afford better medical care than me
Influencer can afford to pay school expenses more easily than me
FOMO I’m afraid later I will feel sorry I did not buy products endorsed by Good and Hyman
influencers (2020a)
I will worry about I’m missing products endorsed by influencers
I will worry other people are having more rewarding things than me
by using products endorsed by influencers
I feel concerned that other people are having more fun with products
endorsed by influencers while I do not
I will feel left out the trends if I do not have products endorsed by
influencers
I will feel sorry that I did not experience products endorsed by
influencers
I will feel anxious about not being with products endorsed by
influencers
I will feel bothered that I missed an opportunity to use that products Table A1.
endorsed by influencers Construct
measurement items
(continued )
JRIM Constructs Items Sources
16,3
Materialism I admire people who own expensive homes, cars, and clothes Richins (2004)
The things I own say a lot about how well I’m doing in life
I like a lot of luxury in my life
My life would be better if I owned certain things I do not have
I’d be happier if I could afford to buy more things
364 Buying intention Products endorsed by influencers influence my buying decisions Liu and Brock
I buy a product because I like the personality of the influencer (2011)
endorser
Table A1. I feel happy in buying a product endorsed by a famous influencer

About the authors

Thi Cam Tu Dinh is a PhD candidate at the Department of Business Administration of Yeungnam
University, South Korea. She got a BA in the Marketing Department from National Economics
University in Vietnam and a MA in the Media and Communication Department of Yeungnam
University. Her main areas of research are customer behavior, social media users’ behaviors and online
marketing.
Yoonjae Lee holds a BA and MA in Business Administration from the Seoul National University,
South Korea. In 2012, he obtained his PhD in Business Administration from the same graduate school.
Currently, he is an Associate Professor at the Yeungnam University’s Department of Business
Administration, from 2013. His key areas of research include consumer behavior, customer
engagement and online media marketing. Yoonjae Lee is the corresponding author and can be
contacted at: ylee@yu.ac.kr

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
Reproduced with permission of copyright owner. Further
reproduction prohibited without permission.