Influencer Traits and Information Credibility in Driving Gen Z Women’s Purchase Intentions

  • Authors

    https://doi.org/10.14419/vh2af397

    Received date: July 4, 2025

    Accepted date: August 4, 2025

    Published date: September 30, 2025

  • Generation Z; India; Purchase Intention; Social Media; YouTube Influencers

  • Abstract

    Influencer marketing has evolved from a hobby into a key business strategy, as companies increasingly collaborate with influencers to ‎promote their products. This shift is especially impactful for Generation Z, who rely heavily on social media to discover and follow the ‎latest fashion and lifestyle trends. This study examines how YouTubers' influencer marketing impacts the credibility of information and ‎influences purchasing decisions for cosmetic brands. Using a descriptive study design, 385 digitally active Gen Z participants were ‎selected through snowball sampling, highlighting their significant role in shaping consumer trends. The study utilised Confirmatory ‎Factor Analysis (CFA) to assess reliability and validity, while hypotheses were tested using Structural Equation Modelling (SEM). The ‎study found that source-related factors like expertise (β= 0.216), trustworthiness (β=0.678), likability (β=0.287), and homophily ‎‎(β=0.298) positively and significantly influence perceived information credibility. However, platform factors like social advocacy and ‎interactivity had no significant impact, while argument quality negatively influenced information quality. Ultimately, perceived information credibility significantly influences purchase intentions (β=0.564) for beauty products among Generation Z women in India. The ‎study's results are in partial agreement with previous research, shedding light on how Generation Z women engage with social media ‎content when seeking recommendations for beauty products‎.

  • References

    1. Aggarwal, R. and Mittal, S. (2022) ‘Impact of Social Media Marketing Activities on Purchase Intentions via Customer Equity Drivers’, International Journal of Online Marketing, 12(1), pp. 1–19. Available at: https://doi.org/10.4018/IJOM.299402.
    2. Alalmai, A., Arun, A. and Aarif, M. (2022) ‘Social Media Advertising Impact on the Consumer Purchasing’, IBN Khaldoun Journal for Studies and Research, 2(8), pp. 820–830.
    3. Anonymous (2023) ‘Insta loving GenZ prefer YouTube, shopping on Amazon, says survey’, Livemint, 22 June. Available at: https://www.livemint.com/news/india/yougov-survey-indian-gen-z-insta-lovers-prefer-youtube-for-streaming-green-energy-and-saving-money-top-priorities-11687424873439.html.
    4. Awad, N.F. and Ragowsky, A. (2008) ‘Establishing Trust in Electronic Commerce Through Online Word of Mouth: An Examination Across Genders’, Journal of Management Information Systems, 24(4), pp. 101–121. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2753/MIS0742-1222240404.
    5. Ayeh, J., Au, N. and Law, R. (2013) ‘“Do We Believe in TripAdvisor?” Examining Credibility Perceptions and Online Travelers’ Attitude Toward Using User-Generated Content, Journal of Travel Research, 52(4), pp. 437–452. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287512475217.
    6. Bandara, D. (2020) ‘Impact of Social Media Advertising on Consumer Buying Behavior: With Special Reference to Fast Fashion Industry’, in International Conference on Business and Information (ICBI) 2020, pp. 476–491. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3862941.
    7. Bellini-Leite, S.C. (2022) ‘Dual Process Theory: Embodied and Predictive; Symbolic and Classical’, Frontiers in Psychology, 13(March), pp. 1–11. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.805386.
    8. Brodsky, S. et al. (2009) ‘Credibility in the Courtroom: How Likeable Should an Expert Witness Be?’, The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 37, pp. 525–532.
    9. Brooks, G., Drenten, J. and Piskorski, M.J. (2021) ‘Influencer Celebrification: How Social Media Influencers Acquire Celebrity Capital’, Journal of Advertising, 50(5), pp. 528–547. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2021.1977737.
    10. Cacioppo, J.T. et al. (1986) ‘Central and Peripheral routes to Persuasion: An Individual Difference Perspective’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(5), pp. 1032–1043. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.51.5.1032.
    11. Chen, S. and Chaiken, S. (1999) ‘The heuristic-systematic model in its broader context.’, in Dual-process theories in social psychology. New York, NY, US: The Guilford Press, pp. 73–96.
    12. Cheung, M.Y. et al. (2009) ‘Credibility of Electronic Word-of-Mouth: Informational and Normative Determinants of Online Consumer Recommendations’, International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 13(4), pp. 9–38. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2753/JEC1086-4415130402.
    13. Chu, S.-C. and Kamal, S. (2008) ‘The Effect of Perceived Blogger Credibility and Argument Quality on Message Elaboration and Brand Attitudes’, Journal of Interactive Advertising, 8(2), pp. 26–37. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/15252019.2008.10722140.
    14. Cochran, W.G. (1977) Sampling Techniques. 3rd edn. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
    15. Confetto, M.G. et al. (2023) ‘Sustainability advocacy antecedents: how social media content influences sustainable behaviours among Generation Z’, Journal of Consumer Marketing, 40(6), pp. 758–774. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/JCM-11-2021-5038.
    16. Conlin, B. (2023) ‘10 Tech Trends That Will Influence Your Marketing Strategies’. Business News Daily. Available at: https://www.businessnewsdaily.com/8564-future-of-marketing.html.
    17. Cunningham, G., Fink, J. and Kenix, L. (2007) ‘Choosing an Endorser for a Women’s Sporting Event: The Interaction of Attractiveness and Expertise’, Sex Roles, 58, pp. 371–378. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-007-9340-z.
    18. Damilola Bejide, S. (2021) Consumer Behaviour Towards YouTube Ads (A Case Study of TalTech Students). Tallinn University of Technology.
    19. Dehghani, M. et al. (2016) ‘Evaluating the influence of YouTube advertising for attraction of young customers’, Computers in Human Behavior, 59, pp. 165–172. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.01.037.
    20. Dinh, H. and Doan, T.H. (2020) ‘The Impact of Senders’ Identity to the Acceptance of Electronic Word-of-Mouth of Consumers in Vietnam’, Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 7, pp. 213–219. https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2020.vol7.no2.213.
    21. Djafarova, E. and BA, L.G. (2023) ‘Exploring the Perceived Online Review Credibility and Management Response Influence on Purchase Intention’, Journal of Information Technology Management, 15(2), pp. 92–115.
    22. Erwin, Saununu, S.J. and Rukmana, A.Y. (2023) ‘The Influence of Social Media Influencers on Generation Z Consumer Behavior in Indonesia’, West Science Interdisciplinary Studies, 1(10), pp. 1028–1038. Available at: https://doi.org/10.58812/wsis.v1i10.317.
    23. Febriane, R., Wibowo, W. and Agrippina, Y.R. (2023). The Influences of Perceived Credibility and Consumer Attitude Towards Purchase Intention of Some by Mi’s YouTube User-Generated Content. Atlantis Press International BV. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2991/978-94-6463-076-3_24.
    24. Filieri, R., Acikgoz, F. and Du, H. (2023) ‘Electronic word-of-mouth from video bloggers: The role of content quality and source homophily across hedonic and utilitarian products’, Journal of Business Research, 160, p. 113774. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.113774.
    25. Gass, R.H. (2015) ‘Social Influence, Sociology of’, in J.D.B.T.-I.E. of the S.& B.S. (Second E. Wright (ed.) International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. 2nd edn. Oxford: Elsevier, pp. 348–354. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.32074-8.
    26. Gass, R.H. and Seiter, J.S. (2011) ‘Credibility’, in & L. Bowers. K, Zalesky. J (ed.) Persuasion, Social Influence, and Compliance Gaining. 4th edn. Boston: Allyn & Bacon, pp. 72–90.
    27. Grigaliunaite, V. and Pileliene, L. (2015) ‘Determination of the Impact of Spokesperson on Advertising Effectiveness’, International Journal of Management, Accounting and Economics, 2, pp. 810–822.
    28. H.A. Smink (2013) Combining Source Trustworthiness with Message Credibility. Are You Being Persuaded?, University of Twente.
    29. Hair, J.F. et al. (2019) ‘When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM’, European Business Review. Emerald Group Publishing Ltd., pp. 2–24. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203.
    30. Hair, J.F. et al. (2021) ‘Evaluation of Reflective Measurement Models’, in, pp. 75–90. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-80519-7_4.
    31. Hooper, D., Coughlan, J. and Mullen, M.R. (2008) ‘Structural Equation Modelling: Guidelines for Determining Model Fit’, Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6(1), pp. 53–60. Available at: www.ejbrm.com.
    32. Hovland, C.I., Janis, I.L. and Kelley, H.H. (1953). Communication and persuasion : Psychological studies of opinion change, Yale University Press. New Haven SE -: Yale University Press. Available at: https://doi.org/LK - https://worldcat.org/title/187639.
    33. Hu, L. and Bentler, P.M. (1999) ‘Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives’, Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), pp. 1–55. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118.
    34. Hung, K. (2020) ‘Celebrity and Influencer in a Fan Economy: Unfolding the Fans’ Roles in Enhancing Endorsement Effects’, in R.A. Dunn (ed.) Multidisciplinary Perspectives on Media Fandom. PA: IGI Global, pp. 323–340. Available at: https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-3323-9.ch018.
    35. Huwaida, L.A. et al. (2024) ‘Generation Z and Indonesian Social Commerce: Unraveling key drivers of their shopping decisions’, Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 10(2), p. 100256. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joitmc.2024.100256.
    36. Idris, I. et al. (2020) ‘The impacts of social media advertisement on millennials’ consumption’, Test Engineering and Management, 82(January), pp. 5537–5544.
    37. Ismagilova, E. et al. (2020) ‘The effect of characteristics of source credibility on consumer behaviour: A meta-analysis’, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 53, p. 101736. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.01.005.
    38. Jaso, E. (2011). The Dimensions of Source Credibility and Salesperson Persuasion. California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo.
    39. Kaplan, A.M. and Haenlein, M. (2010) ‘Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of Social Media', Business Horizons, 53(1), pp. 59–68. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2009.09.003.
    40. Kapoor, K.K. et al. (2018) ‘Advances in Social Media Research: Past, Present and Future’, Information Systems Frontiers, 20(3), pp. 531–558. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-017-9810-y.
    41. Kim, J.H. and Song, H. (2020) ‘The influence of perceived credibility on purchase intention via competence and authenticity’, International Journal of Hospitality Management, 90(71750110541), p. 102617. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2020.102617.
    42. Kim, S.-E. and Arnett, K. (2012) ‘Exploring satisfaction with the portal’s “Cs”: Assessing US and Korean preferences’, Internet Research, 22(1), pp. 75–97. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/10662241211199979.
    43. Kim, S.B. and Kim, D.Y. (2014) ‘The Effects of Message Framing and Source Credibility on Green Messages in Hotels’, Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 55(1), pp. 64–75. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/1938965513503400.
    44. Kirchherr, J. and Charles, K. (2018) ‘Enhancing the sample diversity of snowball samples: Recommendations from a research project on anti-dam movements in Southeast Asia’, PLoS ONE, 13(8), pp. 1–17. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0201710.
    45. Kline, R.B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling, 4th ed., Guilford Press. Available at: https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2015-56948-000 (Accessed: 25 September 2023).
    46. Lafferty, B.A., Goldsmith, R.E. and Newell, S.J. (2002) ‘The dual credibility model: the influence of corporate and endorser credibility on attitudes and purchase intentions’, Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 10(3), pp. 1–12. Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41304270. https://doi.org/10.1080/10696679.2002.11501916.
    47. Larasati, A. and Yasa, N.N.K. (2018) ‘The Effects of Argument Quality and Sources Credibility on Ewom Credibility and Online Reviews Adoption’, International Journal of Management and Commerce Innovations, 5(2), pp. 892–898.
    48. Le, T.D., Dobele, A. and Robinson, L. (2018) ‘WOM source characteristics and message quality: the receiver perspective’, Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 36. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/MIP-10-2017-0249.
    49. Lee, K. (2018) The influence of beauty-related YouTube content on consumers ’ purchase intention, Master Theses. University of Tennessee, Knoxville. Available at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes/5151.
    50. Li, R. and Suh, A. (2015) ‘Factors Influencing Information credibility on Social Media Platforms: Evidence from Facebook Pages’, Procedia Computer Science, 72, pp. 314–328. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2015.12.146.
    51. Li, Y.-M., Lee, Y.-L. and Lien, N.-J. (2012) ‘Online Social Advertising via Influential Endorsers’, International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 16(3), pp. 119–153. Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/23106405. https://doi.org/10.2753/JEC1086-4415160305.
    52. Lim, X.J. et al. (2017) ‘The Impact of Social Media Influencers on Purchase Intention and the Mediation Effect of Customer Attitude’, Asian Journal of Business Research, 7(2), pp. 19–36. Available at: https://doi.org/10.14707/ajbr.170035.
    53. Lim, Y. and Van Der Heide, B. (2015) ‘Evaluating the Wisdom of Strangers: The Perceived Credibility of Online Consumer Reviews on Yelp’, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 20(1), pp. 67–82. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12093.
    54. Lin, T.C., Hwang, L.L. and Lai, Y.J. (2017) ‘Effects of argument quality, source credibility and self-reported diabetes knowledge on message attitudes: an experiment using diabetes related messages’, Health Information and Libraries Journal, 34(3), pp. 225–235. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/hir.12181.
    55. 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, 19(1), pp. 58–73. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/15252019.2018.1533501.
    56. Maddux, J.E. and Rogers, R.W. (1980) ‘Effects of source expertness, physical attractiveness, and supporting arguments on persuasion: A case of brains over beauty.’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(2), pp. 235–244. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.39.2.235.
    57. McAdams, D.P. and Powers, J. (1981) ‘Themes of intimacy in behavior and thought.’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40(3), pp. 573–587. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.40.3.573.
    58. McCormick, K. (2016) ‘Celebrity endorsements: Influence of a product-endorser match on Millennials attitudes and purchase intentions’, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 32, pp. 39–45. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2016.05.012.
    59. Mccroskey, J., Richmond, V. and Daly, J. (1975) ‘The Development of a Measure of Perceived Homophily’, Human Communication Research, 1(4), pp. 323–332. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1975.tb00281.x.
    60. McGuire, W.J. (1985) ‘Attitudes and Attitude Change’, in G. Lindzey and E. Aronson (eds) Handbook of Social Psychology. 3rd edn. Random House, New York, pp. 233–346.
    61. McMillan, S.J. and Hwang, J.S. (2002) ‘Measures of perceived interactivity: An exploration of the role of direction of communication, user control, and time in shaping perceptions of interactivity’, Journal of Advertising, 31(3), pp. 29–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2002.10673674.
    62. Metzger, M.J. and Flanagin, A.J. (2013) ‘Credibility and trust of information in online environments: The use of cognitive heuristics’, Journal of Pragmatics, 59, pp. 210–220. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2013.07.012.
    63. Moussaid, M. et al. (2013) ‘Social Influence and the Collective Dynamics of Opinion Formation’, PLOS ONE, 8(11), p. e78433. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0078433.
    64. Neal, T.M.S. et al. (2012) ‘Warmth and competence on the witness stand: implications for the credibility of male and female expert witnesses.’, The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 40(4), pp. 488–497.
    65. Ngo, T.T.A. et al. (2024) ‘The impact of eWOM information in social media on the online purchase intention of Generation Z’, Cogent Business and Management, 11(1), pp. 1–20. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2024.2316933.
    66. Nugroho, A. and Wang, W.-T. (2023) ‘Credibility of YouTube product reviews and customers’ product return intention: a product fit uncertainty perspective’, Information Technology & People, (ahead-of-print). Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/ITP-11-2021-0838.
    67. Ohanian, R. (1990) ‘Construction and Validation of a Scale to Measure Celebrity Endorsers’ Perceived Expertise, Trustworthiness, and Attractiveness’, Journal of Advertising, 19(3), pp. 39–52. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.1990.10673191.
    68. Pagani, M. and Mirabello, A. (2011) ‘The influence of personal and social-interactive engagement in social TV web sites’, International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 16(2), pp. 41–67. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2753/JEC1086-4415160203.
    69. Park, N., Jin, B. and Jin, S.-A. (2011) ‘Effects of self-disclosure on relational intimacy in Facebook’, Computers in Human Behavior, 27(5), pp. 1974–1983. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.05.004.
    70. Phang, C.W., Zhang, C. and Sutanto, J. (2013) ‘The influence of user interaction and participation in social media on the consumption intention of niche products’, Information & Management, 50(8), pp. 661–672. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2013.07.001.
    71. Pikas, B. and Sorrentino, G. (2014) ‘The Effectiveness of Online Advertising: Consumer’s Perceptions of Ads on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube’, The Journal of Applied Business and Economics, 16(4), pp. 70–81.
    72. Pitanatri, P.D.S. et al. (2024) ‘Winning Over the Gen Z: Empirical Insights Into Social Media Behaviour During Travel’, International Journal of Professional Business Review, 9(8), pp. 1–18. Available at: https://doi.org/10.26668/businessreview/2024.v9i8.4884.
    73. Racherla, P., Mandviwalla, M. and Connolly, D. (2012) ‘Factors affecting consumers’ trust in online product reviews’, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 11(2), pp. 94–104. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.385.
    74. Rebelo, M. (2017) How influencers’credibility on Instagram is perceived by consumers and its impact on purchase intention. Universidade Catolica Portuguesa. Available at: https://repositorio.ucp.pt/bitstream/10400.14/23360/1/TESE_FINAL PDFA.pdf.
    75. Reysen, S. (2005) ‘Construction of a New Scale: The Reysen Likability Scale’, Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 33(2), pp. 201–208. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2005.33.2.201.
    76. Rosara and Luthfia, A. (2020) ‘Factors Influencing Consumer’s Purchase Intention on Beauty Products in YouTube’, Journal of Asian Finance, Economics, and Business, 18(6), pp. 37–46.
    77. Rupera, P. (2023) ‘Gen Z watches 450 reels in three hrs daily’, The Times of India, 24 May. Available at: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/vadodara/gen-z-watches-450-reels-in-three-hrs-daily/articleshow/100459311.cms?from=mdr.
    78. Saleh, M.Z. and Iskandar, Y. (2025) ‘The Influence of Social Media Marketing, Influencer Endorsement, and Content Personalisation on Buying Intention among Generation Z Consumers in Indonesia’, Indonesian Research Journal on Education, 5(4), pp. 960–969.
    79. Schouten, A.P., Janssen, L. and Verspaget, M. (2020) ‘Celebrity vs. Influencer endorsements in advertising: the role of identification, credibility, and Product-Endorser fit’, International Journal of Advertising, 39(2), pp. 258–281. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/02650487.2019.1634898.
    80. Shareef, M.A. et al. (2019) ‘Social media marketing: Comparative effect of advertisement sources’, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 46, pp. 58–69. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2017.11.001.
    81. Silaban, P.H. et al. (2022) ‘How Travel Vlogs on YouTube Influence Consumer Behavior: A Use and Gratification Perspective and Customer Engagement’, Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies. Edited by Z. Yan, 2022, pp. 1–16. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/4432977.
    82. Sirola, A. et al. (2021) ‘Online identities and social influence in social media gambling exposure: A four-country study on young people’, Telematics and Informatics, 60, pp. 1–15. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2021.101582.
    83. Smith, A.N., Fischer, E. and Yongjian, C. (2012) ‘How Does Brand-related User-generated Content Differ across YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter?’, Journal of Interactive Marketing, 26(2), pp. 102–113. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2012.01.002.
    84. Sokolova, K. and Kefi, H. (2020) ‘Instagram and YouTube bloggers promote it, why should I buy? How credibility and parasocial interaction influence purchase intentions’, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 53, pp. 1–9. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.01.011.
    85. Steiger, J.H. (2007) ‘Understanding the limitations of global fit assessment in structural equation modeling’, Personality and Individual Differences, 42(5), pp. 893–898. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.09.017.
    86. Strolovitch, D.Z. (2006) ‘Do Interest Groups Represent the Disadvantaged? Advocacy at the Intersections of Race, Class, and Gender’, The Journal of Politics, 68(4), pp. 894–910. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2508.2006.00478.x.
    87. Teng, S., Khong, K.W. and Goh, W.W. (2015) ‘Persuasive Communication: A Study of Major Attitude-Behaviour Theories in a Social Media Context’, Journal of Internet Commerce, 14(1), pp. 42–64. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/15332861.2015.1006515.
    88. Tien, D.H., Amaya Rivas, A.A. and Liao, Y.-K. (2019) ‘Examining the influence of customer-to-customer electronic word-of-mouth on purchase intention in social networking sites’, Asia Pacific Management Review, 24(3), pp. 238–249. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmrv.2018.06.003.
    89. Trumbo, C.W. (1999) ‘Heuristic-systematic information processing and risk judgment’, Risk Analysis, 19(3), pp. 391–400. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007092410720.
    90. Uparimart, C. (2018) ‘Measuring the Influence of YouTube Advertising in Creating Attractiveness to Consumer in Bangkok, Thailand | International Research E-Journal on Business and Economics’, International Research E-Journal on Business and Economics, 4(1), pp. 19–38. Available at: http://www.assumptionjournal.au.edu/index.php/aumitjournal/article/view/4263.
    91. Vi, T. Le, Alang, T. and Tri Tran, Q. (2021) ‘How YouTube Influencers Impact Customers’ Purchase Intention: An Empirical Study of Cosmetic Brands in Vietnam’, The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 8(9), pp. 101–111.
    92. Vo Minh, S., Nguyen Huong, G. and Dang Nguyen Ha, G. (2022) ‘The role of social brand engagement on brand equity and purchase intention for fashion brands’, Cogent Business & Management, 9(1), p. 2143308. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2022.2143308.
    93. Wang, A. (2005) ‘Integrating and Comparing Others’ Opinions’, Journal of Website Promotion, 1(1), pp. 105–129. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1300/J238v01n01_09.
    94. Wu, J.J. and Chang, Y.S. (2005) ‘Towards understanding members’ interactivity, trust, and flow in online travel community’, Industrial Management and Data Systems, 105(7), pp. 937–954. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/02635570510616120.
    95. Xiao, M., Wang, R. and Chan-Olmsted, S. (2018) ‘Factors affecting YouTube influencer marketing credibility: a heuristic-systematic model’, Journal of Media Business Studies, 15(3), pp. 188–213. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/16522354.2018.1501146.
    96. Yang, C., Hsu, Y.-C. and Tan, S. (2010) ‘Predicting the Determinants of Users’ Intentions for Using YouTube to Share Video: Moderating Gender Effects’, Cyberpsychology, behavior and social networking, 13(2), pp. 141–152. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2009.0105.
    97. Younan, M. and Martire, K.A. (2021) ‘Likeability and Expert Persuasion: Dislikeability Reduces the Perceived Persuasiveness of Expert Evidence’, Frontiers in Psychology, 12(December), pp. 1–16. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.785677.
    98. Zha, X. et al. (2018) ‘Exploring the effect of social media information quality, source credibility and reputation on informational fit-to-task: Moderating role of focused immersion’, Computers in Human Behavior, 79, pp. 227–237. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.10.038.

  • Downloads

  • How to Cite

    P, V. ., Hawaldar, I. T. ., Soni, A. ., Khan, R. K., & Pinto, P. . (2025). Influencer Traits and Information Credibility in Driving Gen Z Women’s Purchase Intentions. International Journal of Accounting and Economics Studies, 12(5), 1207-1216. https://doi.org/10.14419/vh2af397