The Rise of the Deinfluencers: Perceived Similarity and Anticipated Emotions in Advocating Mindful Consumption on Social Media
Summary
This article presents a multi-study investigation into the growing phenomenon of “deinfluencers” — social media figures who discourage purchases and promote simpler, more sustainable consumption. Drawing on social cognitive theory, the authors test how perceived homophily (similarity) with deinfluencers triggers anticipated emotions (pride and guilt) that drive mindful consumption intentions, willingness to pay a premium for sustainable products, engagement with deinfluencer content and actual behaviour. Four empirical studies (including experiments, structural equation modelling and behavioural measures) support a pathway from perceived similarity to anticipated emotions to intentions and real-world action.
Key Points
- Deinfluencers differ from traditional influencers by discouraging purchases and promoting mindful, sustainable lifestyles.
- Consumers report greater attitudinal and value homophily with deinfluencers versus traditional influencers (Study 1).
- Perceived homophily activates anticipated pride and guilt, which mediate the effect on mindful consumption intentions (Study 2).
- Mindful consumption intentions predict willingness to pay a premium for sustainable offerings and intentions to engage with deinfluencer content (Study 3).
- Study 4 demonstrates that these intention pathways correspond to actual mindful consumption behaviour, reducing the intention–behaviour gap.
Content Summary
The paper develops a model grounded in social cognitive theory to explain how deinfluencers shape consumer choices. Across four studies the authors: (1) experimentally compare perceived similarity to traditional influencers, (2) use structural equation modelling to test the emotion-mediated paths, (3) link intentions to willingness-to-pay and engagement, and (4) validate the chain with observed consumption behaviour. The evidence suggests both pride (positive self-regulatory emotion) and guilt (self-conscious negative emotion) are important mechanisms. The research extends influencer marketing literature into anti-consumption and sustainability domains and supplies empirical evidence that deinfluencing can move people from intention to action.
Context and Relevance
Deinfluencing sits at the intersection of two big trends: backlash against excessive consumerism and the rise of values-driven social media influence (greenfluencing/deinfluencing). For marketers, sustainability teams and platform strategists, the findings matter because they show a credible route by which peerlike messengers can reduce overpurchase and increase willingness to pay for genuinely sustainable products. The study also highlights the emotional levers (pride, guilt) that campaigns can ethically tap to shift behaviour, and it addresses the intention–behaviour gap with behavioural evidence.
Why should I read this?
Short and blunt: if you work in marketing, sustainability, product or social strategy, this paper explains why people listen when someone says “don’t buy that” — and how that listening can actually change buying. It’s a tidy package of experiments and real behaviour evidence showing deinfluencers aren’t just a meme — they can move wallets and habits. Read it to save time and pick up practical levers (homophily + anticipated emotions) for campaigns or research.
Author style
Punchy — the authors cut straight to the point with a clear theoretical frame and stepwise empirical tests. If you care about behaviour change, brand purpose or influencer strategy, the detailed results are worth digging into: they’ve done the heavy lifting so you can apply the takeaways.
Source
Source: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/mar.70024?af=R
