The emergent body of scholarship on social media influencers (SMIs) highlights their potential to yield positive brand advertising outcomes. However, the literature is undermined by the lack of clarity regarding how SMIs conceptually compare to celebrity endorsers and their impact on advertising outcomes. The study aims to clarify these differences via a meta-analysis of 39 experimental studies (total sample size = 13,766) of SMI effects from 2010 through March 2024. Findings reveal that SMIs are more effective than brand-only advertising and that there is no significant difference between SMIs and celebrity endorsers. Taking these factors into consideration, the effects are moderated by perceived credibility and influencer types, indicating that mega-influencers are relatively more persuasive, while nano-influencers are less persuasive compared to celebrities, respectively. Findings imply that there is a “sweet spot” wherein SMIs are most effective and distinct from celebrity endorsers, providing support for more nuanced conceptualizations of SMIs and calling for future research to explore additional enhancing and attenuating factors.

中文翻译：

---

有影响力的人有影响力吗？名人和社交媒体影响者效应的元分析比较


关于社交媒体影响者（SMI）的新兴学术机构强调了他们产生积极品牌广告效果的潜力。然而，由于对 SMI 在概念上如何与名人代言人进行比较及其对广告效果的影响缺乏明确性，文献受到了损害。该研究旨在通过对 2010 年至 2024 年 3 月 SMI 效果的 39 项实验研究（总样本量 = 13,766）进行荟萃分析来澄清这些差异。研究结果表明，SMI 比纯品牌广告更有效，并且没有显着影响。 SMI 和名人代言人之间的区别。考虑到这些因素，影响力受到感知可信度和影响者类型的调节，表明与名人相比，超级影响者相对更具说服力，而纳米影响者的说服力较差。研究结果表明，存在一个“最佳点”，其中 SMI 最有效且与名人代言人不同，为更细致的 SMI 概念化提供支持，并呼吁未来的研究探索其他增强和减弱因素。