Para-Social Interaction and Trust in Live-Streaming Sellers

Thoai Diem Phuong Mai, Anh Tho To, Thi Hong Minh Trinh, Thi Thoa Nguyen, Thi Thanh Trang Le


Live streaming is one of the modern methods that allows sellers to create, transmit, or broadcast some content on the internet in real-time, and it has been used by many small individual merchants. Understanding how live streaming contributes to online consumption is becoming increasingly important in social commerce as the live-streaming industry has grown more and more popular. However, the number of studies on live streaming is still quite limited in Vietnam. Therefore, this research will look at the mechanism that enables live streaming to boost customer trust in streamers. Using PLS-SEM on a sample of 360 respondents who viewed selling live streams on social network sites in Vietnam, we discovered that other members' endorsement, value similarity, hedonic value, and utilitarian value contribute to good para-social interaction. Next, utilitarian and hedonic values, streamer product expertise, and para-social interaction all positively affect trust in the streamers. The findings could help live-streaming sellers better understand their social interactions with viewers, resulting in increased customer trust.


Doi: 10.28991/ESJ-2023-07-03-06

Full Text: PDF


Hedonic; Utilitarian; Live-Streaming; Trust; Para-Social Interaction; Value Similarity.


Sun, Y., Shao, X., Li, X., Guo, Y., & Nie, K. (2019). How live streaming influences purchase intentions in social commerce: An IT affordance perspective. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 37, 100886. doi:10.1016/j.elerap.2019.100886.

Hu, M., Zhang, M., & Wang, Y. (2017). Why do audiences choose to keep watching on live video streaming platforms? An explanation of dual identification framework. Computers in Human Behavior, 75, 594–606. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2017.06.006.

Lu, Z., Xia, H., Heo, S., & Wigdor, D. (2018). You Watch, You Give, and You Engage. Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. doi:10.1145/3173574.3174040.

Cai, J., & Wohn, D. Y. (2019). Live Streaming Commerce: Uses and Gratifications Approach to Understanding Consumers’ Motivations. Proceedings of the 52nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. doi:10.24251/hicss.2019.307.

Vietnam Investment Review. (2021). Livestream commerce booms. Vietnam Investment Review, Ministry of Planning and Investment, Hanoi, Vietnam. Available online: (accessed on April 2023).

Hajli, N. (2015). Social commerce constructs and consumer’s intention to buy. International Journal of Information Management, 35(2), 183–191. doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2014.12.005.

Wongkitrungrueng, A., & Assarut, N. (2020). The role of live streaming in building consumer trust and engagement with social commerce sellers. Journal of Business Research, 117, 543–556. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.08.032.

Kim, S., & Park, H. (2013). Effects of various characteristics of social commerce (s-commerce) on consumers’ trust and trust performance. International Journal of Information Management, 33(2), 318–332. doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2012.11.006.

Kim, Y., & Peterson, R. A. (2017). A Meta-analysis of Online Trust Relationships in E-commerce. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 38, 44–54. doi:10.1016/j.intmar.2017.01.001.

Horton, D., & Richard Wohl, R. (1956). Mass Communication and Para-Social Interaction. Psychiatry, 19(3), 215–229. doi:10.1080/00332747.1956.11023049.

Stephens, D. L., Hill, R. P., & Bergman, K. (1996). Enhancing the consumer-product relationship: Lessons from the QVC home shopping channel. Journal of Business Research, 37(3), 193–200. doi:10.1016/S0148-2963(96)00069-0.

Stasi, D. (1988). Interactive electronic home shopping: an update on the telaction approach. NCTA Technical Papers, National Cable & Telecommunications Association, Washington, United States.

Labrecque, L. I. (2014). Fostering consumer-brand relationships in social media environments: The role of parasocial interaction. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 28(2), 134–148. doi:10.1016/j.intmar.2013.12.003.

Ballantine, P. W., & Martin, B. A. (2005). Forming parasocial relationships in online communities. ACR North American Advances in Consumer Research Volume 32, (eds. Geeta Menon and Akshay R. Rao, Duluth, MN): Association for Consumer Research, 197-201.

Powell, L., Richmond, V. P., & Williams, G. C. (2011). Social Networking and Political Campaigns: Perceptions of Candidates as Interpersonal Constructs. North American Journal of Psychology, 13(2), 331-342.

Thorson, K. S., & Rodgers, S. (2006). Relationships between Blogs as EWOM and Interactivity, Perceived Interactivity, and Parasocial Interaction. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 6(2), 5–44. doi:10.1080/15252019.2006.10722117.

French, M., & Bazarova, N. N. (2017). Is Anybody Out There? Understanding Masspersonal Communication Through Expectations for Response Across Social Media Platforms. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 22(6), 303–319. doi:10.1111/jcc4.12197.

Rogers, E. M., & Bhowmik, D. K. (1970). Homophily-heterophily: Relational concepts for communication research. Public Opinion Quarterly, 34(4), 523–538. doi:10.1086/267838.

Morgan, R. M., & Hunt, S. D. (1994). The Commitment-Trust Theory of Relationship Marketing. Journal of Marketing, 58(3), 20. doi:10.2307/1252308.

Johnson, D., & Grayson, K. (2005). Cognitive and affective trust in service relationships. Journal of Business Research, 58(4), 500–507. doi:10.1016/S0148-2963(03)00140-1.

Martin, A., Jacob, C., & Guéguen, N. (2013). Similarity facilitates relationships on social networks: A field experiment on Facebook. Psychological Reports, 113(1), 1229–1232. doi:10.2466/21.07.PR0.113x15z8.

Guéguen, N., Martin, A., & Meineri, S. (2011). Mimicry and helping behavior: An evaluation of mimicry on explicit helping request. Journal of Social Psychology, 151(1), 1–4. doi:10.1080/00224540903366701.

Prisbell, M., & Andersen, J. F. (1980). The importance of perceived homophily, level of uncertainty, feeling good, safety, and self-disclosure in interpersonal relationships. Communication Quarterly, 28(3), 22–33. doi:10.1080/01463378009369372.

Chen, C. C., & Lin, Y. C. (2018). What drives live-stream usage intention? The perspectives of flow, entertainment, social interaction, and endorsement. Telematics and Informatics, 35(1), 293–303. doi:10.1016/j.tele.2017.12.003.

Cheng, X., Gu, Y., & Shen, J. (2019). An integrated view of particularized trust in social commerce: An empirical investigation. International Journal of Information Management, 45, 1–12. doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2018.10.014.

Hsu, M. H., Chuang, L. W., & Hsu, C. S. (2014). Understanding online shopping intention: The roles of four types of trust and their antecedents. Internet Research, 24(3), 332–352. doi:10.1108/IntR-01-2013-0007.

Chen, S. C., & Dhillon, G. S. (2003). Interpreting dimensions of consumer trust in e-commerce. Information technology and management, 4, 303-318. doi:10.1023/A:1022962631249.

Boyle, D. (2003). Authenticity: Brands, fakes, spin and the lust for real life. Harper Collins, New York, United States.

Gilmore, J. H., & Pine, B. J. (2008). Authenticity: what consumers really want? Choice Reviews Online, 45(11), 45-6277-45–6277. doi:10.5860/choice.45-6277.

Lee, H. H., Kim, J., & Fiore, A. M. (2010). Affective and cognitive online shopping experience: Effects of image interactivity technology and experimenting with appearance. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 28(2), 140–154. doi:10.1177/0887302X09341586.

Park, J., Stoel, L., & Lennon, S. J. (2008). Cognitive, affective and conative responses to visual simulation: the effects of rotation in online product presentation. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 7(1), 72–87. doi:10.1002/cb.237.

Zeithaml, V. A. (2000). Service quality, profitability, and the economic worth of customers: What we know and what we need to learn. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28(1), 67–85. doi:10.1177/0092070300281007.

van Noort, G., Voorveld, H. A. M., & van Reijmersdal, E. A. (2012). Interactivity in Brand Web Sites: Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Responses Explained by Consumers’ Online Flow Experience. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 26(4), 223–234. doi:10.1016/j.intmar.2011.11.002.

Llach, J., Marimon, F., Alonso-Almeida, M. del M., & Bernardo, M. (2013). Determinants of online booking loyalties for the purchasing of airline tickets. Tourism Management, 35, 23–31. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2012.05.006.

Arnold, M. J., & Reynolds, K. E. (2003). Hedonic shopping motivations. Journal of Retailing, 79(2), 77–95. doi:10.1016/S0022-4359(03)00007-1.

Pöyry, E., Parvinen, P., & Malmivaara, T. (2013). Can we get from liking to buying? Behavioral differences in hedonic and utilitarian Facebook usage. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 12(4), 224–235. doi:10.1016/j.elerap.2013.01.003.

Chen, C.-D., Zhao, Q., & Wang, J.-L. (2020). How live streaming increases product sales: role of trust transfer and elaboration likelihood model. Behaviour & Information Technology, 41(3), 558–573. doi:10.1080/0144929x.2020.1827457.

Kaiser, S., & Müller-Seitz, G. (2008). Leveraging lead user knowledge in software development - The case of weblog technology. Industry and Innovation, 15(2), 199–221. doi:10.1080/13662710801954542.

Bart, Y., Shankar, V., Sultan, F., & Urban, G. L. (2005). Are the drivers and role of online trust the same for all web sites and consumers? A large-scale exploratory empirical study. Journal of Marketing, 69(4), 133–152. doi:10.1509/jmkg.2005.69.4.133.

Yahia, I. Ben, Al-Neama, N., & Kerbache, L. (2018). Investigating the drivers for social commerce in social media platforms: Importance of trust, social support and the platform perceived usage. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 41, 11–19. doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2017.10.021.

Friedländer, M. B. (2017). Streamer motives and user-generated content on social live-streaming services. Journal of Information Science Theory and Practice, 5(1), 65–84. doi:10.1633/JISTaP.2017.5.1.5.

Djafarova, E., & Trofimenko, O. (2018). ‘Instafamous’ – credibility and self-presentation of micro-celebrities on social media. Information, Communication & Society, 22(10), 1432–1446. doi:10.1080/1369118x.2018.1438491.

Leguina, A. (2015). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 38(2), 220–221. doi:10.1080/1743727x.2015.1005806.

Park, H. J., & Lin, L. M. (2020). The effects of match-ups on the consumer attitudes toward internet celebrities and their live streaming contents in the context of product endorsement. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 52, 101934. doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.101934.

Guo, Y., Zhang, K., & Wang, C. (2022). Way to success: Understanding top streamer’s popularity and influence from the perspective of source characteristics. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 64, 102786. doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102786.

Suh, K. S., & Chang, S. (2006). User interfaces and consumer perceptions of online stores: The role of telepresence. Behaviour and Information Technology, 25(2), 99–113. doi:10.1080/01449290500330398.

Wan, A., & Wu, L. (2020). Understanding the Negative Consequences of Watching Social Live Streaming Among Chinese Viewers. International Journal of Communication, 14, 5311–5330.

Liang, T. P., Wu, S. P. J., & Huang, C. chi. (2019). Why funders invest in crowdfunding projects: Role of trust from the dual-process perspective. Information and Management, 56(1), 70–84. doi:10.1016/

Lim, K. H., Sia, C. L., Lee, M. K. O., & Benbasat, I. (2006). Do I trust you online, and if so, will I buy? An empirical study of two trust-building strategies. Journal of Management Information Systems, 23(2), 233–266. doi:10.2753/MIS0742-1222230210.

Cohen, J. (2013). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Routledge, New York, United States. doi:10.4324/9780203771587.

Bründl, S., Matt, C., & Hess, T. (2017). Consumer use of social live streaming services: The influence of co-experience and effectance on enjoyment. Proceedings of the 25th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), June 5-10, 2017, Guimarães, Portugal.

Full Text: PDF

DOI: 10.28991/ESJ-2023-07-03-06


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2023 Thoai Diem Phuong Mai, Anh Tho To, Thi Hong Minh Trinh, Thi Thoa Nguyen, Thi Thanh Trang Le