Divulgación, credibilidad y vinculación parasocial ante contenido generado por inteligencia artificial (influencers virtuales y deepfakes): Una revisión sistemática rápida de sus efectos comunicativos y psicológicos en las audiencias
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.65415/js5jtv62Palabras clave:
influencers virtuales; deepfakes; divulgación; credibilidad de la fuente; interacción parasocial; bienestar psicológico; revisión sistemática; PRISMAResumen
La proliferación de personas sintéticas generadas por IA —influencers virtuales y deepfakes— genera efectos comunicativos (credibilidad, confianza, divulgación) y psicológicos (bienestar, autoestima, ansiedad) aún no integrados en una síntesis única. El objetivo de este estudio fue sintetizar la evidencia empírica sobre cómo la divulgación, la credibilidad de la fuente y la interacción parasocial ante contenido generado por IA se relacionan con efectos comunicativos y psicológicos en las audiencias. Se realizó una revisión sistemática rápida (rapid review) siguiendo PRISMA 2020, con búsquedas en Scopus, SciELO y Redalyc (2016-2026); tras cribar 553 registros únicos, 257 estudios resultaron potencialmente elegibles, y se evaluó a texto completo una muestra representativa (n=49), estratificada por diseño y eje temático, cuya calidad metodológica se evaluó con el MMAT (2018). De los 49 estudios evaluados, 46 se confirmaron como estudios primarios elegibles tras excluir un estudio teórico y dos actas de congreso que no cumplían el criterio de tipo de documento declarado; uno adicional no pudo verificarse por un error de documentación, por lo que la síntesis se basa en n=45 (76% cuantitativos, 16% cualitativos, 9% mixtos). Los hallazgos se organizan en tres ejes: (1) la divulgación reduce la confianza/antropomorfismo percibido, moderada por el tipo de persona sintética y el momento de divulgación; (2) la interacción parasocial ocurre por rutas afectivas más que cognitivas; y (3) hay evidencia de un "lado oscuro" psicológico —comparación social dañina, amenaza a la identidad humana y, en casos extremos, daño psicológico agudo por deepfakes sexualizados. Se concluye que la divulgación transparente es indispensable, aunque no suficiente, para proteger el bienestar psicológico, pues los mecanismos comunicativos que generan valor comercial suelen ser los mismos que generan riesgo psicológico.
Descargas
Referencias
Ameen, N., Cheah, J-H., Ali, F., El-Manstrly, D., & Kulyciute, R. (2024). Risk, trust, and the roles of human versus virtual influencers. Tourism Recreation Research.
Bang, J., & Han, S. (2025). “I like community more than Influencers”: Unraveling the influence of followers on parasocial interaction and attachment with virtual influencers. Computers in Human Behavior, 173, 108796. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2025.108796
Barari, M., Ross, M., & Azad Moghddam, H. (2025). Virtual influencers' anthropomorphism, consumer engagement and/or well-being. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 42(5), 673-688.
Bie, Y., Tang, J., Miao, M., Sun, W., & Jiang, Y. (2025). Beyond the shores of reality: the effect of virtual influencers on luxury perception and its downstream consequence. Psychology & Marketing, 42, 2369-2387.
Breves, P. L., & van Berlo, Z. M. C. (2025). Making and breaking parasocial relationships with human and virtual influencers: An experience sampling study. Media Psychology, 1-29. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2025.2558029
Byun, K. J., & Ahn, S. J. G. (2023). A systematic review of virtual influencers: Similarities and differences between human and virtual influencers in interactive advertising. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 23(4), 293-306.
Carrillo-Durán, M. V., García García, M., & Corzo Cortés, L. (2024). Influencers virtuales de apariencia humana como forma de comunicación online: el caso de Lil Miquela y Lu do Magalu en Instagram. Revista de Comunicación, 23(1), 119-140. https://doi.org/10.26441/RC23.1-2024-3453
Chen, H., Lou, C., Wang, Y., & Lee, Y. (2025). Social virtual influencer effectiveness: environmental factor and source trust. Journal of Interactive Advertising.
Cheng, L.-K., Toung, C.-L., & Ho, C. M. (2025). The danger of perfection: How consumer power diminishes brand attitudes toward flawless virtual influencers. International Journal of Advertising, 1-43. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650487.2025.2576961
Dalouh Ounia, R., Soriano Ayala, E., & Caballero Cala, V. (2025). Deepfakes and Digital Violence in Adolescent Couples: Perceptions, Risks, and Prevention Strategies. Pedagogika, 160(4), 74-93. https://doi.org/10.15823/p.2025.160.4
Deng, R., Ahmed, S., & Kang, H. (2026). Reconsidering deepfake priming: effects on belief and sharing across media platforms. Online Information Review.
Establés, M.-J., LLovet, C., & Gallego Gómez, C. (2025). Teléfonos móviles, socialización sexual y educación mediática: percepciones y retos en la protección digital de la infancia y la adolescencia. Revista de Comunicación, 24(1), 127-182.
Fajardo Rodríguez-Borlado, P., & Pérez-Curiel, C. (2024). Impacto de la inteligencia artificial en la moda: análisis de influencers digitales en las fashion weeks internacionales. Universitas-XXI, Revista de Ciencias Sociales y Humanas, 41, 75-99. https://doi.org/10.17163/uni.n41.2024.03
Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7(2), 117-140. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872675400700202
Forrai, M., & Balaban, D. C. (2026). Disclosures and literacy as determinants of AI-influencer recognition and well-being. Computers in Human Behavior.
Fowler, K., & Thomas, V. L. (2025). An investigation into the sexualization of human and virtual social media influencers. European Journal of Marketing, 59(5), 1318-1346.
Friestad, M., & Wright, P. (1994). The persuasion knowledge model: How people cope with persuasion attempts. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(1), 1-31. https://doi.org/10.1086/209380
Garritty, C., Gartlehner, G., Nussbaumer-Streit, B., King, V. J., Hamel, C., Kamel, C., Affengruber, L., & Stevens, A. (2021). Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Group offers evidence-informed guidance to conduct rapid reviews. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 130, 13-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.10.007
Gerlich, M. (2024). Societal perceptions and acceptance of virtual humans: trust and ethics across different contexts. Social Sciences, 13(10), 516.
Hong, Q. N., Fàbregues, S., Bartlett, G., Boardman, F., Cargo, M., Dagenais, P., Gagnon, M.-P., Griffiths, F., Nicolau, B., O'Cathain, A., Rousseau, M.-C., Vedel, I., & Pluye, P. (2018). The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) version 2018 for information professionals and researchers. Education for Information, 34(4), 285-291. https://doi.org/10.3233/EFI-180221
Horton, D., & Wohl, R. R. (1956). Mass communication and para-social interaction: Observations on intimacy at a distance. Psychiatry, 19(3), 215-229. https://doi.org/10.1080/00332747.1956.11023049
Huang, S., Huang, L., & Goh, D. H.-L. (2025). Third-person perception of deepfake harms: Comparing seniors and young adults. Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 62, 920-925. https://doi.org/10.1002/pra2.1314
Jha, S., Chaudhary, R., & Shukla, B. (2025). Trust dynamics of virtual influencers: exploring their influence on fashion purchase decisions. Innovative Marketing, 21(3), 226-236.
Kang, S., & Valadez, K. (2025). Deepfakes' cognitive, emotional, and behavioral impact: A systematic review and meta-analysis of individual responses. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 102(4), 958-992. https://doi.org/10.1177/10776990251357294
Kim, D., & Han, Y. (2026). The deepfake doctor problem: why labeling synthetic experts is necessary but insufficient for protecting consumer trust. Frontiers in Communication, 11, Article 1856259. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2026.1856259
Kim, E. A., Shoenberger, H., Kim, D., Thorson, E., & Zihang, E. (2025). Novelty vs. trust in virtual influencers: exploring the effectiveness of human-like virtual influencers and anime-like virtual influencers. International Journal of Advertising, 44(3), 453-483. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650487.2024.2386916
Kumar, V., Kumar, S., Chatterjee, S., Chaudhuri, R., & Gupta, S. (2026). Decoding deepfake perceptions: Trustworthiness, importance and behavioral intention. Information Systems Frontiers. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-026-10765-9
Laszkiewicz, A., & Kalińska-Kuła, M. (2023). Virtual influencers as an emerging marketing theory: a systematic literature review. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 47(6), 2479-2494.
Lee, H., Shin, M., Yang, J., & Chock, T. M. (2025). Virtual influencers vs. human influencers in the context of influencer marketing: The moderating role of machine heuristic on perceived authenticity of influencers. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 41(10), 6029-6046. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2024.2374100
Lee, J., & John, K. K. (2025). Detecting deepfakes through emotion?: Facial expression and emotional contagion as dual indicators of deepfake credibility. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 39(6), e70141. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.70141
Levkov, N., Santa, M., & Kitanovikj, B. (2026). Exploring opportunities and challenges in promoting interethnic tolerance as a social good through virtual influencers. Global Knowledge, Memory and Communication, 75(7-8), 2546-2572. https://doi.org/10.1108/GKMC-01-2024-0033
Li, S., Ham, J., & Eastin, M. S. (2024). Social media users' affective, attitudinal, and behavioral responses to virtual human emotions. Telematics and Informatics, 87, 102084.
Lim, R. E., & Lee, S. Y. (2023). “You are a virtual influencer!”: Understanding the impact of origin disclosure and emotional narratives on parasocial relationships and virtual influencer credibility. Computers in Human Behavior, 148, 107897. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2023.107897
Liu, F., & Lee, Y. (2024). Virtually authentic: Examining the match-up hypothesis between human vs. virtual influencers and product types (“Pixels vs. people”). Journal of Product & Brand Management, 33(2), 287.
Liu, F., & Wang, R. (2025). Fostering parasocial relationships with virtual influencers in the uncanny valley: Anthropomorphism, autonomy, and a multigroup comparison. Journal of Business Research, 186, 115024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2024.115024
Liu, R., Li, X., & Liu, S. (2026). How emotional expression in human-like virtual influencers drives user engagement: Empathy model and its antecedents. Frontiers in Psychology, 16, 1544037. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1544037
Lu, Z., & Ali, K. S. (2026). Virtual influencer marketing and consumers' well-being: Understanding how social power works. Acta Psychologica, 268, 107251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2026.107251
Luo, L., & Kim, W. (2024). How virtual influencers' identities are shaped on Chinese social media: a case study of Ling. Global Media and China, 9(3), 325-343.
Mouritzen, S. L. T., Pedersen, S., & Jacobsen, L. F. (2026). "Like a human – just digital": Adolescents' and parents' perceptions of virtual influencer marketing. European Journal of Marketing, 60(4), 891-931. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-05-2024-0351
Muniz, F., Stewart, K., & Magalhães, L. (2024). Are they humans or are they robots? The effect of virtual influencer disclosure on brand trust. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 23(3), 1234-1250.
Nasr, L. I., Mousavi, S., & Michaelidou, N. (2025). Self-comparing with virtual influencers: effects on followers' wellbeing. Psychology & Marketing, 42(3), 780-798. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.22151
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., ... Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Peemanee, J., Udomlarp, T., Weber, P., & Weerarathna, R. (2026). The Role of Virtual and Human Influencer Characteristics in Shaping Gen Z Purchases on TikTok: Hybrid SEM-ANN Approach. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 21(5), 150. https://doi.org/10.3390/jtaer21050150
Sattar, A. A., Ul Haq, J., Saleem, A., & Ahmad, W. (2025). Shyness vs confidence: the effect of virtual influencer personalities on social media users' well-being and addiction. Psychology & Marketing, 42(4), 1088-1109.
Saumer, M., Neureiter, A., Varga, É. M., Gataric, V., Liu, C. Y., & Matthes, J. (2025). Artificial presence, real-life influence? Effects of CGI influencers on young adults' health behavior intentions. Cyberpsychology, 19(2).
Shepherd, L., Sopina, D., Dawson, J., Brown, G., & Paterson, J. (2026). Fake content, harmful emotions: The influence of being a victim-survivor of sexualised deepfakes on women's aversive emotions and desire for legal action. Sex Roles, 92, Article 46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-026-01677-8
Sorosrungruang, T., Ameen, N., & Hackley, C. (2024). How real is real enough? Unveiling the diverse power of generative AI-enabled virtual influencers and the dynamics of human responses. Psychology & Marketing, 41, 3124-3143.
Stein, J.-P., Breves, P. L., & Anders, N. (2024). Parasocial interactions with real and virtual influencers: The role of perceived similarity and human-likeness. New Media & Society, 26(6), 3433-3453. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448221102900
Su, L., Duan, X., & Pan, X. (2026). From anthropomorphism to prosocial intention: a PLS-SEM and fsQCA study of virtual influencers. Frontiers in Psychology.
Sundar, S. S. (2008). The MAIN model: A heuristic approach to understanding technology effects on credibility. In M. J. Metzger & A. J. Flanagin (Eds.), Digital media, youth, and credibility (pp. 73-100). MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.1162/dmal.9780262562324.073
Tricco, A. C., Antony, J., Zarin, W., Strifler, L., Ghassemi, M., Ivory, J., Perrier, L., Hutton, B., Moher, D., & Straus, S. E. (2015). A scoping review of rapid review methods. BMC Medicine, 13, 224. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-015-0465-6
Vélez Bermello, G. L., Reyes Andrade, J. J., & Parrales Saltos, M. E. (2025). Deepfakes en las elecciones ecuatorianas de 2025. Percepción ciudadana y desafíos. Razón y Palabra, 29(124), 10-26. https://doi.org/10.26807/rp.v29i124.2308
Verma, A. (2026). Deepfakes and the crisis of digital authenticity: ethical challenges in the age of synthetic media. Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society, 24(1), 59-76. https://doi.org/10.1108/JICES-04-2025-0083
Vogler, D., Rauchfleisch, A., & de Seta, G. (2025). Support for deepfake regulation: The role of third-person perception, trust, and risk. Studies in Communication and Media, 14(4), 570-593. https://doi.org/10.5771/2192-4007-2025-4-570
Whittaker, L., Mulcahy, R., Russell-Bennett, R., Letheren, K., & Kietzmann, J. (2026). Examining consumer appraisals of deepfake advertising and disclosure: show deepfakes as 'real life' or say they're 'just fantasy'? Journal of Advertising Research, 66(1), 113-134. https://doi.org/10.1080/00218499.2025.2498830
Yuan, Y., Nguyen, M., Shao, W., & Zhang, Y. (2025). Digital congruence in influencer marketing: how NFTs shift the balance between human and AI-driven virtual endorsers through parasocial relationships. Marketing Intelligence & Planning. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1108/MIP-03-2025-0281
Descargas
Publicado
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2026 Luis Arturo Rosero Constante , Edison David Andrade-Sánchez , Kevin Acosta-Barreno , Iván Leonardo Pincay Aguilar
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 4.0.
