<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xml:lang="en">
  <teiHeader>
    <fileDesc>
      <titleStmt>
        <title>Primed Authenticity: How Priming Impacts Authenticity Perception of Social Media Influencers</title>
        <author>Luoma-aho</author>
        <author>Pirttimäki</author>
        <author>Maity</author>
        <author>Munnukka</author>
        <author>Reinikainen</author>
      </titleStmt>
      <publicationStmt>
        <p>Tag layer of the DHSS Meta-Tagging Project. The article text is reproduced from the
           staged copy named in sourceDesc and is not altered; the tags are held separately in
           standOff so that overlapping and nested spans are preserved.</p>
      </publicationStmt>
      <sourceDesc>
        <bibl>
          <title>Primed Authenticity: How Priming Impacts Authenticity Perception of Social Media Influencers</title>
          <date>2019</date>
          <publisher>International Journal of Strategic Communication</publisher>
          <idno type="DOI">10.1080/1553118x.2019.1617716</idno>
          
          <idno type="record">Luoma-aho2019-primed-authenticity-how-priming-impacts-auth</idno>
          <note type="staged-file">Luoma-aho2019-primed-authenticity-how-priming-impacts-auth.txt, the project's staged copy</note>
          <note type="text-sha1">f33aa5931254a78220d32e42904d87eee15a6fdf</note>
          <note type="rights">not-redistributable</note>
        </bibl>
      </sourceDesc>
    </fileDesc>
    <profileDesc>
      <textClass><keywords><term>strategic-communication</term></keywords></textClass>
      <particDesc>
        <person xml:id="paper"><p>the paper's own words</p></person>
        <person xml:id="tagger"><p>the tag layer; a sentence written by the tagger about the
          paper, always anchored to a quotation but not itself a quotation</p></person>
      </particDesc>
    </profileDesc>
    <revisionDesc>
      <change when="2026-10-06"
              who="build_paper_edition.py">0 spans located by searching the stored text for the quote's exact words, allowing any whitespace between them</change>
    </revisionDesc>
  </teiHeader>
  <standOff>
    <spanGrp type="tags">
      <span xml:id="t0" type="claim_type" ana="#claim_type" resp="#paper">
        <label>existence</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t1" type="phenomenon" ana="#phenomenon" resp="#paper">
        <label>priming of perceived influencer authenticity</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t2" type="method" ana="#method" resp="#paper">
        <label>behavioural-experiment</label>
        <term>behavioural-experiment</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t3" type="mechanisms" ana="#mechanisms[0]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>mechanisms</label>
        <term>the prime biases how the subsequent sponsored content is processed, so the same content yields different judgments</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t4" type="mechanisms" ana="#mechanisms[1]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>mechanisms</label>
        <term>being invited to participate lets viewers process the content more carefully, so they either confirm or reject the prime instead of simply absorbing it</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t5" type="mechanisms" ana="#mechanisms[2]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>mechanisms</label>
        <term>disclosing a persuasion attempt first activates cognitive persuasion knowledge, which then activates attitudinal knowledge (a stepwise persuasion process)</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t6" type="limitations" ana="#limitations[0]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>Only a single vlog and a single video were used, so results may not generalise beyond this vlogger and product category</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t7" type="limitations" ana="#limitations[1]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>The findings may be tied to the particular vlog, vlogger and products shown</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t8" type="limitations" ana="#limitations[2]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>Only a positive brand endorsement was tested; priming may behave differently for negative or neutral coverage</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t9" type="limitations" ana="#limitations[3]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>The study was run in a single national setting</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t10" type="transfers" ana="#transfers[0]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>the study imports theoretical apparatus from psychology and neighbouring consumer-research fields into strategic-communication research on influencer content</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t11" type="controls" ana="#controls[0]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.85">
        <label>random assignment of subjects to the four experimental conditions crossing priming and audience participation</label>
        <note>eliminates: that a difference between conditions is a difference between the kinds of people who ended up in them - the paper names this as internal validity · outcome (stated by the tagger, no quotation): held</note>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t12" type="concepts" ana="#concepts[0]" resp="#paper" cert="0.95">
        <label>priming</label>
        <term>priming</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t13" type="concepts" ana="#concepts[1]" resp="#paper" cert="0.95">
        <label>framing</label>
        <term>framing</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t14" type="concepts" ana="#concepts[2]" resp="#paper" cert="0.95">
        <label>prime stimulus</label>
        <term>prime stimulus</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t15" type="concepts" ana="#concepts[3]" resp="#paper" cert="0.95">
        <label>target stimulus</label>
        <term>target stimulus</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t16" type="concepts" ana="#concepts[4]" resp="#paper" cert="0.95">
        <label>perceived authenticity</label>
        <term>perceived authenticity</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t17" type="concepts" ana="#concepts[5]" resp="#paper" cert="0.95">
        <label>brand authenticity</label>
        <term>brand authenticity</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t18" type="concepts" ana="#concepts[6]" resp="#paper" cert="0.95">
        <label>audience participation</label>
        <term>audience participation</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t19" type="concepts" ana="#concepts[7]" resp="#paper" cert="0.95">
        <label>sponsored content</label>
        <term>sponsored content</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t20" type="concepts" ana="#concepts[8]" resp="#paper" cert="0.95">
        <label>participation</label>
        <term>participation</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t21" type="unhoused_relations" ana="#unhoused_relations[0]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>priming versus framing, as this paper draws it: both activate awareness of an issue and framing additionally attributes MEANINGS to it → the same pair as drawn in drouvelis2010 / drouvelis2015 (framing RE-DESCRIBES a logically equivalent decision problem) and as reported unresolved in Hoewe2020 (where Ottati holds that framing IS a form of priming)</label>
        <note>THREE PAPERS IN THIS CORPUS SEPARATE &#x27;priming&#x27; FROM &#x27;framing&#x27;, IN THREE FIELDS, ON THREE DIFFERENT AXES - AND NONE OF THEM CITES THE OTHERS. Economics (drouvelis, both papers) makes the criterion THE DECISION PROBLEM: framing re-describes a logically equivalent one, priming does not. Media studies (Hoewe2020) makes it AWARENESS, and reports its own field unable to settle whether the two are even distinct, quoting Ottati that &#x27;media framing constitutes a specific form of priming&#x27;. Strategic communication (this paper) makes it MEANING: the two share the activation of awareness and framing adds the attribution of meanings. Not a disagreement about a fact - three literatures independently fixing one boundary and not noticing each other. That is the negative space this project was built to make visible, and the schema has no relation type for &#x27;these papers partition the same pair differently&#x27;., and for the missing types.</note>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t22" type="senses" ana="#senses[0]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>priming, in strategic communication - an ACT OF SELECTION on the audience&#x27;s memory: certain patterns are activated and others are left out. The exclusion is written into the definition, which is what makes a positive and a negative primer symmetrical operations here</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t23" type="senses" ana="#senses[1]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>priming as against framing, THIS FIELD&#x27;S VERSION - the two are granted the same function (activating awareness of an issue) and separated by what framing does in addition: attribute meanings. Compare the economics version, where the criterion is re-description of the decision problem, and the media-studies version, where it is awareness</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t24" type="senses" ana="#senses[2]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>perceived authenticity - a construct whose positive definition is a list and whose working definition is its complement. The paper says so outright: it is OFTEN ALSO DEFINED BY NEGATION, with inauthenticity as falsity, externally motivated behaviour, and reciting a script rather than expressing one&#x27;s own words</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t25" type="senses" ana="#senses[3]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>selling out - the folk term the negative prime is built from, glossed by the paper in parentheses because the construct it operationalises has no technical name: giving up integrity or compromising principles for personal gain</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t26" type="claim_relations" ana="#claim_relations[0]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>builds-on → persuasion knowledge model (Friestad &amp; Wright, 1994) and priming theory (Carroll &amp; Einwiller, 2014; Celse &amp; Chang, 2017)</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t27" type="claim_relations" ana="#claim_relations[1]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>builds-on → Gilpin, Palazzolo &amp; Brody (2010); Henderson &amp; Bowley (2010) on the subjectivity of authenticity perceptions</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t28" type="concept_edges" ana="#concept_edges[0]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>priming —distinct-from→ framing</label>
        <term>priming</term>
        <term>framing</term>
        <note>differs in: WHAT FRAMING DOES IN ADDITION: both activate awareness of an issue, and framing also directs judgment by attributing meanings to it · strength of the relation: 0.9 · note: THE THIRD INCOMPATIBLE CUT AT THIS PAIR IN THIS CORPUS. The economics papers separate them by re-description of the decision problem; the media-studies review reports the field unable to agree and cites Ottati holding framing to BE a form of priming. See the unhoused-relations row on this record.</note>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t29" type="concept_edges" ana="#concept_edges[1]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>prime stimulus —distinct-from→ target stimulus</label>
        <term>prime stimulus</term>
        <term>target stimulus</term>
        <note>strength of the relation: 0.95 · note: Stated as a structural requirement - priming REQUIRES both - which is more than most of this corpus&#x27;s priming papers make explicit.</note>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t30" type="concept_edges" ana="#concept_edges[2]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.85">
        <label>priming —causes→ perceived authenticity</label>
        <term>priming</term>
        <term>perceived authenticity</term>
        <note>holds when: with a POSITIVE introductory text attached to the sponsored content · direction on the measure: increases · strength of the relation: 0.85 · note: Half of a symmetric pair. The result the paper reports is sharper than either hypothesis: the SAME sponsored content produces opposite reactions depending only on the valence of the introductory text.
Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its span and kept, but the span is hypothesis H1a; causes states it as a finding.</note>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t31" type="concept_edges" ana="#concept_edges[3]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.85">
        <label>priming —causes→ perceived authenticity</label>
        <term>priming</term>
        <term>perceived authenticity</term>
        <note>holds when: with a NEGATIVE introductory text attached to the sponsored content · direction on the measure: reduces · strength of the relation: 0.85 · note: The other half. Two edges rather than one because the direction reverses with the prime&#x27;s valence, and an edge that averaged them would describe neither condition.
Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its span and kept, but the span is hypothesis H1b; causes states it as a finding.</note>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t32" type="concept_edges" ana="#concept_edges[5]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>sponsored content —causes→ perceived authenticity</label>
        <term>sponsored content</term>
        <term>perceived authenticity</term>
        <note>direction on the measure: reduces · strength of the relation: 0.7 · note: The premise the negative prime is built on, attributed to prior work rather than shown here - hence 0.7.
Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its full span and kept, but sponsored content &#x27;CAN PUT under threat&#x27; a vlogger&#x27;s perceived authenticity; causes is hedged.</note>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t33" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.statistics[0]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>chi-squared test</label>
        <term>chi-squared test</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t34" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.statistics[1]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>p-value</label>
        <term>p-value</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t35" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.statistics[2]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>chi-squared expected-cell-frequency assumption</label>
        <term>chi-squared expected-cell-frequency assumption</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t36" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.findings[0]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>Priming was strongly associated with viewers&#x27; authenticity perceptions in both the positive and the negative priming conditions, confirming H1a and H1b.</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t37" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.findings[1]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>Encouraging versus discouraging audience participation changed authenticity perception only when the introductory text was negative, not when it was positive.</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t38" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.findings[2]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>Negative priming did not spill over onto the endorsed products: negative attitudes towards the products did not differ across the manipulation groups.</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t39" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.findings[3]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>Positive priming shifted perceptions of the vlogger, the video and the product, whereas negative priming moved only perceptions of the vlogger.</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t40" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.findings[4]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>Because negativity concentrates on the influencer rather than on the sponsor, sponsored content carries less reputational risk for the organization than for the vlogger.</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t41" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.definitions[0]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>sponsored content</label>
        <term>sponsored content</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t42" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.definitions[1]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>priming</label>
        <term>priming</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t43" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.definitions[2]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>perceived authenticity</label>
        <term>perceived authenticity</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t44" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.definitions[3]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>audience participation</label>
        <term>audience participation</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t45" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.definitions[5]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>target stimulus</label>
        <term>target stimulus</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t46" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.definitions[6]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>prime stimulus</label>
        <term>prime stimulus</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t47" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.variables[0]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>type of introductory text</label>
        <term>type of introductory text</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t48" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.variables[1]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>audience participation</label>
        <term>audience participation</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t49" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.variables[2]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>perceived authenticity</label>
        <term>perceived authenticity</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t50" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.variables[3]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>attitude towards the video</label>
        <term>attitude towards the video</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t51" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.quantities[0]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>211 — open-ended viewer responses analysed</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t52" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.quantities[1]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>59% male and 41% female — gender split of the MTurk respondent sample</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t53" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.quantities[2]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>p = .002 — chi-squared significance of the difference in endorser-authenticity perceptions across the four manipulation groups</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t54" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.quantities[3]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>45% ... 17% — share of responses coding the endorser as inauthentic in the most negatively primed group versus the most positively primed group</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t55" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.quantities[4]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>28% — highest share of authenticity perception, found in Group 3 (negative text, participation encouraged)</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
    </spanGrp>
  </standOff>
  <text>
    <body>
      <p><note type="rights">The full text of this article is not redistributable, so it is
      not included here. The evidence sentences are withheld with it; the tag layer and its
      grounding status remain. The article itself is at https://doi.org/10.1080/1553118x.2019.1617716.</note></p>
    </body>
  </text>
</TEI>
