IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ddj/fseeai/y2025i1p184-193.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Systematic Review and Research Agenda Emphasizing Persuasion Knowledge Model as an Alternative Tool That Can Mitigate the Effect of Fake News on Consumers’ Intention to Adopt an Innovation

Author

Listed:
  • Cerasel O. Cuteanu

    (Babeș-Bolyai University of Cluj Napoca, Romania)

  • Ciprian Marcel Pop

    (Babeș-Bolyai University of Cluj Napoca, Romania)

  • Angela-Eliza Micu

    (Ovidius University of Constanta, Romania)

Abstract

Aim: This study aims to conduct a systematic review to gather evidence from existing literature for the purpose of developing a new behavioural model. The model will leverage Persuasion Knowledge (PK) to mitigate the harmful effects of fake news in the context of the Behavioural Reasoning Theory (BRT) and Diffusion of Innovations (DOI). Specifically, it seeks to demonstrate that Persuasion Knowledge can help counteract the negative impact of fake news on Romanian consumers' intention to adopt a new product. Design: A systematic review was conducted, following the Cochrane Handbook (2019) guidelines. The study examines transdisciplinary research on theories, methodologies, and outcomes, identifying both similarities and differences to construct a model that links fake news (misleading reasons against adoption) with consumer innovation adoption behaviour. Results were synthesised narratively, rather than statistically, due to the transdisciplinary reach, which encompassed an expected diversity of approaches. Results: 39 studies were included in the review. Conclusion: There is interest in finding ways to counter fake news malign effect, Persuasion Knowledge could be such a term, and not much has been researched on how this tool could moderate, in a behavioural reasoning – diffusion of innovations context, the effect of fake news/(fake)reason against onto consumers’ intention to adopt an innovation when targeted by a fake news.

Suggested Citation

  • Cerasel O. Cuteanu & Ciprian Marcel Pop & Angela-Eliza Micu, 2025. "Systematic Review and Research Agenda Emphasizing Persuasion Knowledge Model as an Alternative Tool That Can Mitigate the Effect of Fake News on Consumers’ Intention to Adopt an Innovation," Economics and Applied Informatics, "Dunarea de Jos" University of Galati, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, issue 1, pages 184-193.
    • Handle: RePEc:ddj:fseeai:y:2025:i:1:p:184-193
    DOI: https://doi.org/10.35219/eai15840409499
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://eia.feaa.ugal.ro/images/eia/2025_1/Cuteanu_Pop_Micu.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/https://doi.org/10.35219/eai15840409499?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Campbell, Margaret C & Kirmani, Amna, 2000. "Consumers' Use of Persuasion Knowledge: The Effects of Accessibility and Cognitive Capacity on Perceptions of an Influence Agent," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 27(1), pages 69-83, June.
    2. Visentin, Marco & Pizzi, Gabriele & Pichierri, Marco, 2019. "Fake News, Real Problems for Brands: The Impact of Content Truthfulness and Source Credibility on consumers' Behavioral Intentions toward the Advertised Brands," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 99-112.
    3. Vahid Rahmani, 2023. "Persuasion knowledge framework: Toward a comprehensive model of consumers’ persuasion knowledge," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 13(1), pages 12-33, June.
    4. Gordon Pennycook & Adam Bear & Evan T. Collins & David G. Rand, 2020. "The Implied Truth Effect: Attaching Warnings to a Subset of Fake News Headlines Increases Perceived Accuracy of Headlines Without Warnings," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(11), pages 4944-4957, November.
    5. Jost, Peter J. & Pünder, Johanna & Schulze-Lohoff, Isabell, 2020. "Fake news - Does perception matter more than the truth?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    6. Kleijnen, Mirella & Lee, Nick & Wetzels, Martin, 2009. "An exploration of consumer resistance to innovation and its antecedents," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 344-357, June.
    7. Cotte, June & Coulter, Robin A. & Moore, Melissa, 2005. "Enhancing or disrupting guilt: the role of ad credibility and perceived manipulative intent," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 58(3), pages 361-368, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Golovacheva, E., 2016. "When consumers activate persuasion knowledge: Review of antecedents and consequences," Working Papers 6440, Graduate School of Management, St. Petersburg State University.
    2. Woimant, Antonin & Steils, Nadia, 2025. "“Take no risk!†: Immediate and delayed backfire-effect of risk-reducing messages in retailers' return and exchange policies," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    3. Choi, Jungsil & Park, Hyun Young, 2021. "How donor's regulatory focus changes the effectiveness of a sadness-evoking charity appeal," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 749-769.
    4. Sergei Sevriugin & Ben Sheehan, 2025. "NGO’s religious affiliation and donation intent: the role of missionary alarm and manipulative intent," International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, Springer;International Association of Public and Non-Profit Marketing, vol. 22(2), pages 349-371, June.
    5. Vahid Rahmani, 2023. "Persuasion knowledge framework: Toward a comprehensive model of consumers’ persuasion knowledge," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 13(1), pages 12-33, June.
    6. Zhou, Lianxi & Poon, Patrick & Wang, Haizhong, 2015. "Consumers' reactions to global versus local advertising appeals: A test of culturally incongruent images in China," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 561-568.
    7. Sirieix, Lucie & Lála, Jan & Kocmanová, Klára, 2017. "Understanding the antecedents of consumers' attitudes towards doggy bags in restaurants: Concern about food waste, culture, norms and emotions," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 153-158.
    8. Hans-Jürgen Engelbrecht, 2015. "A General Model of the Innovation - Subjective Well-Being Nexus," Economic Complexity and Evolution, in: Andreas Pyka & John Foster (ed.), The Evolution of Economic and Innovation Systems, edition 127, pages 69-90, Springer.
    9. Suwelack, Thomas & Hogreve, Jens & Hoyer, Wayne D., 2011. "Understanding Money-Back Guarantees: Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Outcomes," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 87(4), pages 462-478.
    10. Chadwick J. Miller & Daniel C. Brannon & Jim Salas & Martha Troncoza, 2021. "Advertising, incentives, and the upsell: how advertising differentially moderates customer- vs. retailer-directed price incentives’ impact on consumers’ preferences for premium products," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 49(6), pages 1043-1064, November.
    11. Michelsen, Carl Christian & Madlener, Reinhard, 2016. "Switching from fossil fuel to renewables in residential heating systems: An empirical study of homeowners' decisions in Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 95-105.
    12. Marijn Sax & Natali Helberger & Nadine Bol, 2018. "Health as a Means Towards Profitable Ends: mHealth Apps, User Autonomy, and Unfair Commercial Practices," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 41(2), pages 103-134, June.
    13. Anna Mardumyan & Iris Siret, 2023. "When review verification does more harm than good: How certified reviews determine customer–brand relationship quality," Post-Print hal-04739727, HAL.
    14. Tuk, M.A. & Verlegh, P.W.J. & Smidts, A. & Wigboldus, D.H.J., 2008. "Interpersonal Relationships Moderate the Effect of Faces on Person Judgments," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2008-057-MKT, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    15. Yi, Jisu & Lee, Youseok & Suh, Jungmin & Kim, Sang-Hoon, 2022. "Psychological determinants of non-attendees’ resistance toward performing arts," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 690-699.
    16. Skarmeas, Dionysis & Leonidou, Constantinos N., 2013. "When consumers doubt, Watch out! The role of CSR skepticism," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(10), pages 1831-1838.
    17. Hajiheydari, Nastaran & Delgosha, Mohammad Soltani & Olya, Hossein, 2021. "Scepticism and resistance to IoMT in healthcare: Application of behavioural reasoning theory with configurational perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    18. Puccinelli, Nancy M. & Goodstein, Ronald C. & Grewal, Dhruv & Price, Robert & Raghubir, Priya & Stewart, David, 2009. "Customer Experience Management in Retailing: Understanding the Buying Process," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 85(1), pages 15-30.
    19. Chamaret, Cécile & Steyer, Véronique & Mayer, Julie C., 2020. "“Hands off my meter!” when municipalities resist smart meters: Linking arguments and degrees of resistance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    20. Laurin, Kristin & Kay, Aaron C. & Proudfoot, Devon & Fitzsimons, Gavan J., 2013. "Response to restrictive policies: Reconciling system justification and psychological reactance," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 122(2), pages 152-162.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ddj:fseeai:y:2025:i:1:p:184-193. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Gianina Mihai (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fegalro.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.