Mapping the themes and intellectual structure of micro-influencers: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Mapping the themes and intellectual structure of... | F1000Research "use strict";function _typeof(t){return(_typeof="function"==typeof Symbol&&"symbol"==typeof Symbol.iterator?function(t){return typeof t}:function(t){return t&&"function"==typeof Symbol&&t.constructor===Symbol&&t!==Symbol.prototype?"symbol":typeof t})(t)}!function(){var t=function(){var t,e,o=[],n=window,r=n;for(;r;){try{if(r.frames.__tcfapiLocator){t=r;break}}catch(t){}if(r===n.top)break;r=r.parent}t||(!function t(){var e=n.document,o=!!n.frames.__tcfapiLocator;if(!o)if(e.body){var r=e.createElement("iframe");r.style.cssText="display:none",r.name="__tcfapiLocator",e.body.appendChild(r)}else setTimeout(t,5);return!o}(),n.__tcfapi=function(){for(var t=arguments.length,n=new Array(t),r=0;r 3&&2===parseInt(n[1],10)&&"boolean"==typeof n[3]&&(e=n[3],"function"==typeof n[2]&&n[2]("set",!0)):"ping"===n[0]?"function"==typeof n[2]&&n[2]({gdprApplies:e,cmpLoaded:!1,cmpStatus:"stub"}):o.push(n)},n.addEventListener("message",(function(t){var e="string"==typeof t.data,o={};if(e)try{o=JSON.parse(t.data)}catch(t){}else o=t.data;var n="object"===_typeof(o)&&null!==o?o.__tcfapiCall:null;n&&window.__tcfapi(n.command,n.version,(function(o,r){var a={__tcfapiReturn:{returnValue:o,success:r,callId:n.callId}};t&&t.source&&t.source.postMessage&&t.source.postMessage(e?JSON.stringify(a):a,"*")}),n.parameter)}),!1))};"undefined"!=typeof module?module.exports=t:t()}(); dataLayer = dataLayer || []; // Standard GTM initialization - Google Consent Mode handles consent automatically (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start': new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0], j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src= 'https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl+ '>m_auth=hzk0Vc3qFsQYhCrIoHz68A>m_preview=env-1>m_cookies_win=x';f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f); })(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-MWFK8L5J'); ;window.NREUM||(NREUM={});NREUM.init={distributed_tracing:{enabled:true},privacy:{cookies_enabled:true},ajax:{deny_list:["bam.nr-data.net"]}}; ;NREUM.loader_config={accountID:"438030",trustKey:"438030",agentID:"772317073",licenseKey:"97f8f67f26",applicationID:"772317073"} ;NREUM.info={beacon:"bam.nr-data.net",errorBeacon:"bam.nr-data.net",licenseKey:"97f8f67f26",applicationID:"772317073",sa:1} ;/*! For license information please see nr-loader-spa-1.236.0.min.js.LICENSE.txt */ (()=>{"use strict";var e,t,r={5763:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{P_:()=>l,Mt:()=>g,C5:()=>s,DL:()=>v,OP:()=>T,lF:()=>D,Yu:()=>y,Dg:()=>h,CX:()=>c,GE:()=>b,sU:()=>_});var n=r(8632),i=r(9567);const o={beacon:n.ce.beacon,errorBeacon:n.ce.errorBeacon,licenseKey:void 0,applicationID:void 0,sa:void 0,queueTime:void 0,applicationTime:void 0,ttGuid:void 0,user:void 0,account:void 0,product:void 0,extra:void 0,jsAttributes:{},userAttributes:void 0,atts:void 0,transactionName:void 0,tNamePlain:void 0},a={};function s(e){if(!e)throw new Error("All info objects require an agent identifier!");if(!a[e])throw new Error("Info for ".concat(e," was never set"));return a[e]}function c(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All info objects require an agent identifier!");a[e]=(0,i.D)(t,o),(0,n.Qy)(e,a[e],"info")}var u=r(7056);const d=()=>{const e={blockSelector:"[data-nr-block]",maskInputOptions:{password:!0}};return{allow_bfcache:!0,privacy:{cookies_enabled:!0},ajax:{deny_list:void 0,enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},distributed_tracing:{enabled:void 0,exclude_newrelic_header:void 0,cors_use_newrelic_header:void 0,cors_use_tracecontext_headers:void 0,allowed_origins:void 0},session:{domain:void 0,expiresMs:u.oD,inactiveMs:u.Hb},ssl:void 0,obfuscate:void 0,jserrors:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},metrics:{enabled:!0},page_action:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:30},page_view_event:{enabled:!0},page_view_timing:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:30,long_task:!1},session_trace:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},harvest:{tooManyRequestsDelay:60},session_replay:{enabled:!1,harvestTimeSeconds:60,sampleRate:.1,errorSampleRate:.1,maskTextSelector:"*",maskAllInputs:!0,get blockClass(){return"nr-block"},get ignoreClass(){return"nr-ignore"},get maskTextClass(){return"nr-mask"},get blockSelector(){return e.blockSelector},set blockSelector(t){e.blockSelector+=",".concat(t)},get maskInputOptions(){return e.maskInputOptions},set maskInputOptions(t){e.maskInputOptions={...t,password:!0}}},spa:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10}}},f={};function l(e){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");if(!f[e])throw new Error("Configuration for ".concat(e," was never set"));return f[e]}function h(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");f[e]=(0,i.D)(t,d()),(0,n.Qy)(e,f[e],"config")}function g(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");var r=l(e);if(r){for(var n=t.split("."),i=0;i {r.d(t,{D:()=>i});var n=r(50);function i(e,t){try{if(!e||"object"!=typeof e)return(0,n.Z)("Setting a Configurable requires an object as input");if(!t||"object"!=typeof t)return(0,n.Z)("Setting a Configurable requires a model to set its initial properties");const r=Object.create(Object.getPrototypeOf(t),Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptors(t)),o=0===Object.keys(r).length?e:r;for(let a in o)if(void 0!==e[a])try{"object"==typeof e[a]&&"object"==typeof t[a]?r[a]=i(e[a],t[a]):r[a]=e[a]}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occurred while setting a property of a Configurable",e)}return r}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occured while setting a Configurable",e)}}},6818:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Re:()=>i,gF:()=>o,q4:()=>n});const n="1.236.0",i="PROD",o="CDN"},385:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{FN:()=>a,IF:()=>u,Nk:()=>f,Tt:()=>s,_A:()=>o,il:()=>n,pL:()=>c,v6:()=>i,w1:()=>d});const n="undefined"!=typeof window&&!!window.document,i="undefined"!=typeof WorkerGlobalScope&&("undefined"!=typeof self&&self instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&self.navigator instanceof WorkerNavigator||"undefined"!=typeof globalThis&&globalThis instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&globalThis.navigator instanceof WorkerNavigator),o=n?window:"undefined"!=typeof WorkerGlobalScope&&("undefined"!=typeof self&&self instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&self||"undefined"!=typeof globalThis&&globalThis instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&globalThis),a=""+o?.location,s=/iPad|iPhone|iPod/.test(navigator.userAgent),c=s&&"undefined"==typeof SharedWorker,u=(()=>{const e=navigator.userAgent.match(/Firefox[/\s](\d+\.\d+)/);return Array.isArray(e)&&e.length>=2?+e[1]:0})(),d=Boolean(n&&window.document.documentMode),f=!!navigator.sendBeacon},1117:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{w:()=>o});var n=r(50);const i={agentIdentifier:"",ee:void 0};class o{constructor(e){try{if("object"!=typeof e)return(0,n.Z)("shared context requires an object as input");this.sharedContext={},Object.assign(this.sharedContext,i),Object.entries(e).forEach((e=>{let[t,r]=e;Object.keys(i).includes(t)&&(this.sharedContext[t]=r)}))}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occured while setting SharedContext",e)}}}},8e3:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{L:()=>d,R:()=>c});var n=r(2177),i=r(1284),o=r(4322),a=r(3325);const s={};function c(e,t){const r={staged:!1,priority:a.p[t]||0};u(e),s[e].get(t)||s[e].set(t,r)}function u(e){e&&(s[e]||(s[e]=new Map))}function d(){let e=arguments.length>0&&void 0!==arguments[0]?arguments[0]:"",t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:"feature";if(u(e),!e||!s[e].get(t))return a(t);s[e].get(t).staged=!0;const r=[...s[e]];function a(t){const r=e?n.ee.get(e):n.ee,a=o.X.handlers;if(r.backlog&&a){var s=r.backlog[t],c=a[t];if(c){for(var u=0;s&&u {let[t,r]=e;return r.staged}))&&(r.sort(((e,t)=>e[1].priority-t[1].priority)),r.forEach((e=>{let[t]=e;a(t)})))}function f(e,t){var r=e[1];(0,i.D)(t[r],(function(t,r){var n=e[0];if(r[0]===n){var i=r[1],o=e[3],a=e[2];i.apply(o,a)}}))}},2177:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{c:()=>f,ee:()=>u});var n=r(8632),i=r(2210),o=r(1284),a=r(5763),s="nr@context";let c=(0,n.fP)();var u;function d(){}function f(e){return(0,i.X)(e,s,l)}function l(){return new d}function h(){u.aborted=!0,u.backlog={}}c.ee?u=c.ee:(u=function e(t,r){var n={},c={},f={},g=!1;try{g=16===r.length&&(0,a.OP)(r).isolatedBacklog}catch(e){}var p={on:b,addEventListener:b,removeEventListener:y,emit:v,get:x,listeners:w,context:m,buffer:A,abort:h,aborted:!1,isBuffering:E,debugId:r,backlog:g?{}:t&&"object"==typeof t.backlog?t.backlog:{}};return p;function m(e){return e&&e instanceof d?e:e?(0,i.X)(e,s,l):l()}function v(e,r,n,i,o){if(!1!==o&&(o=!0),!u.aborted||i){t&&o&&t.emit(e,r,n);for(var a=m(n),s=w(e),d=s.length,f=0;fn,p:()=>i});var n=r(2177).ee.get("handle");function i(e,t,r,i,o){o?(o.buffer([e],i),o.emit(e,t,r)):(n.buffer([e],i),n.emit(e,t,r))}},4322:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{X:()=>o});var n=r(5546);o.on=a;var i=o.handlers={};function o(e,t,r,o){a(o||n.E,i,e,t,r)}function a(e,t,r,i,o){o||(o="feature"),e||(e=n.E);var a=t[o]=t[o]||{};(a[r]=a[r]||[]).push([e,i])}},3239:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{bP:()=>s,iz:()=>c,m$:()=>a});var n=r(385);let i=!1,o=!1;try{const e={get passive(){return i=!0,!1},get signal(){return o=!0,!1}};n._A.addEventListener("test",null,e),n._A.removeEventListener("test",null,e)}catch(e){}function a(e,t){return i||o?{capture:!!e,passive:i,signal:t}:!!e}function s(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2],n=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;window.addEventListener(e,t,a(r,n))}function c(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2],n=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;document.addEventListener(e,t,a(r,n))}},4402:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Ht:()=>u,M:()=>c,Rl:()=>a,ky:()=>s});var n=r(385);const i="xxxxxxxx-xxxx-4xxx-yxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx";function o(e,t){return e?15&e[t]:16*Math.random()|0}function a(){const e=n._A?.crypto||n._A?.msCrypto;let t,r=0;return e&&e.getRandomValues&&(t=e.getRandomValues(new Uint8Array(31))),i.split("").map((e=>"x"===e?o(t,++r).toString(16):"y"===e?(3&o()|8).toString(16):e)).join("")}function s(e){const t=n._A?.crypto||n._A?.msCrypto;let r,i=0;t&&t.getRandomValues&&(r=t.getRandomValues(new Uint8Array(31)));const a=[];for(var s=0;s {r.d(t,{Bq:()=>n,Hb:()=>o,oD:()=>i});const n="NRBA",i=144e5,o=18e5},7894:(e,t,r)=>{function n(){return Math.round(performance.now())}r.d(t,{z:()=>n})},7243:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{e:()=>o});var n=r(385),i={};function o(e){if(e in i)return i[e];if(0===(e||"").indexOf("data:"))return{protocol:"data"};let t;var r=n._A?.location,o={};if(n.il)t=document.createElement("a"),t.href=e;else try{t=new URL(e,r.href)}catch(e){return o}o.port=t.port;var a=t.href.split("://");!o.port&&a[1]&&(o.port=a[1].split("/")[0].split("@").pop().split(":")[1]),o.port&&"0"!==o.port||(o.port="https"===a[0]?"443":"80"),o.hostname=t.hostname||r.hostname,o.pathname=t.pathname,o.protocol=a[0],"/"!==o.pathname.charAt(0)&&(o.pathname="/"+o.pathname);var s=!t.protocol||":"===t.protocol||t.protocol===r.protocol,c=t.hostname===r.hostname&&t.port===r.port;return o.sameOrigin=s&&(!t.hostname||c),"/"===o.pathname&&(i[e]=o),o}},50:(e,t,r)=>{function n(e,t){"function"==typeof console.warn&&(console.warn("New Relic: ".concat(e)),t&&console.warn(t))}r.d(t,{Z:()=>n})},2587:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{N:()=>c,T:()=>u});var n=r(2177),i=r(5546),o=r(8e3),a=r(3325);const s={stn:[a.D.sessionTrace],err:[a.D.jserrors,a.D.metrics],ins:[a.D.pageAction],spa:[a.D.spa],sr:[a.D.sessionReplay,a.D.sessionTrace]};function c(e,t){const r=n.ee.get(t);e&&"object"==typeof e&&(Object.entries(e).forEach((e=>{let[t,n]=e;void 0===u[t]&&(s[t]?s[t].forEach((e=>{n?(0,i.p)("feat-"+t,[],void 0,e,r):(0,i.p)("block-"+t,[],void 0,e,r),(0,i.p)("rumresp-"+t,[Boolean(n)],void 0,e,r)})):n&&(0,i.p)("feat-"+t,[],void 0,void 0,r),u[t]=Boolean(n))})),Object.keys(s).forEach((e=>{void 0===u[e]&&(s[e]?.forEach((t=>(0,i.p)("rumresp-"+e,[!1],void 0,t,r))),u[e]=!1)})),(0,o.L)(t,a.D.pageViewEvent))}const u={}},2210:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{X:()=>i});var n=Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty;function i(e,t,r){if(n.call(e,t))return e[t];var i=r();if(Object.defineProperty&&Object.keys)try{return Object.defineProperty(e,t,{value:i,writable:!0,enumerable:!1}),i}catch(e){}return e[t]=i,i}},1284:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{D:()=>n});const n=(e,t)=>Object.entries(e||{}).map((e=>{let[r,n]=e;return t(r,n)}))},4351:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{P:()=>o});var n=r(2177);const i=()=>{const e=new WeakSet;return(t,r)=>{if("object"==typeof r&&null!==r){if(e.has(r))return;e.add(r)}return r}};function o(e){try{return JSON.stringify(e,i())}catch(e){try{n.ee.emit("internal-error",[e])}catch(e){}}}},3960:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{K:()=>a,b:()=>o});var n=r(3239);function i(){return"undefined"==typeof document||"complete"===document.readyState}function o(e,t){if(i())return e();(0,n.bP)("load",e,t)}function a(e){if(i())return e();(0,n.iz)("DOMContentLoaded",e)}},8632:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{EZ:()=>u,Qy:()=>c,ce:()=>o,fP:()=>a,gG:()=>d,mF:()=>s});var n=r(7894),i=r(385);const o={beacon:"bam.nr-data.net",errorBeacon:"bam.nr-data.net"};function a(){return i._A.NREUM||(i._A.NREUM={}),void 0===i._A.newrelic&&(i._A.newrelic=i._A.NREUM),i._A.NREUM}function s(){let e=a();return e.o||(e.o={ST:i._A.setTimeout,SI:i._A.setImmediate,CT:i._A.clearTimeout,XHR:i._A.XMLHttpRequest,REQ:i._A.Request,EV:i._A.Event,PR:i._A.Promise,MO:i._A.MutationObserver,FETCH:i._A.fetch}),e}function c(e,t,r){let i=a();const o=i.initializedAgents||{},s=o[e]||{};return Object.keys(s).length||(s.initializedAt={ms:(0,n.z)(),date:new Date}),i.initializedAgents={...o,[e]:{...s,[r]:t}},i}function u(e,t){a()[e]=t}function d(){return function(){let e=a();const t=e.info||{};e.info={beacon:o.beacon,errorBeacon:o.errorBeacon,...t}}(),function(){let e=a();const t=e.init||{};e.init={...t}}(),s(),function(){let e=a();const t=e.loader_config||{};e.loader_config={...t}}(),a()}},7956:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{N:()=>i});var n=r(3239);function i(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]&&arguments[1],r=arguments.length>2?arguments[2]:void 0,i=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;return void(0,n.iz)("visibilitychange",(function(){if(t)return void("hidden"==document.visibilityState&&e());e(document.visibilityState)}),r,i)}},1214:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{em:()=>v,u5:()=>N,QU:()=>S,_L:()=>I,Gm:()=>L,Lg:()=>M,gy:()=>U,BV:()=>Q,Kf:()=>ee});var n=r(2177);const i="nr@original";var o=Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty,a=!1;function s(e,t){return e||(e=n.ee),r.inPlace=function(e,t,n,i,o){n||(n="");var a,s,c,u="-"===n.charAt(0);for(c=0;c 2?n-2:0),o=2;o {r(A[T],e,w),r(E[T],e,w)})),r(l._A,"fetch",y),t.on(y+"end",(function(e,r){var n=this;if(r){var i=r.headers.get("content-length");null!==i&&(n.rxSize=i),t.emit(y+"done",[null,r],n)}else t.emit(y+"done",[e],n)})),t}const O={},j=["pushState","replaceState"];function S(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("history")}(e);return!l.il||O[t.debugId]++||(O[t.debugId]=1,s(t).inPlace(window.history,j,"-")),t}var P=r(3239);const C={},R=["appendChild","insertBefore","replaceChild"];function I(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("jsonp")}(e);if(!l.il||C[t.debugId])return t;C[t.debugId]=!0;var r=s(t),i=/[?&](?:callback|cb)=([^&#]+)/,o=/(.*)\.([^.]+)/,a=/^(\w+)(\.|$)(.*)$/;function c(e,t){var r=e.match(a),n=r[1],i=r[3];return i?c(i,t[n]):t[n]}return r.inPlace(Node.prototype,R,"dom-"),t.on("dom-start",(function(e){!function(e){if(!e||"string"!=typeof e.nodeName||"script"!==e.nodeName.toLowerCase())return;if("function"!=typeof e.addEventListener)return;var n=(a=e.src,s=a.match(i),s?s[1]:null);var a,s;if(!n)return;var u=function(e){var t=e.match(o);if(t&&t.length>=3)return{key:t[2],parent:c(t[1],window)};return{key:e,parent:window}}(n);if("function"!=typeof u.parent[u.key])return;var d={};function f(){t.emit("jsonp-end",[],d),e.removeEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.removeEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1))}function l(){t.emit("jsonp-error",[],d),t.emit("jsonp-end",[],d),e.removeEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.removeEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1))}r.inPlace(u.parent,[u.key],"cb-",d),e.addEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.addEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1)),t.emit("new-jsonp",[e.src],d)}(e[0])})),t}var k=r(5763);const H={};function L(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("mutation")}(e);if(!l.il||H[t.debugId])return t;H[t.debugId]=!0;var r=s(t),i=k.Yu.MO;return i&&(window.MutationObserver=function(e){return this instanceof i?new i(r(e,"fn-")):i.apply(this,arguments)},MutationObserver.prototype=i.prototype),t}const z={};function M(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("promise")}(e);if(z[t.debugId])return t;z[t.debugId]=!0;var r=n.c,o=s(t),a=k.Yu.PR;return a&&function(){function e(r){var n=t.context(),i=o(r,"executor-",n,null,!1);const s=Reflect.construct(a,[i],e);return t.context(s).getCtx=function(){return n},s}l._A.Promise=e,Object.defineProperty(e,"name",{value:"Promise"}),e.toString=function(){return a.toString()},Object.setPrototypeOf(e,a),["all","race"].forEach((function(r){const n=a[r];e[r]=function(e){let i=!1;[...e||[]].forEach((e=>{this.resolve(e).then(a("all"===r),a(!1))}));const o=n.apply(this,arguments);return o;function a(e){return function(){t.emit("propagate",[null,!i],o,!1,!1),i=i||!e}}}})),["resolve","reject"].forEach((function(r){const n=a[r];e[r]=function(e){const r=n.apply(this,arguments);return e!==r&&t.emit("propagate",[e,!0],r,!1,!1),r}})),e.prototype=a.prototype;const n=a.prototype.then;a.prototype.then=function(){var e=this,i=r(e);i.promise=e;for(var a=arguments.length,s=new Array(a),c=0;c e())),t};function m(e,t){i.inPlace(t,["onreadystatechange"],"fn-",E)}function b(){var e=this,t=r.context(e);e.readyState>3&&!t.resolved&&(t.resolved=!0,r.emit("xhr-resolved",[],e)),i.inPlace(e,f,"fn-",E)}if(function(e,t){for(var r in e)t[r]=e[r]}(o,p),p.prototype=o.prototype,i.inPlace(p.prototype,J,"-xhr-",E),r.on("send-xhr-start",(function(e,t){m(e,t),function(e){h.push(e),a&&(y?y.then(A):u?u(A):(w=-w,x.data=w))}(t)})),r.on("open-xhr-start",m),a){var y=c&&c.resolve();if(!u&&!c){var w=1,x=document.createTextNode(w);new a(A).observe(x,{characterData:!0})}}else t.on("fn-end",(function(e){e[0]&&e[0].type===d||A()}));function A(){for(var e=0;e {r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.ajax},6660:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{A:()=>i,t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.jserrors,i="nr@seenError"},3081:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{gF:()=>o,mY:()=>i,t9:()=>n,vz:()=>s,xS:()=>a});const n=r(3325).D.metrics,i="sm",o="cm",a="storeSupportabilityMetrics",s="storeEventMetrics"},4649:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageAction},7633:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Dz:()=>i,OJ:()=>a,qw:()=>o,t9:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageViewEvent,i="firstbyte",o="domcontent",a="windowload"},9251:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageViewTiming},3614:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{BST_RESOURCE:()=>i,END:()=>s,FEATURE_NAME:()=>n,FN_END:()=>u,FN_START:()=>c,PUSH_STATE:()=>d,RESOURCE:()=>o,START:()=>a});const n=r(3325).D.sessionTrace,i="bstResource",o="resource",a="-start",s="-end",c="fn"+a,u="fn"+s,d="pushState"},7836:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{BODY:()=>A,CB_END:()=>E,CB_START:()=>u,END:()=>x,FEATURE_NAME:()=>i,FETCH:()=>_,FETCH_BODY:()=>v,FETCH_DONE:()=>m,FETCH_START:()=>p,FN_END:()=>c,FN_START:()=>s,INTERACTION:()=>l,INTERACTION_API:()=>d,INTERACTION_EVENTS:()=>o,JSONP_END:()=>b,JSONP_NODE:()=>g,JS_TIME:()=>T,MAX_TIMER_BUDGET:()=>a,REMAINING:()=>f,SPA_NODE:()=>h,START:()=>w,originalSetTimeout:()=>y});var n=r(5763);const i=r(3325).D.spa,o=["click","submit","keypress","keydown","keyup","change"],a=999,s="fn-start",c="fn-end",u="cb-start",d="api-ixn-",f="remaining",l="interaction",h="spaNode",g="jsonpNode",p="fetch-start",m="fetch-done",v="fetch-body-",b="jsonp-end",y=n.Yu.ST,w="-start",x="-end",A="-body",E="cb"+x,T="jsTime",_="fetch"},5938:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{W:()=>o});var n=r(5763),i=r(2177);class o{constructor(e,t,r){this.agentIdentifier=e,this.aggregator=t,this.ee=i.ee.get(e,(0,n.OP)(this.agentIdentifier).isolatedBacklog),this.featureName=r,this.blocked=!1}}},9144:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{j:()=>m});var n=r(3325),i=r(5763),o=r(5546),a=r(2177),s=r(7894),c=r(8e3),u=r(3960),d=r(385),f=r(50),l=r(3081),h=r(8632);function g(){const e=(0,h.gG)();["setErrorHandler","finished","addToTrace","inlineHit","addRelease","addPageAction","setCurrentRouteName","setPageViewName","setCustomAttribute","interaction","noticeError","setUserId"].forEach((t=>{e[t]=function(){for(var r=arguments.length,n=new Array(r),i=0;i 1?r-1:0),i=1;i {e.exposed&&e.api[t]&&o.push(e.api[t](...n))})),o.length>1?o:o[0]}(t,...n)}}))}var p=r(2587);function m(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:{},m=arguments.length>2?arguments[2]:void 0,v=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0,{init:b,info:y,loader_config:w,runtime:x={loaderType:m},exposed:A=!0}=t;const E=(0,h.gG)();y||(b=E.init,y=E.info,w=E.loader_config),(0,i.Dg)(e,b||{}),(0,i.GE)(e,w||{}),(0,i.sU)(e,x),y.jsAttributes??={},d.v6&&(y.jsAttributes.isWorker=!0),(0,i.CX)(e,y),g();const T=function(e,t){t||(0,c.R)(e,"api");const h={};var g=a.ee.get(e),p=g.get("tracer"),m="api-",v=m+"ixn-";function b(t,r,n,o){const a=(0,i.C5)(e);return null===r?delete a.jsAttributes[t]:(0,i.CX)(e,{...a,jsAttributes:{...a.jsAttributes,[t]:r}}),x(m,n,!0,o||null===r?"session":void 0)(t,r)}function y(){}["setErrorHandler","finished","addToTrace","inlineHit","addRelease"].forEach((e=>h[e]=x(m,e,!0,"api"))),h.addPageAction=x(m,"addPageAction",!0,n.D.pageAction),h.setCurrentRouteName=x(m,"routeName",!0,n.D.spa),h.setPageViewName=function(t,r){if("string"==typeof t)return"/"!==t.charAt(0)&&(t="/"+t),(0,i.OP)(e).customTransaction=(r||"http://custom.transaction")+t,x(m,"setPageViewName",!0)()},h.setCustomAttribute=function(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2];if("string"==typeof e){if(["string","number"].includes(typeof t)||null===t)return b(e,t,"setCustomAttribute",r);(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setCustomAttribute.\nNon-null value must be a string or number type, but a type of was provided."))}else(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setCustomAttribute.\nName must be a string type, but a type of was provided."))},h.setUserId=function(e){if("string"==typeof e||null===e)return b("enduser.id",e,"setUserId",!0);(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setUserId.\nNon-null value must be a string type, but a type of was provided."))},h.interaction=function(){return(new y).get()};var w=y.prototype={createTracer:function(e,t){var r={},i=this,a="function"==typeof t;return(0,o.p)(v+"tracer",[(0,s.z)(),e,r],i,n.D.spa,g),function(){if(p.emit((a?"":"no-")+"fn-start",[(0,s.z)(),i,a],r),a)try{return t.apply(this,arguments)}catch(e){throw p.emit("fn-err",[arguments,this,"string"==typeof e?new Error(e):e],r),e}finally{p.emit("fn-end",[(0,s.z)()],r)}}}};function x(e,t,r,i){return function(){return(0,o.p)(l.xS,["API/"+t+"/called"],void 0,n.D.metrics,g),i&&(0,o.p)(e+t,[(0,s.z)(),...arguments],r?null:this,i,g),r?void 0:this}}function A(){r.e(439).then(r.bind(r,7438)).then((t=>{let{setAPI:r}=t;r(e),(0,c.L)(e,"api")})).catch((()=>(0,f.Z)("Downloading runtime APIs failed...")))}return["actionText","setName","setAttribute","save","ignore","onEnd","getContext","end","get"].forEach((e=>{w[e]=x(v,e,void 0,n.D.spa)})),h.noticeError=function(e,t){"string"==typeof e&&(e=new Error(e)),(0,o.p)(l.xS,["API/noticeError/called"],void 0,n.D.metrics,g),(0,o.p)("err",[e,(0,s.z)(),!1,t],void 0,n.D.jserrors,g)},d.il?(0,u.b)((()=>A()),!0):A(),h}(e,v);return(0,h.Qy)(e,T,"api"),(0,h.Qy)(e,A,"exposed"),(0,h.EZ)("activatedFeatures",p.T),T}},3325:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{D:()=>n,p:()=>i});const n={ajax:"ajax",jserrors:"jserrors",metrics:"metrics",pageAction:"page_action",pageViewEvent:"page_view_event",pageViewTiming:"page_view_timing",sessionReplay:"session_replay",sessionTrace:"session_trace",spa:"spa"},i={[n.pageViewEvent]:1,[n.pageViewTiming]:2,[n.metrics]:3,[n.jserrors]:4,[n.ajax]:5,[n.sessionTrace]:6,[n.pageAction]:7,[n.spa]:8,[n.sessionReplay]:9}}},n={};function i(e){var t=n[e];if(void 0!==t)return t.exports;var o=n[e]={exports:{}};return r[e](o,o.exports,i),o.exports}i.m=r,i.d=(e,t)=>{for(var r in t)i.o(t,r)&&!i.o(e,r)&&Object.defineProperty(e,r,{enumerable:!0,get:t[r]})},i.f={},i.e=e=>Promise.all(Object.keys(i.f).reduce(((t,r)=>(i.f[r](e,t),t)),[])),i.u=e=>(({78:"page_action-aggregate",147:"metrics-aggregate",242:"session-manager",317:"jserrors-aggregate",348:"page_view_timing-aggregate",412:"lazy-feature-loader",439:"async-api",538:"recorder",590:"session_replay-aggregate",675:"compressor",733:"session_trace-aggregate",786:"page_view_event-aggregate",873:"spa-aggregate",898:"ajax-aggregate"}[e]||e)+"."+{78:"ac76d497",147:"3dc53903",148:"1a20d5fe",242:"2a64278a",317:"49e41428",348:"bd6de33a",412:"2f55ce66",439:"30bd804e",538:"1b18459f",590:"cf0efb30",675:"ae9f91a8",733:"83105561",786:"06482edd",860:"03a8b7a5",873:"e6b09d52",898:"998ef92b"}[e]+"-1.236.0.min.js"),i.o=(e,t)=>Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(e,t),e={},t="NRBA:",i.l=(r,n,o,a)=>{if(e[r])e[r].push(n);else{var s,c;if(void 0!==o)for(var u=document.getElementsByTagName("script"),d=0;d {s.onerror=s.onload=null,clearTimeout(h);var i=e[r];if(delete e[r],s.parentNode&&s.parentNode.removeChild(s),i&&i.forEach((e=>e(n))),t)return t(n)},h=setTimeout(l.bind(null,void 0,{type:"timeout",target:s}),12e4);s.onerror=l.bind(null,s.onerror),s.onload=l.bind(null,s.onload),c&&document.head.appendChild(s)}},i.r=e=>{"undefined"!=typeof Symbol&&Symbol.toStringTag&&Object.defineProperty(e,Symbol.toStringTag,{value:"Module"}),Object.defineProperty(e,"__esModule",{value:!0})},i.j=364,i.p="https://js-agent.newrelic.com/",(()=>{var e={364:0,953:0};i.f.j=(t,r)=>{var n=i.o(e,t)?e[t]:void 0;if(0!==n)if(n)r.push(n[2]);else{var o=new Promise(((r,i)=>n=e[t]=[r,i]));r.push(n[2]=o);var a=i.p+i.u(t),s=new Error;i.l(a,(r=>{if(i.o(e,t)&&(0!==(n=e[t])&&(e[t]=void 0),n)){var o=r&&("load"===r.type?"missing":r.type),a=r&&r.target&&r.target.src;s.message="Loading chunk "+t+" failed.\n("+o+": "+a+")",s.name="ChunkLoadError",s.type=o,s.request=a,n[1](s)}}),"chunk-"+t,t)}};var t=(t,r)=>{var n,o,[a,s,c]=r,u=0;if(a.some((t=>0!==e[t]))){for(n in s)i.o(s,n)&&(i.m[n]=s[n]);if(c)c(i)}for(t&&t(r);u {i.r(o);var e=i(3325),t=i(5763);const r=Object.values(e.D);function n(e){const n={};return r.forEach((r=>{n[r]=function(e,r){return!1!==(0,t.Mt)(r,"".concat(e,".enabled"))}(r,e)})),n}var a=i(9144);var s=i(5546),c=i(385),u=i(8e3),d=i(5938),f=i(3960),l=i(50);class h extends d.W{constructor(e,t,r){let n=!(arguments.length>3&&void 0!==arguments[3])||arguments[3];super(e,t,r),this.auto=n,this.abortHandler,this.featAggregate,this.onAggregateImported,n&&(0,u.R)(e,r)}importAggregator(){let e=arguments.length>0&&void 0!==arguments[0]?arguments[0]:{};if(this.featAggregate||!this.auto)return;const r=c.il&&!0===(0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"privacy.cookies_enabled");let n;this.onAggregateImported=new Promise((e=>{n=e}));const o=async()=>{let t;try{if(r){const{setupAgentSession:e}=await Promise.all([i.e(860),i.e(242)]).then(i.bind(i,3228));t=e(this.agentIdentifier)}}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("A problem occurred when starting up session manager. This page will not start or extend any session.",e)}try{if(!this.shouldImportAgg(this.featureName,t))return void(0,u.L)(this.agentIdentifier,this.featureName);const{lazyFeatureLoader:r}=await i.e(412).then(i.bind(i,8582)),{Aggregate:o}=await r(this.featureName,"aggregate");this.featAggregate=new o(this.agentIdentifier,this.aggregator,e),n(!0)}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("Downloading and initializing ".concat(this.featureName," failed..."),e),this.abortHandler?.(),n(!1)}};c.il?(0,f.b)((()=>o()),!0):o()}shouldImportAgg(r,n){return r!==e.D.sessionReplay||!1!==(0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"session_trace.enabled")&&(!!n?.isNew||!!n?.state.sessionReplay)}}var g=i(7633),p=i(7894);class m extends h{static featureName=g.t9;constructor(r,n){let i=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];if(super(r,n,g.t9,i),("undefined"==typeof PerformanceNavigationTiming||c.Tt)&&"undefined"!=typeof PerformanceTiming){const n=(0,t.OP)(r);n[g.Dz]=Math.max(Date.now()-n.offset,0),(0,f.K)((()=>n[g.qw]=Math.max((0,p.z)()-n[g.Dz],0))),(0,f.b)((()=>{const t=(0,p.z)();n[g.OJ]=Math.max(t-n[g.Dz],0),(0,s.p)("timing",["load",t],void 0,e.D.pageViewTiming,this.ee)}))}this.importAggregator()}}var v=i(1117),b=i(1284);class y extends v.w{constructor(e){super(e),this.aggregatedData={}}store(e,t,r,n,i){var o=this.getBucket(e,t,r,i);return o.metrics=function(e,t){t||(t={count:0});return t.count+=1,(0,b.D)(e,(function(e,r){t[e]=w(r,t[e])})),t}(n,o.metrics),o}merge(e,t,r,n,i){var o=this.getBucket(e,t,n,i);if(o.metrics){var a=o.metrics;a.count+=r.count,(0,b.D)(r,(function(e,t){if("count"!==e){var n=a[e],i=r[e];i&&!i.c?a[e]=w(i.t,n):a[e]=function(e,t){if(!t)return e;t.c||(t=x(t.t));return t.min=Math.min(e.min,t.min),t.max=Math.max(e.max,t.max),t.t+=e.t,t.sos+=e.sos,t.c+=e.c,t}(i,a[e])}}))}else o.metrics=r}storeMetric(e,t,r,n){var i=this.getBucket(e,t,r);return i.stats=w(n,i.stats),i}getBucket(e,t,r,n){this.aggregatedData[e]||(this.aggregatedData[e]={});var i=this.aggregatedData[e][t];return i||(i=this.aggregatedData[e][t]={params:r||{}},n&&(i.custom=n)),i}get(e,t){return t?this.aggregatedData[e]&&this.aggregatedData[e][t]:this.aggregatedData[e]}take(e){for(var t={},r="",n=!1,i=0;i t.max&&(t.max=e),e 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,r,j.t,n),c.il&&((0,t.OP)(e).initHidden=Boolean("hidden"===document.visibilityState),(0,N.N)((()=>(0,s.p)("docHidden",[(0,p.z)()],void 0,j.t,this.ee)),!0),(0,O.bP)("pagehide",(()=>(0,s.p)("winPagehide",[(0,p.z)()],void 0,j.t,this.ee))),this.importAggregator())}}var P=i(3081);class C extends h{static featureName=P.t9;constructor(e,t){let r=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,t,P.t9,r),this.importAggregator()}}var R,I=i(2210),k=i(1214),H=i(2177),L={};try{R=localStorage.getItem("__nr_flags").split(","),console&&"function"==typeof console.log&&(L.console=!0,-1!==R.indexOf("dev")&&(L.dev=!0),-1!==R.indexOf("nr_dev")&&(L.nrDev=!0))}catch(e){}function z(e){try{L.console&&z(e)}catch(e){}}L.nrDev&&H.ee.on("internal-error",(function(e){z(e.stack)})),L.dev&&H.ee.on("fn-err",(function(e,t,r){z(r.stack)})),L.dev&&(z("NR AGENT IN DEVELOPMENT MODE"),z("flags: "+(0,b.D)(L,(function(e,t){return e})).join(", ")));var M=i(6660);class B extends h{static featureName=M.t;constructor(r,n){let i=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(r,n,M.t,i),this.skipNext=0;try{this.removeOnAbort=new AbortController}catch(e){}const o=this;o.ee.on("fn-start",(function(e,t,r){o.abortHandler&&(o.skipNext+=1)})),o.ee.on("fn-err",(function(t,r,n){o.abortHandler&&!n[M.A]&&((0,I.X)(n,M.A,(function(){return!0})),this.thrown=!0,(0,s.p)("err",[n,(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.jserrors,o.ee))})),o.ee.on("fn-end",(function(){o.abortHandler&&!this.thrown&&o.skipNext>0&&(o.skipNext-=1)})),o.ee.on("internal-error",(function(t){(0,s.p)("ierr",[t,(0,p.z)(),!0],void 0,e.D.jserrors,o.ee)})),this.origOnerror=c._A.onerror,c._A.onerror=this.onerrorHandler.bind(this),c._A.addEventListener("unhandledrejection",(t=>{const r=function(e){let t="Unhandled Promise Rejection: ";if(e instanceof Error)try{return e.message=t+e.message,e}catch(t){return e}if(void 0===e)return new Error(t);try{return new Error(t+(0,D.P)(e))}catch(e){return new Error(t)}}(t.reason);(0,s.p)("err",[r,(0,p.z)(),!1,{unhandledPromiseRejection:1}],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}),(0,O.m$)(!1,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),(0,k.gy)(this.ee),(0,k.BV)(this.ee),(0,k.em)(this.ee),(0,t.OP)(r).xhrWrappable&&(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),this.abortHandler=this.#e,this.importAggregator()}#e(){this.removeOnAbort?.abort(),this.abortHandler=void 0}onerrorHandler(t,r,n,i,o){"function"==typeof this.origOnerror&&this.origOnerror(...arguments);try{this.skipNext?this.skipNext-=1:(0,s.p)("err",[o||new F(t,r,n),(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}catch(t){try{(0,s.p)("ierr",[t,(0,p.z)(),!0],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}catch(e){}}return!1}}function F(e,t,r){this.message=e||"Uncaught error with no additional information",this.sourceURL=t,this.line=r}let U=1;const q="nr@id";function G(e){const t=typeof e;return!e||"object"!==t&&"function"!==t?-1:e===c._A?0:(0,I.X)(e,q,(function(){return U++}))}function V(e){if("string"==typeof e&&e.length)return e.length;if("object"==typeof e){if("undefined"!=typeof ArrayBuffer&&e instanceof ArrayBuffer&&e.byteLength)return e.byteLength;if("undefined"!=typeof Blob&&e instanceof Blob&&e.size)return e.size;if(!("undefined"!=typeof FormData&&e instanceof FormData))try{return(0,D.P)(e).length}catch(e){return}}}var X=i(7243);class W{constructor(e){this.agentIdentifier=e,this.generateTracePayload=this.generateTracePayload.bind(this),this.shouldGenerateTrace=this.shouldGenerateTrace.bind(this)}generateTracePayload(e){if(!this.shouldGenerateTrace(e))return null;var r=(0,t.DL)(this.agentIdentifier);if(!r)return null;var n=(r.accountID||"").toString()||null,i=(r.agentID||"").toString()||null,o=(r.trustKey||"").toString()||null;if(!n||!i)return null;var a=(0,_.M)(),s=(0,_.Ht)(),c=Date.now(),u={spanId:a,traceId:s,timestamp:c};return(e.sameOrigin||this.isAllowedOrigin(e)&&this.useTraceContextHeadersForCors())&&(u.traceContextParentHeader=this.generateTraceContextParentHeader(a,s),u.traceContextStateHeader=this.generateTraceContextStateHeader(a,c,n,i,o)),(e.sameOrigin&&!this.excludeNewrelicHeader()||!e.sameOrigin&&this.isAllowedOrigin(e)&&this.useNewrelicHeaderForCors())&&(u.newrelicHeader=this.generateTraceHeader(a,s,c,n,i,o)),u}generateTraceContextParentHeader(e,t){return"00-"+t+"-"+e+"-01"}generateTraceContextStateHeader(e,t,r,n,i){return i+"@nr=0-1-"+r+"-"+n+"-"+e+"----"+t}generateTraceHeader(e,t,r,n,i,o){if(!("function"==typeof c._A?.btoa))return null;var a={v:[0,1],d:{ty:"Browser",ac:n,ap:i,id:e,tr:t,ti:r}};return o&&n!==o&&(a.d.tk=o),btoa((0,D.P)(a))}shouldGenerateTrace(e){return this.isDtEnabled()&&this.isAllowedOrigin(e)}isAllowedOrigin(e){var r=!1,n={};if((0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"distributed_tracing")&&(n=(0,t.P_)(this.agentIdentifier).distributed_tracing),e.sameOrigin)r=!0;else if(n.allowed_origins instanceof Array)for(var i=0;i 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(r,n,Z.t,i),(0,t.OP)(r).xhrWrappable&&(this.dt=new W(r),this.handler=(e,t,r,n)=>(0,s.p)(e,t,r,n,this.ee),(0,k.u5)(this.ee),(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),function(r,n,i,o){function a(e){var t=this;t.totalCbs=0,t.called=0,t.cbTime=0,t.end=E,t.ended=!1,t.xhrGuids={},t.lastSize=null,t.loadCaptureCalled=!1,t.params=this.params||{},t.metrics=this.metrics||{},e.addEventListener("load",(function(r){_(t,e)}),(0,O.m$)(!1)),c.IF||e.addEventListener("progress",(function(e){t.lastSize=e.loaded}),(0,O.m$)(!1))}function s(e){this.params={method:e[0]},T(this,e[1]),this.metrics={}}function u(e,n){var i=(0,t.DL)(r);i.xpid&&this.sameOrigin&&n.setRequestHeader("X-NewRelic-ID",i.xpid);var a=o.generateTracePayload(this.parsedOrigin);if(a){var s=!1;a.newrelicHeader&&(n.setRequestHeader("newrelic",a.newrelicHeader),s=!0),a.traceContextParentHeader&&(n.setRequestHeader("traceparent",a.traceContextParentHeader),a.traceContextStateHeader&&n.setRequestHeader("tracestate",a.traceContextStateHeader),s=!0),s&&(this.dt=a)}}function d(e,t){var r=this.metrics,i=e[0],o=this;if(r&&i){var a=V(i);a&&(r.txSize=a)}this.startTime=(0,p.z)(),this.listener=function(e){try{"abort"!==e.type||o.loadCaptureCalled||(o.params.aborted=!0),("load"!==e.type||o.called===o.totalCbs&&(o.onloadCalled||"function"!=typeof t.onload)&&"function"==typeof o.end)&&o.end(t)}catch(e){try{n.emit("internal-error",[e])}catch(e){}}};for(var s=0;s 1?e[1]=i:e.push(i)}else e[0]&&e[0].headers&&s(e[0].headers,n)&&(this.dt=n);function s(e,t){var r=!1;return t.newrelicHeader&&(e.set("newrelic",t.newrelicHeader),r=!0),t.traceContextParentHeader&&(e.set("traceparent",t.traceContextParentHeader),t.traceContextStateHeader&&e.set("tracestate",t.traceContextStateHeader),r=!0),r}}function x(e,t){this.params={},this.metrics={},this.startTime=(0,p.z)(),this.dt=t,e.length>=1&&(this.target=e[0]),e.length>=2&&(this.opts=e[1]);var r,n=this.opts||{},i=this.target;"string"==typeof i?r=i:"object"==typeof i&&i instanceof Y?r=i.url:c._A?.URL&&"object"==typeof i&&i instanceof URL&&(r=i.href),T(this,r);var o=(""+(i&&i instanceof Y&&i.method||n.method||"GET")).toUpperCase();this.params.method=o,this.txSize=V(n.body)||0}function A(t,r){var n;this.endTime=(0,p.z)(),this.params||(this.params={}),this.params.status=r?r.status:0,"string"==typeof this.rxSize&&this.rxSize.length>0&&(n=+this.rxSize);var o={txSize:this.txSize,rxSize:n,duration:(0,p.z)()-this.startTime};i("xhr",[this.params,o,this.startTime,this.endTime,"fetch"],this,e.D.ajax)}function E(t){var r=this.params,n=this.metrics;if(!this.ended){this.ended=!0;for(var o=0;o 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,t,we.t,r),this.importAggregator()}}new class{constructor(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:(0,_.ky)(16);c._A?(this.agentIdentifier=t,this.sharedAggregator=new y({agentIdentifier:this.agentIdentifier}),this.features={},this.desiredFeatures=new Set(e.features||[]),this.desiredFeatures.add(m),Object.assign(this,(0,a.j)(this.agentIdentifier,e,e.loaderType||"agent")),this.start()):(0,l.Z)("Failed to initial the agent. Could not determine the runtime environment.")}get config(){return{info:(0,t.C5)(this.agentIdentifier),init:(0,t.P_)(this.agentIdentifier),loader_config:(0,t.DL)(this.agentIdentifier),runtime:(0,t.OP)(this.agentIdentifier)}}start(){const t="features";try{const r=n(this.agentIdentifier),i=[...this.desiredFeatures];i.sort(((t,r)=>e.p[t.featureName]-e.p[r.featureName])),i.forEach((t=>{if(r[t.featureName]||t.featureName===e.D.pageViewEvent){const n=function(t){switch(t){case e.D.ajax:return[e.D.jserrors];case e.D.sessionTrace:return[e.D.ajax,e.D.pageViewEvent];case e.D.sessionReplay:return[e.D.sessionTrace];case e.D.pageViewTiming:return[e.D.pageViewEvent];default:return[]}}(t.featureName);n.every((e=>r[e]))||(0,l.Z)("".concat(t.featureName," is enabled but one or more dependent features has been disabled (").concat((0,D.P)(n),"). This may cause unintended consequences or missing data...")),this.features[t.featureName]=new t(this.agentIdentifier,this.sharedAggregator)}})),(0,T.Qy)(this.agentIdentifier,this.features,t)}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("Failed to initialize all enabled instrument classes (agent aborted) -",e);for(const e in this.features)this.features[e].abortHandler?.();const r=(0,T.fP)();return delete r.initializedAgents[this.agentIdentifier]?.api,delete r.initializedAgents[this.agentIdentifier]?.[t],delete this.sharedAggregator,r.ee?.abort(),delete r.ee?.get(this.agentIdentifier),!1}}}({features:[J,m,S,class extends h{static featureName=oe;constructor(t,r){if(super(t,r,oe,!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2]),!c.il)return;const n=this.ee;let i;(0,k.QU)(n),this.eventsEE=(0,k.em)(n),this.eventsEE.on(se,(function(e,t){this.bstStart=(0,p.z)()})),this.eventsEE.on(ae,(function(t,r){(0,s.p)("bst",[t[0],r,this.bstStart,(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)})),n.on(ce+ne,(function(e){this.time=(0,p.z)(),this.startPath=location.pathname+location.hash})),n.on(ce+ie,(function(t){(0,s.p)("bstHist",[location.pathname+location.hash,this.startPath,this.time],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)}));try{i=new PerformanceObserver((t=>{const r=t.getEntries();(0,s.p)(te,[r],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)})),i.observe({type:re,buffered:!0})}catch(e){}this.importAggregator({resourceObserver:i})}},C,xe,B,class extends h{static featureName=de;constructor(e,r){if(super(e,r,de,!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2]),!c.il)return;if(!(0,t.OP)(e).xhrWrappable)return;try{this.removeOnAbort=new AbortController}catch(e){}let n,i=0;const o=this.ee.get("tracer"),a=(0,k._L)(this.ee),s=(0,k.Lg)(this.ee),u=(0,k.BV)(this.ee),d=(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),f=this.ee.get("events"),l=(0,k.u5)(this.ee),h=(0,k.QU)(this.ee),g=(0,k.Gm)(this.ee);function m(e,t){h.emit("newURL",[""+window.location,t])}function v(){i++,n=window.location.hash,this[ve]=(0,p.z)()}function b(){i--,window.location.hash!==n&&m(0,!0);var e=(0,p.z)();this[pe]=~~this[pe]+e-this[ve],this[ye]=e}function y(e,t){e.on(t,(function(){this[t]=(0,p.z)()}))}this.ee.on(ve,v),s.on(be,v),a.on(be,v),this.ee.on(ye,b),s.on(ge,b),a.on(ge,b),this.ee.buffer([ve,ye,"xhr-resolved"],this.featureName),f.buffer([ve],this.featureName),u.buffer(["setTimeout"+le,"clearTimeout"+fe,ve],this.featureName),d.buffer([ve,"new-xhr","send-xhr"+fe],this.featureName),l.buffer([me+fe,me+"-done",me+he+fe,me+he+le],this.featureName),h.buffer(["newURL"],this.featureName),g.buffer([ve],this.featureName),s.buffer(["propagate",be,ge,"executor-err","resolve"+fe],this.featureName),o.buffer([ve,"no-"+ve],this.featureName),a.buffer(["new-jsonp","cb-start","jsonp-error","jsonp-end"],this.featureName),y(l,me+fe),y(l,me+"-done"),y(a,"new-jsonp"),y(a,"jsonp-end"),y(a,"cb-start"),h.on("pushState-end",m),h.on("replaceState-end",m),window.addEventListener("hashchange",m,(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),window.addEventListener("load",m,(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),window.addEventListener("popstate",(function(){m(0,i>1)}),(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),this.abortHandler=this.#e,this.importAggregator()}#e(){this.removeOnAbort?.abort(),this.abortHandler=void 0}}],loaderType:"spa"})})(),window.NRBA=o})(); window.jQuery || document.write(' ') CKEDITOR_BASEPATH='https://f1000research.com/js/vendor/ckeditor/' window.reactTheme = 'research'; window.MathJax = { CommonHTML: { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, 'HTML-CSS': { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, SVG: { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, AuthorInit: function() { MathJax.Hub.Register.MessageHook('End Process', function () { let timeout = false; // holder for timeout id const delay = 250; // delay after event is "complete" to run callback const reflowMath = function() { const dispFormulas = document.querySelectorAll('.disp-formula.panel'); if (!dispFormulas) { return; } for (const dispFormula of dispFormulas) { const child = dispFormula.querySelector('.MathJax_Preview').nextSibling.firstChild; const isMultiline = MathJax.Hub.getAllJax(dispFormula)[0].root.isMultiline; if (dispFormula.offsetWidth < child.offsetWidth || isMultiline) { MathJax.Hub.Queue(['Rerender', MathJax.Hub, dispFormula]); } } }; window.addEventListener('resize', function() { clearTimeout(timeout); // clear the timeout timeout = setTimeout(reflowMath, delay); // start timing for event "completion" }); }); }, }; if (window.location.hash == '#_=_'){ window.location = window.location.href.split('#')[0] } !function(f,b,e,v,n,t,s){if(f.fbq)return;n=f.fbq=function() {n.callMethod? n.callMethod.apply(n,arguments):n.queue.push(arguments)} ;if(!f._fbq)f._fbq=n; n.push=n;n.loaded=!0;n.version='2.0';n.queue=[];t=b.createElement(e);t.async=!0; t.src=v;s=b.getElementsByTagName(e)[0];s.parentNode.insertBefore(t,s)}(window, document,'script','https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/fbevents.js'); fbq('init', '1641728616063202'); fbq('track', "PixelInitialized", {}); (function(h,o,t,j,a,r){ h.hj=h.hj||function(){(h.hj.q=h.hj.q||[]).push(arguments)}; h._hjSettings={hjid:2318163,hjsv:6}; a=o.getElementsByTagName('head')[0]; r=o.createElement('script');r.async=1; r.src=t+h._hjSettings.hjid+j+h._hjSettings.hjsv; a.appendChild(r); })(window,document,'https://static.hotjar.com/c/hotjar-','.js?sv='); search file_upload Submit your research search menu close search Browse Gateways & Collections How to Publish Submit your Research My Submissions Article Guidelines Article Guidelines (New Versions) Open Data, Software and Code Guidelines Open Data and Accessible Source Materials Guidelines (HSS) Open Data, Software and Code Guidelines (PSE) Prepublication Checks Production Process Posters and Slides Guidelines Document Guidelines Article Processing Charges Peer Review Finding Article Reviewers About How it Works For Reviewers Our Advisors Policies Glossary FAQs For Developers Newsroom Contact My Research Submissions Content and Tracking Alerts My Details Sign In file_upload Submit your research { "@context": "https://schema.org", "@type": "ScholarlyArticle", "mainEntityOfPage": { "@type": "WebPage", "@id": "https://f1000research.com/articles/15-70" }, "headline": "Mapping the themes and intellectual structure of micro-influencers: A systematic review and meta-analysis", "datePublished": "2026-01-16T12:14:45", "dateModified": "2026-01-16T12:14:45", "author": [ { "@type": "Person", "name": "L.M.D.O Wimalasena" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "D.M.R Dissanayake" } ], "publisher": { "@type": "Organization", "name": "F1000Research", "logo": { "@type": "ImageObject", "url": "https://f1000research.com/img/AMP/F1000Research_image.png", "height": 480, "width": 60 } }, "image": { "@type": "ImageObject", "url": "https://f1000research.com/img/AMP/F1000Research_image.png", "height": 1200, "width": 150 }, "description": "Abstract* Background Social media marketing dynamics have been reshaped with the rise of micro-influencers, with the offering of community-driven and authentic brand engagement that goes beyond traditional celebrity endorsements and advertising. This study aims to systematically examine the micro-influencer research published between 2020 and 2025, focusing on identifying themes, research gaps, methodological characteristics, and providing future directions. Methods This paper focuses on providing a thorough systematic literature review (SLR) incorporating the PRISMA protocol on micro-influencers, while identifying interdependencies and relationships. 68 research papers that were derived from the Scopus database were analysed through bibliometric and content analysis. Bibliometric analysis was conducted using a combination of VOSviewer and Biblioshiny packages. Results were analysed through thematic clusters, co-occurrence, and bibliographic coupling analysis. Results The analysis depicts a steady growth in publications accelerated with digitalisation and post-COVID consumer shift that placed a commercial value on small-scale influencers. Research is fragmented across authenticity, trust, engagement, sponsorship disclosure, and niche-domains for micro-influencers. The literature is geographically skewed towards the West and high-income Asian countries. Less longitudinal evidence with strong methodological homogeneity was present. Algorithmic visibility, emerging platform comparisons, influencer labour, and non-commercial uses of micro-influencers were underexplored themes. Five research areas were identified from clustering. Conclusion Despite the rapid expansions, micro-influencer literature remains theoretically fragmented and unevenly distributed. This review provides a comprehensive analysis of the literature on micro-influencers and provides implications and future research directions. Most studies focused on analysing a single platform with cross-sectional designs. This study highlights the need for thorough theoretical integration with methodological diversification, considering emerging platforms to better understand how micro influencers shape digital communication. " } { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "BreadcrumbList", "itemListElement": [ { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "1", "item": { "@id": "https://f1000research.com/", "name": "Home" } }, { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "2", "item": { "@id": "https://f1000research.com/browse/articles", "name": "Browse" } }, { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "3", "item": { "@id": "https://f1000research.com/articles/15-70", "name": "Mapping the themes and intellectual structure of micro-influencers:..." } } ] } Home Browse Mapping the themes and intellectual structure of micro-influencers:... ALL Metrics - Views Downloads Get PDF Get XML Cite How to cite this article Wimalasena LMDO and Dissanayake DMR. Mapping the themes and intellectual structure of micro-influencers: A systematic review and meta-analysis [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2026, 15 :70 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.175286.1 ) NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. Close Copy Citation Details Export Export Citation Sciwheel EndNote Ref. Manager Bibtex ProCite Sente EXPORT Select a format first Track Share ▬ ✚ Systematic Review Mapping the themes and intellectual structure of micro-influencers: A systematic review and meta-analysis [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] L.M.D.O Wimalasena https://orcid.org/0009-0009-5168-0206 1 , D.M.R Dissanayake 2,3 L.M.D.O Wimalasena https://orcid.org/0009-0009-5168-0206 1 , D.M.R Dissanayake 2,3 PUBLISHED 16 Jan 2026 Author details Author details 1 University of Kelaniya Faculty of Commerce and Management Studies, Kelaniya, Western Province, 11600, Sri Lanka 2 Department of Marketing Management, University of Kelaniya Faculty of Commerce and Management Studies, Kelaniya, Western Province, 11600, Sri Lanka 3 Adjunct Professor, Taylor’s Business School, Taylor's University, Subang Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia L.M.D.O Wimalasena Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Methodology, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing D.M.R Dissanayake Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Methodology, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Review & Editing OPEN PEER REVIEW DETAILS REVIEWER STATUS Abstract Abstract* Background Social media marketing dynamics have been reshaped with the rise of micro-influencers, with the offering of community-driven and authentic brand engagement that goes beyond traditional celebrity endorsements and advertising. This study aims to systematically examine the micro-influencer research published between 2020 and 2025, focusing on identifying themes, research gaps, methodological characteristics, and providing future directions. Methods This paper focuses on providing a thorough systematic literature review (SLR) incorporating the PRISMA protocol on micro-influencers, while identifying interdependencies and relationships. 68 research papers that were derived from the Scopus database were analysed through bibliometric and content analysis. Bibliometric analysis was conducted using a combination of VOSviewer and Biblioshiny packages. Results were analysed through thematic clusters, co-occurrence, and bibliographic coupling analysis. Results The analysis depicts a steady growth in publications accelerated with digitalisation and post-COVID consumer shift that placed a commercial value on small-scale influencers. Research is fragmented across authenticity, trust, engagement, sponsorship disclosure, and niche-domains for micro-influencers. The literature is geographically skewed towards the West and high-income Asian countries. Less longitudinal evidence with strong methodological homogeneity was present. Algorithmic visibility, emerging platform comparisons, influencer labour, and non-commercial uses of micro-influencers were underexplored themes. Five research areas were identified from clustering. Conclusion Despite the rapid expansions, micro-influencer literature remains theoretically fragmented and unevenly distributed. This review provides a comprehensive analysis of the literature on micro-influencers and provides implications and future research directions. Most studies focused on analysing a single platform with cross-sectional designs. This study highlights the need for thorough theoretical integration with methodological diversification, considering emerging platforms to better understand how micro influencers shape digital communication. READ ALL READ LESS Keywords Micro influencers, Influencer marketing, Nano influencers, Bibliometric analysis, VOSviewer, Biblioshiny, Systematic Literature Review, Social media Corresponding Author(s) L.M.D.O Wimalasena ( [email protected] ) D.M.R Dissanayake ( [email protected] ) Close Corresponding authors: L.M.D.O Wimalasena, D.M.R Dissanayake Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Grant information: The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work. Copyright: © 2026 Wimalasena LMDO and Dissanayake DMR. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. How to cite: Wimalasena LMDO and Dissanayake DMR. Mapping the themes and intellectual structure of micro-influencers: A systematic review and meta-analysis [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2026, 15 :70 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.175286.1 ) First published: 16 Jan 2026, 15 :70 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.175286.1 ) Latest published: 16 Jan 2026, 15 :70 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.175286.1 ) Introduction The wide use of social media in recent years has transformed the marketing and consumer engagement landscape profoundly. Considering all the significant evolutions, the evolution of influencer marketing holds a high position. This strategy involves individuals who possess a significant number of followers to actively engage in promoting brands or products with the intention of receiving monetary compensation or otherwise. 1 Social proof theory acts as the basis of this sort of paradigm shift, and this explains the behaviour of people to conform to the actions of someone they trust or highly admire. 2 This psychological tendency is capitalized in influencer marketing, which is identified as a powerful tool in brand communication strategies in the digital era. In order to achieve various goals of brands, ranging from increasing awareness to increasing direct sales, currently more than 90% of the brands utilize influencers in their marketing efforts. 3 Various types of influencers can be identified based on the number of followers they possess, and a significant shift from reliance on mega influencers with millions of followers to micro-influencers typically having followers between 5000 to 50,000 is evident. 4 Micro-influencers are known to be more authentic, community-oriented, and approachable than other influencers, which allows them to form parasocial relationships that are strong in nature with their audience. 5 Studies have proven that these relationships result in enhancing perceived credibility, brand engagement, and consumer trust. 6 Higher engagement rates achieved by micro-influencers compared to mega influencers have proven the effectiveness of utilizing micro-influencers in community building, niche marketing, and driving purchase decisions. 7 , 8 Cost-effective campaigns on platforms such as Instagram, YouTube, and TikTok, targeting segmented audiences, utilize them. 3 Nano-influencers with less than 5000 followers are also significantly utilized in hyper-targeted marketing efforts. 9 Though the reach is comparatively small, high trust and intimate follower engagement are crucial in grassroots influence and brand authenticity. 10 Research remains scarce in relation to the effectiveness and strategic roles. In the domain of micro-influencer systematic literature reviews, a dearth of literature exists in peer-reviewed journals. Chen et al., 11 which was among the few reviews in this domain, employed CiteSpace while considering literature from 2013 to 2024. Though it covered from 2013, it did not only consider social sciences, limiting coherent theoretical synthesis relevant to advertising, consumer behavior, persuasion, digital labor, and communication scholarship. Our review employed a narrower, contextually relevant snapshot of the domain, which consists of post-COVID era emerging themes with digital acceleration, platform shifts, rapid advancements in artificial intelligence, and the creator economy surge. A notable gap exists in the lack of studies employing advanced tools such as VOSviewer and Biblioshiny employing PRISMA, to conduct a bibliometric analysis with systematic mapping and visualization of the landscapes in the domain. As per the best of the knowledge of the authors, there is a dearth of research on the evolution of micro-influencer literature utilizing comprehensive bibliometric analysis using VOSviewer and Biblioshiny, which affirms the originality of the study. The study focuses on addressing this gap with a data-driven approach, identifying thematic clusters, sources, significant contributors, and emerging research areas. A systematic review is “not the end of the road, but the beginning of new journeys”. 12 Therefore, the main goal of this study is to explore the development of the knowledge structures of micro-influencer literature with the investigation of key themes while providing future research areas and actionable insights for scholars and practitioners. This study aims to address the following research questions: RQ1: How has the literature on micro-influencers developed? RQ2: What are the key themes and research focuses in the existing literature on micro-influencers? RQ3: What are the implications for future research on micro-influencers? The first research question focuses on the development of literature on micro-influencers in the past years, analyzing the empirical papers, authors, and journals. The second research question aims to identify the themes and focuses on the existing literature, and the final research question focuses on identifying implications for future researchers in the micro-influencer domain. Methods The methodology of this study is a systematic literature review (SLR) with a bibliometric analysis focusing on analyzing the research area, “micro-influencers”. This reviews the literature systematically by setting clear exclusion and inclusion criteria. 13 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), which is popular among medical research, was utilized as this reporting is lacking in social science studies in this arena. 14 Our study employed PRISMA, utilizing a rigorous, systematic, and objective process of selection. Further, the study aims to identify knowledge growth and future research areas in this domain. 15 SLRs have gained wide recognition and are suiting for micro-influencer-focused study due to the manageable dataset, and with the wide availability of research articles, proper analysis can be conducted, going beyond simple summarization. 16 Transparency and replicability are notable principles of SLRs. 17 Publication impact, influence of the authors, keywords, and top journals that published articles are aimed at discovering with the literature review exploration. Search strategy The next stage requires identifying the exact papers for the analysis and launching the scientific query in the database. Hence, the study employed four steps in the PRISMA flow diagram, which are identification, screening, eligibility, and inclusion. At the first step of PRISMA, the Scopus database was selected, and two search strings were utilized: “micro influencers” OR “nano influencers.” Scopus database includes over 20,000 peer-reviewed journal titles. 18 This search took place in April 2025. Scopus was picked over Web of Science (WoS) due to the large number of papers covered in Scopus, and 97% of WoS-indexed papers are included in the Scopus domain. 19 In the identification stage, 369 articles were identified. The authors identified duplicates and removed them. The criteria utilized for searching are unbiased and reproducible. At the screening stage, the research adheres to several inclusion and exclusion criteria. Only empirical articles published in journals were selected, excluding book chapters, books, conference papers, reviews, conference reviews, short surveys, research notes, and articles in press. 20 , 21 With the implementation of this criterion, 160 articles were shown, and further exclusion criteria were set. English articles published between 2020 and 2025, in social sciences, business, management and accounting, economics, econometrics, finance, arts and humanities domains were included. This resulted in downloading 100 papers from the database as a CSV file with title, abstract, author(s), authors’ keyword, number of citations, year, affiliation, sources, and references. 2020 was set as the base year, considering the post-COVID digital acceleration, increased digital engagement, algorithmic distribution of content, and maturity of the micro-influencer research area. Post-COVID consumer shift toward increased digital engagement, online purchase surge, which influenced the positioning of micro and nano influencers. AI-driven algorithmic platform adoption also started getting popular in emerging social media platforms around this time. 2025 was selected as the ending time to grasp the insights of the recent literature developed. Further, at the screening stage, a total of 32 articles were excluded by the researchers through content analysis, which identified articles with unclear methodology and a lack of necessary details. Each author thoroughly reviewed the articles independently based on the set criteria. Any disagreements occurred with regards to article inclusion were addressed. At the final stage, 68 articles were selected for this study. The process of article selection is depicted in Figure 1 . On the selected 68 papers, a descriptive analysis and a cluster analysis were performed. Descriptive analysis focused on identifying publication evolution, specific journals, nationwide contribution, and topics. Citations, along with author collaborations, were also identified. 22 , 23 In order to enhance the value of the research outcomes, bibliometric analysis is utilized in this critical analysis stage. 24 Data was analysed using VOSviewer version 1.6.20 and Bibioshiny (Bibliometrix) via RStudio software desktop version 2023.09.1+494 with the intention of increasing the validity of the results. The VOSviewer analytical tool was utilized to visualize bibliometric networks and clusters through co-occurrence and bibliographic coupling analysis. 25 , 26 Biblioshiny was utilized to derive the most relevant sources, author production identification, treemap with keywords, trend topic analysis, and finally a three-field plot with authors, keywords, and sources. The latter part of the paper includes clustering followed by a critical content analysis of the papers to form research areas and provide future research directions. The next section presents the main research evidence of this paper. Figure 1. The PRISMA flow diagram for identification of articles from the database. Source: Constructed by the authors. Results The main evidence of the systematic review focused on addressing the aforementioned research questions is presented in this section. The rest of the section covers the selected articles’ bibliometric and content analysis. Descriptive analysis The publications trend between 2020 and 2025 is depicted in Figure 2 . An upward trend can be identified over the years from 2020 up until 2024. In 2020, 2 articles were published, and gradually, in 2024, 29 articles were published. However, the upward trend does not seem to be promising, as up to now only 9 articles have been published. This illustrates the actuality of the research area and the necessity for a thorough investigation into micro-influencer research. This identifies a temporal gap despite the growth. There is a need for continuous and updated research in this area. Figure 2. Publication trend between the years 2020 and 2025. Source: Developed by the authors. In terms of the distribution, which is a crucial metric for researchers, for this study, 68 papers were selected, and this acts as an important sign of the potential for exploring the research subjects. Journal distribution depicts that one to four papers were fragmented across 50 journals. Journal of Business Research and Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing are the only two journals that have published four papers. As per Figure 3 , other journals had about two papers. Figure 3. Most relevant sources. Source: Authors generated through Biblioshiny. This highlights another gap, as the research on this area is highly fragmented and lacks a specialized outlet, which results in slowing theory-building. Future studies should focus on identifying core streams and underexplored areas and should publish in high-impact journals to grow visibility. Article categorization as per the subject areas depicted in Table 1 , and it is evident that the leading areas are business, management and accounting, social sciences, computer science and economics, econometrics, and finance. This shows the importance of analysing the impact of micro-influencers in businesses, socially and technologically. Micro-influencer impact on shaping consumer engagement, marketing, and branding could be investigated under the business-related areas. Economic implications of influencer marketing campaigns, computer science involvement with the utilization of data analytics and algorithmic targeting, confirm that the cross-disciplinary focus on studies relating to micro-influencers, which is not only limited to strategic business applications but extends to social behaviours and technological implementation. Table 1. Article categorization based on subject areas. Subject area Number of papers Business, management and accounting 57 Social sciences 46 Economics, econometrics and finance 14 Arts and humanities 4 Computer science 15 Others 6 Geographical analysis of the articles and citations: to analyse the number of articles published and the number of citations in the monitored time based on the geography, Figures 4 , 5 , and 6 have been utilized. The authorship, research centre, or base university was considered as the criterion to determine the total number of citations and research articles for each country, and if the research work involved authors from various countries, a point was awarded for each of them. The studies were fragmented across a range of countries, including from United States, the United Kingdom to Malaysia, Taiwan, South Korea, and 28 countries in total have contributed. Figure 4. Number of articles per country. Source: Developed by the authors. Figure 5. Number of citations per country. Source: Developed by the authors. Figure 6. Articles and citations per country. Source: Developed by the authors. The summary of the evidence suggests that the top eight publications belong to the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, China, India, Spain, the Netherlands, and Germany, as shown in Figure 4 . The three countries that topped in terms of publications are, United States with 19 papers, the United Kingdom with 10 papers, China and Australia with 9 papers. India published 8 papers, Spain six, the Netherlands and Germany five each. The citation analysis given in Figure 5 and Figure 6 , based on the countries, depicts the top three countries with the highest number of citations: Australia (474), the United States (337), and South Korea (156). Research gaps relating to geographical concentration can be identified as the highest number of citations and publications is skewed towards Western countries and some Asian countries. Many regions, including Africa, the Middle East, and South America (apart from the limited research considered), remain underrepresented. Australia and South Korea, despite having fewer publications than the United States, resulted in high citation counts, showing that high-impact research does not always correlate with volume. Valuable insights could also be derived from fewer article-producing countries, but with highly cited documents. Figure 7 shows the number of citations received by the articles over the considered time. The trend depicts a decreasing nature of the number of citations from the year 2020 to 2022, and again in 2023, this has increased. However, in 2024, this has drastically decreased, and it appears that 2025 will confirm this pattern as well. Figure 7. Number of citations received by articles over time. Source: Developed by the authors. Despite the increasing publications over time from 2020 to 2024, citations have not followed the trend. This highlights that publication volume does not correlate with the impact, and future research should aim for theoretically grounded and rigorous studies instead of context-specific exploratory studies. The top three mostly cited papers, which are listed in Table 2 , demonstrate citations ranging from 293 to 112. The most cited paper, which gained 293 citations, was published in 2020, whilst the other two were published in 2021, and this demonstrates that the scientific community has greatly valued the efforts. This also suggests that the arena is emerging, and future research should aim to replicate, validate the early findings towards building theoretical robustness. The most relevant affiliations are mentioned in Figure 8 , and the University of Southern California, the University of Auckland, and Griffith University can be considered as the top affiliations. This indicates that research is concentrated among a few universities, and this gap could be addressed if future research encourages participation across the globe with a high number of institutions, with the intention to explore cross-cultural studies and diversified methodologies. The dearth of research also showcases the geographical research gaps that limit the generalizability of the findings. Table 2. Top three cited papers. Authors Title Cited by Source Country (-ies) Kay S.; Mulcahy R.; Parkinson J. 2020 When less is more: the impact of macro and micro social media influencers’ disclosure 293 Journal of Marketing Management Australia Park J.; Lee J.M.; Xiong V.Y.; Septianto F.; Seo Y. 2021 David and Goliath: When and Why Micro-Influencers Are More Persuasive Than Mega-Influencers 139 Journal of Advertising South Korea, New Zealand, Australia Muda M.; Hamzah M.I. 2021 Should I suggest this YouTube clip? The impact of UGC source credibility on eWOM and purchase intention 112 Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing Malaysia Figure 8. Most relevant affiliations. Source: Developed by the authors through Biblioshiny. Figure 9 gives a clear overview of the number of articles published and the number of citations gained from 2020 to 2025. In all the years, the number of citations has exceeded the number of published articles. The peak of the citations was in the year 2020, yet the number of articles in that year remains two. From the years 2020 to 2022, there was a downward trend in terms of citations, and in 2023, citations increased from 188 to 353. However, the citations have shown a downward trend from 2023 to 2025. The number of articles published from 2020 to 2024 has shown an increasing trend, and in 2025, it has decreased. Publication activity of top authors in the domain is depicted in Figure 10 . Unger JB , Vassey J , and Chang H-CH were the most productive authors who published many papers in 2024 that contributed towards a notable citation impact. Consistent involvement has been shown by De Angelis M , Golan GJ , and Lee JM by publishing from 2021 to 2024. Lee JM has been an active contributor across four years. Parkinson J , Park J , and Lu S have been able to make contributions over short periods, while Parkinson J , who started in 2020, continued through 2022. Even though authors have few publications, certain authors have achieved moderate citation influence. A diverse and focused group of researchers has shaped this stream. Figure 9. Number of articles and citations gained. Source: Developed by the authors. Figure 10. Author's production. Source: Developed by the authors through Biblioshiny. A very small number of authors appeared in 2020 and 2021, indicating a gap in baseline studies in the arena. To build a more complete understanding of micro-influencers, future research should be carried out to uncover understudied variables, especially in qualitative and exploratory terms. Short-lived research involvement can be identified with the limited multi-year productivity with the publication concentration in 2024. Researchers should design multi-phase and longitudinal studies targeting multi-year productions. Future studies should consider long-term collaborations. In Figure 11 , the Sankey diagram is used to visualize the relationship between the most relevant authors, keywords, and sources. Each bar shows the frequency and relevance, and the size shows the contribution. One of the central keywords being micro-influencers, depicts the strong focus of research in this area. Certain authors, including Golan GJ, Vassey J, and Chang H-CH, have published articles relating to micro-influencers while being connected to themes such as ‘influencer marketing’, ‘Instagram’, and ‘social media’. These have been published in the Journal of Business Research, Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, and the European Journal of Marketing. Research with overlapping keywords suggests collaborative trends. Even among closely related keywords such as ‘social media influencers’, ‘influencers’, and ‘influencer marketing’, the specific emergence of ‘micro-influencers’ confirms the trending and growing research interest in this niche area. This provides a clear understanding of the prominent authors, sources, and keywords. Figure 11. Sankey Diagram. Source: Developed by the authors through Biblioshiny. Topics and common keywords VOSviewer and Biblioshiny were used for the keyword occurrences to retrieve the most common topics and keywords initially. In order to conduct the keyword analysis, the keywords utilized by the authors and the publishers were considered. A large number of papers can be analysed while focusing on the depth of the small concepts. 27 The Keywords were retrieved from the chosen articles, which were later subdivided. 28 The keyword subdivision, as per the co-occurrence using VOSviewer, resulted in seven clusters. In the process of extracting the most common keywords, the threshold was set to at least two times, and the unit of analysis was selected as the author’s keywords. The formed clusters, along with the keywords, are depicted in Table 3 and Figure 12 . The keyword “influencer marketing” was identified as the most recurrent keyword, with the occurrence of 22 times, then “social media” and “micro-influencer” were identified. These top-three keywords are in different clusters, in particular clusters 2, 6, and 7. Micro-influencers are a part of the wider social media marketing domain, with studies focusing on comparisons with different types of influencers. Hence, the identification of influencer marketing as the most occurring keyword is consistent with the studies, such as Walter et al. 5 A clear gap can be identified as certain constructs that have a clear link toward social media micro-influencers, like self-branding, parasocial intimacy, and algorithmic visibility, were not visible in this analysis. This suggests that despite the link, these areas remain underexplored, and future studies should focus on this arena. Table 3. Author’s keywords occurrence. Keywords Occurrences Cluster 1 (7 items- Red) Credibility 2 Influencer 4 Perceived credibility 2 Persuasion 2 Similarity 2 Social media influencer 2 Trust 2 Cluster 2 (7 items- Green) Brand engagement 2 Influencer marketing 22 Micro-influencer 2 Parasocial relationship 2 Purchase intention 4 Source Credibility 3 User-generated content 3 Cluster 3 (6 items-Blue) Engagement 2 Influencer type 2 Persuasion knowledge 2 Social networks 2 Sponsorship disclosure 3 YouTube 3 Cluster 4 (6 items-Light green) E-cigarettes 2 Influencers 8 Misinformation 2 Nicotine 2 Social network 2 Tiktok 2 Cluster 5 (5 items-Violet) Microblogging 2 Nano-influencers 2 Natural language processing 2 Sentiment analysis 4 Social media influencers 7 Cluster 6 (4 items- Sky Blue) Covid-19 2 Instagram 10 Micro-influencers 12 Social status 2 Cluster 7 (3 items-Orange) Branding 2 Micro influencer 2 Social media 19 Figure 12. Authors' keywords' clusters. Source: Developed by the authors through VOSviewer. Further, with Biblioshiny , a Treemap was used in Figure 13 to provide a clear representation of the keywords, as treemaps effectively represent the keyword repetition and hierarchical structure with stacked rectangles. The value decides the area of the rectangle. ‘Micro influencers’ was the third most frequently occurring keyword with 12 mentions. Key domains in the research area were depicted from this, and a social media platform, which is Instagram, was the 4th frequently occurring keyword in the study. This is consistent with Liao et al., 29 as these studies specifically focused on Instagram. Figure 13. Treemap. Source: Authors generated through Biblioshiny. Trend topic analysis was conducted using Biblioshiny with the intention of identifying the most frequently discussed topics in the domain, as shown in Figure 14 . Minimum word frequency was set at ten. ‘Influencer marketing’ was a prominent topic starting from 2022, along with ‘social media’, ‘Instagram’, and ‘micro-influencers’ in the years 2023 and 2024. This indicates the niche and targeted marketing strategies focusing on ‘micro-influencers’ and ‘Instagram’. The recent trend topics indicate the dominance of the Instagram studies, and a clear gap can be identified with the underrepresentation of emerging platforms such as TikTok and Twitch. Future studies should focus on these platforms. Further, future research should focus on theory building towards platform-specific visibility. Figure 14. Trend Topics Analysis. Source: Authors generated through Biblioshiny. Clustering and content analysis In order to evaluate the relatedness, the articles that share similar references have been considered under the clustering in bibliographic coupling. 30 , 31 Bibliographic coupling was conducted with the use of VOSviewer. The unit of analysis was selected as documents, the threshold was a minimum of five citations, and the fractional counting method was followed. This analysis resulted in 33 connected papers because only papers with at least five citations were selected and generated five clusters. The five clusters generated from bibliographic coupling are depicted in Figure 15 , and it is vital to comprehend that the strength of the closeness is related to the quantity of shared bibliographies that occur in the article. Figure 15. Clusters formed with intersected literature. Source: Developed by the authors through VOSviewer. Content analysis Rigorous content analysis has been performed with the objective of thoroughly grasping the primary developing research areas. After carefully reading all the publications, the researchers conducted the content analysis in order to categorize them into research areas. The analysis categorized articles into five research areas, and each of these synthesized the corpus of knowledge. The identified five research areas are as follows: Sponsorship disclosure, influencer types and decision making: a multilevel analysis, Strategic language and micro-influencer engagement, Behavioural outcomes and interpersonal dynamics of micro-influencer marketing, micro-influencers in identity construction and professionalization, and micro-influencers as persuasive actors in niche domains. The articles belonging to the aforementioned research areas are given in Table 4 , which is included in the repository. 32 Research area 1 comprises the highest number of literature among all the clusters, spanning from 2020. Themes of the articles covered in the cluster are converging predominantly on sponsorship disclosure, influencer marketing, influencer type, and responses of the consumers, while emphasizing micro-influencers. One area identified in the cluster was comprising studies focusing on the perceived consumer behaviour pertaining to sponsorship disclosure and influencer credibility. Explicit sponsorship disclosure resulted in increasing the behaviour of value co-creation, 33 while the investigations related to the transparency of sponsorship linking to the decision-making stages depicted a significant impact of trust and sponsorship transparency, highlighting the problem recognition to post-purchase in the decision-making process. 34 Transparency and communication have resulted in boosting consumer credibility among micro-influencers, along with having a positive impact on purchase intention. The impact of disclosure on brand evaluations and the trust among consumers has also been investigated. 35 , 36 Table 4. Research papers based on the research areas. Research areas Year Citations Title Sponsorship disclosure, influencer types and decision making: a multilevel analysis (11 papers) 2022 15 Influencer marketing: sponsorship disclosure and value co-creation behaviour 2023 9 Which decision-making stages matter more? Influencer’s perceived credibility, sponsorship and moderating role of trust 2022 8 Nano-Influencers Edutubers: Perspective of Centennial Generation Families in Spain 2022 45 Sponsorship Disclosure of Influencers – A Curse or a Blessing? 2020 293 When less is more: the impact of macro and micro social media influencers’ disclosure 2024 5 Does the verified badge of social media matter? The perspective of trust transfer theory 2021 139 David and Goliath: When and Why Micro-Influencers Are More Persuasive Than Mega-Influencers 2021 18 How to convert Millennial consumers to brand evangelists through social media micro-influencers 2022 31 Consumers’ self-reported and brain responses to advertising post on Instagram: the effect of number of followers and argument quality 2021 66 A persuasive eWOM model for increasing consumer engagement on social media: evidence from Irish fashion micro-influencers 2022 25 Managing the Transparency Paradox Of Social-Media Influencer Disclosures: How to Improve Authenticity and Engagement When Disclosing Influencer-Sponsor Relationships Strategic language and micro-influencer engagement (6 papers) 2024 21 How High-Arousal Language Shapes Micro- Versus Macro-Influencers’ Impact 2023 5 Macro-influencers or meso-influencers, how do companies choose? 2023 69 Influencer marketing: When and why gen Z consumers avoid influencers and endorsed brands 2023 25 Influencer marketing and the growth of affiliates: The effects of language features on engagement behavior 2024 19 Mega or Micro? Influencer Selection Using Follower Elasticity 2020 109 The Positive Effect of Not Following Others on Social Media Behavioural outcomes and interpersonal dynamics of micro-influencer marketing (6 papers) 2023 7 Who one is, whom one knows? Evaluating the importance of personal and social characteristics of influential people in social networks 2024 15 Influencer marketing in the promotion of tourist destinations: mega, macro and micro-influencers 2023 74 Social media influencers as human brands: an interactive marketing perspective 2024 14 How micro- (vs. mega-) influencers generate word of mouth in the digital economy age: The moderating role of mindset 2021 112 Should I suggest this YouTube clip? The impact of UGC source credibility on eWOM and purchase intention 2024 13 Parasocial relationships with micro-influencers: do sponsorship disclosure and electronic word-of-mouth disrupt? Micro-influencers in identity construction and professionalization (5 papers) 2024 5 How conspicuousness becomes productive on social media 2023 5 Mapping the Russian Political Influence Ecosystem: The Night Wolves Biker Gang 2023 14 A Social Network Approach to Social Media Influencers on Instagram: The Strength of Being a Nano-Influencer in Cause Communities 2022 5 Formal Professionalization of early-stage Social Media “Influencers”—attitudinal Drivers and Their Relation to Personality Traits 2023 24 Instagram Influencers in Health Communication: Examining the Roles of Influencer Tier and Message Construal in COVID-19-Prevention Public Service Announcements Micro-influencers as persuasive actors in niche domains (5 papers) 2021 37 Social media influencers can be used to deliver positive information about the flu vaccine: Findings from a multi-year study 2023 87 Micro, macro and mega-influencers on instagram: The power of persuasion via the parasocial relationship 2024 5 Can residents engage potential tourists as ‘micro’ and ‘nano’ influencers? 2024 8 Self-branding and content creation strategies on Instagram: A case study of foodie influencers 2022 22 Exploring the synergy between nano-influencers and sports community: behavior mapping through machine learning The second group identified among the cluster focuses on the persuasive impact and the characteristics of micro-influencers. In the investigation among millennials, it is evident that evangelism and brand engagement were boosted as a result of the emotional connection built by micro-influencers, along with the authenticity. 37 Micro-influencers were evident to be more persuasive in terms of authenticity, when compared with mega-influencers, when it comes to the hedonic context of products. 38 Trust transfer theory has been a crucial theory in the identification of the effectiveness of verified badges among micro-influencers to enhance trust and behavioural intentions. 29 The third group identified among the clusters focuses on the consumer engagement and content factors, to be precise, which explores the content-specific engagement with the micro-influencer eWOM 39 and explorations in various contexts involving educational as well with regards to nano-influencers and their follower interaction. 40 Authenticity can be regained strategically via carefully managed disclosures 41 while neuroscientific experiments are also involved in the validating process of argument quality and source credibility in influencer posts’ responses. 42 Overall, this cluster depicts an understanding of multifaceted concepts built around micro-influencers’ roles in building consumer trust, perceptions, and concepts such as disclosure of sponsorships. Findings in this cluster relate to sponsorship transparency as a factor that shapes credibility. However, the contradictory results depict that weakening or strengthening the authenticity perceptions is context-specific. This inconsistency gap identifies an unsettled transparency-authenticity paradox. Future research should focus on specifically identifying which boundary conditions, like product involvement or the strength of influencer-follower relationships, result in fostering trust or eroding it. Research area 2: This research area is equipped with literature that focuses on behavioural and strategic dimensions of influencer marketing with regard to micro-influencers. The articles included in this area focus on linguistic techniques, generational-based engagement patterns, and strategies for selecting suitable influencers. With regards to the linguistic features, the language used by the type of influencers results differently; when high arousal language is used by micro-influencers, increased engagement was depicted, whereas if the same was used by macro-influencers, trust and interactions resulted in diminishing unless mitigated by informational framing. 43 The strength of the persuasiveness associated with affiliated marketing content is influenced by linguistic cues that are said to have an impact on cognitive processing routes. 44 Another focus of this research area is decision making and influencer selection, and this is mainly aimed at exploring the follower size, reach, and cost. In the course of making a decision between picking micro and mega influencers, the follower elasticity of impressions (FEI) framework was introduced. 45 This framework acts as a determinant when making decisions focused on visibility and efficiency, and if trade-offs are necessary. Accumulating micro-influencers in low-familiarity brands has been suggested by the evolutionary game theory simulations. 46 The final focus of this research area is on generational-based engagement patterns and consumer responses, especially focusing on Generation Z. Brand avoidance behaviour is evident among Gen Z consumers, resulting from either perceived manipulation or lack of authenticity. The “influencer avoidance” behaviour highlights the moral aspects of digital marketing, and it is evident that macro influencers that are heavily controlled by brands are perceived in a negative manner by Gen Z consumers. 47 In order to build a strong trust among these Gen Z consumers, the influencers should have subtle platform behaviours, including influencers following fewer people, which depicts trust and autonomy, which ultimately results in strong trust and engagement. 48 Considering the studies in this area, a clear gap in the under-theorization of narrative and rhetorical aspects of influencer language is identified. Future studies should focus on how storytelling and the tone affect brand connection and perceived sincerity, linking to emotional contagion and identity performance frameworks. Research area 3: This research area focuses on the effectiveness of micro-influencer marketing in terms of interpersonal traits, emotional bonding, and trust. Followers’ perception of influencers’ personal and social attributes constructs marketing and opinion leadership outcomes is emphasized in this area. Para-social interaction was identified as a mediating factor for opinion leadership, while personal characteristics, including openness, interpersonal competence, and exhibitionism, were considered key factors driving opinion leadership. 49 Homophily, attractiveness, and social presence result in building emotional bonds based on the human brand perspectives and attachment theory. The emotional bonds built among the influencers and followers result in loyalty and advertising credibility. 50 Parasocial relationships are crucial with regard to micro-influencers and negative eWOM and sponsorship disclosure disrupt and result in the reduction of engagement and purchase intentions. 51 In terms of word-of-mouth generation, ‘mindset’ is considered a moderator; endorsements of micro-influencers were perceived as more trustworthy by a set of consumers who are said to have a growth mindset. 52 Purchase intention and eWOM are significantly influenced by perceived source credibility of user-generated content (UGC) in platforms such as YouTube. Further, these are also mediated by homophily over traditional voices of the brands. 53 In tourism, which is a niche domain, customer attitudes toward travel destinations have been influenced by micro-influencer post engagement and credibility. 54 As the studies are predominantly cross-sectional, the temporal evolution of relationships or trust in this arena remains underexplored. Experimental and longitudinal study designs should be utilized to identify the fluctuations of engagement over time. Findings could be explained with brand community and relationship marketing models. Research area 4: This research area focuses on micro-influencers and nano-influencers beyond traditional product endorsement while emphasizing social status, cause-related engagement, public communication, and professional identity. Veblen’s conspicuous consumption theory is utilized to explain self-branding followed by micro-influencers as productive strategies in order to construct signalling social status. 55 In the early stages of growth, professionalization plays a major role in brand collaboration, and this, combined with brand orientation, entrepreneurial orientation, and personality traits, results in a formal market entry. 56 Exploration in the veganism communities relating to nano-influencers emphasized structural power in chambers and capabilities for bridging, spreading the cause-based influence and messages. 57 Homophily plays a major role in enhancing behavioural intentions, and this was shown during COVID-19, relating to health communication. 58 Utilizing micro-influencers in a socio-political context to gain benefits out of various political systems can be identified orientation. 59 Though the studies focus on self-branding and entrepreneurial positioning, ethical implications and labour economics remain underexplored. Future studies could explore this arena with the integration of digital labour theory and identity work perspectives. Research area 5: This research area focuses on micro and nano influencers in community-centric domains, and the power of influencer communications is discussed. Utilizing micro-influencers in larger campaigns, such as flu vaccinations for African American and Hispanic populations in the US, depicted favourable results. This depicts that micro-influencer-generated content has resulted in making changes to social norms, especially in sensitive areas such as health. 60 Perceived popularity and credibility of micro-influencers result in a high chance that their followers will adopt the given recommendation under the mediating role of parasocial relationship. 61 In the tourism industry, scholars have identified that when micro-influencers contribute as local ambassadors in marketing destinations, they tend to build place identification and emotional solidarity among potential visitors. 62 Among food influencers, who produce Instagrammable content marketing efforts, are explored via qualitative methods. 63 Machine learning techniques have been utilized in analysing the efforts of nano-influencers in modulating sports communities and cybersecurity. 64 As the studies show micro-influencers in different industrial contexts, this showcases an increase in societal relevance. A clear gap is shown in theoretically synthesising micro-influencer credibility to behaviour change. Prosocial influence models could be developed focusing on mobilizing social good while reconsidering communication boundaries. Discussion Implication 1: How has the literature on micro-influencers developed? Literature focusing on micro-influencers is relatively young, as per the SLR exploration. Among the years looked into in the analysis, initially in 2020, only two papers were published between 2022 to 2024, an upward trend of publications, promising the research area is gaining popularity across marketing, tourism, health, and communication domains. Earlier studies focused on examining various concepts related to micro-influencers descriptively; however, later studies focused on leading investigations towards authenticity, trust, platform-specific practices, and consumer engagement. Considering the authorship and geographic analyses, the arena is fragmented with underrepresentation of certain regions and limited collaborations across the globe. Though the research domain is growing, a gap can be identified related to theoretical consolidation. Future research should focus on theory development by cumulating psychological, communicational, cultural, and digital perspectives by involving isolated findings. Implication 2: What are the key themes and research focuses in the existing literature on micro-influencers? The key thematic clusters identified as per the bibliometric coupling involves exploration of five research areas: 1) Sponsorship disclosure, influencer types and decision making: a multilevel analysis. 2) Strategic language and micro-influencer engagement. 3) Behavioural outcomes and interpersonal dynamics of micro-influencer marketing. 4) Micro-influencers in identity construction and professionalization. 5) Micro-influencers as persuasive actors in niche domains. Bibliometric mapping and content analysis of the full papers have resulted in a thorough analysis identifying contributions of each cluster and gaps. The main focus among the micro influencer literature is on the capabilities of branding and marketing with regard to authenticity, follower trust, opinion leadership, decision-making, perceived credibility, engagement frameworks, and sponsorship disclosure. 50 , 51 , 61 However, the analysis identified several gaps that need to be addressed. Contradictory findings were identified concerning the sponsorship disclosure; this needs to be validated clearly in future studies. The overemphasis on one specific social media platform, “Instagram,” was visible, labour economics and identity dimensions were underexplored, and a dearth of theoretical synthesis among the wide advertising and communication theory and the behaviour of micro-influencers. The analysis suggests uneven yet rich knowledge development. Researchers should focus on answering under what basis micro-influencers can influence outcomes and why, going beyond detailing effects. This can be achieved with comparative designs, considering approaches that are driven by theory and focusing on emerging platforms. Implication 3: What are the implications for future research on micro-influencers? Future research agenda The study has identified broader future research areas initially and then cluster-specific future research directions. First, the future research focus should be on strong theoretical integration. This is mainly due to the fact that current studies treat the main constructs, including authenticity, engagement, trust, and sponsorship transparency, in an isolated manner. Theorizing these as an interrelated relational process is crucial. Second, integrating diversified methodologies in future research is essential. Studies could employ experiments, longitudinal studies, a mixed-method approach, or multiple-platform comparisons. Third, the studies were skewed towards the West and Asia. This calls for exploring these concepts in different cultural and contextual settings. Future researchers should focus on how the cultural norms, values, and market conditions have an impact on authenticity and credibility. Fourth, as Instagram was the most studied single platform, future studies should analyse community features, content formats, and algorithmic visibility across emerging platforms such as YouTube, TikTok, and Twitch. Finally, the researchers should investigate under-theorized domains, including ethical disclosure practices directly linking to micro-influencers, influencer labour, creator economy, algorithmic forces, identity management, and how influencers act in socially oriented events, including sustainable communication. The future research agenda has been curated carefully by considering the five thematic research areas, which are depicted in Table 5 . This agenda covers the emerging areas and underexplored areas, providing directions to researchers, practitioners, and policymakers to carry out further explorations that intersect with trust-building, digital identity, sponsorship disclosure, value co-creation, and changing consumer-influencer relationships. Table 5. Future research agenda based on research areas. Sub- research areas Future research agenda: Research questions Sponsorship disclosure, influencer types and decision making: a multilevel analysis 1. How does sponsorship disclosure frequency have an impact on long-term value co-creation and the engagement of the audience? 2. How do the cultural differences affect the perception of influencer sponsorship disclosure in various regions? 3. Do nano- and micro-influencers possess the power to generate greater brand trust compared to macro- and mega-influencers for different product categories? 4. How does the credibility and trust of the influencer vary with regard to the individual characteristics in consumer decision-making stages? 5. What is the effectiveness of verified badges on consumer trust across different social media platforms? 6. To what extent do the post type and commercial intent moderate the impact of social media verified badges on consumer trust? 7. What are the effects of influencer aesthetic and video quality on response and brand evaluation across Gen Z and Millennials? 8. What is the impact of influencer type and argument quality on consumers’ neuro-physical and self-reported responses to a brand-related social media post? 9. How do consumers evaluate the source credibility of micro versus meso influencers when they are exposed to negative reviews? 10. How does text mining and natural language processing affect eWOM persuasiveness? 11. What are the core characteristics of micro-influencers that enhance brand engagement, brand love, and brand evangelism? 12. What are the micro-influencer marketing strategies utilized to be effective in promoting utilitarian versus hedonic products? 13. How are shifts in public policy, disclosure legislation affecting long-term influencer marketing effectiveness? 14. How do consumers respond to native ads when influencers use humor or emotions in their messages? Strategic language and micro-influencer engagement, 1. How can businesses allocate budgets dynamically among micro-, meso-, and macro-influencers for maximum real-time campaign engagement? 2. How do trust and engagement get affected by different emotional tones in the influencer language used by micro versus mega influencers? 3. How does the presence of influencer-brand partnership disclosure in the influencer content affect Gen Z’s moral evaluation? 4. How can brand avoidance behavior among Gen Z be mitigated by perceived authenticity and transparency? 5. How do interaction style and follower-following ratio affect perceived authority across various industries? 6. How does the language personalization in micro-influencer content strengthen consumer-brand relationships in the long run? Behavioural outcomes and interpersonal dynamics of micro-influencer marketing 1. How does various personal characteristics affect follower trust and brand advocacy across various types of influencers? 2. To what extent does the midset of consumers moderated the influencer marketing strategy effectiveness in tourism and wellness industry? 3. How does the parasocial relationships affect long-term consumer loyalty in micro and macro influencers? 4. How does source homophily affect engagement and perceived credibility when followers interact with influencer-generated content versus user-generated content? 5. How can influencer marketing strategies increase consumer trust and emotional bonding while facing skepticism towards sponsored content? 6. What is the impact that cultural and regional differences have on the perception of influencer credibility and effectiveness, considering the emerging markets and non-Western contexts? Micro-influencers in identity construction and professionalization 1. To what extent does the conspicuous consumption of micro-influencers reshape traditional understandings of social status in the digital era? 2. What mechanisms enhance the perceived homophily in nano-influencers? 3. How to analyze political micro-influencers through digital forensics methods? 4. How to identify different responses of caused related communities to nano and micro-influencers in terms of loyalty, engagement and behvioral change? 5. What attitudinal drivers predict the successful professionalization of early-stage influencers? 6. What are the ways that brands and public institutions can co-create influencer content that promotes maximum public trust and engagement? Micro-influencers as persuasive actors in niche domains. 1. How do various cultures react to micro-influencer-led public health messaging? 2. What are the long term effects of parasocial relationships across various platforms on brand loyalty? 3. What are the way to cultivated emotional solidarity and self–influencer congruence of micro-influencers? 4. What role does the algorithms play in towards content startegies? 5. How can machine learning be used to develop adaptive models for various influencer selection that focuses on brand values? Limitations Although a significant amount of time was utilized in the process of collecting and analysing the literature in this study, certain limitations exist. The study included data from a specific database, and only peer-reviewed publications were considered, excluding conference proceedings, white papers, and book chapters. This could serve as a limitation. Valuable insights that could have been derived about the rapidly evolving digital field from less formal sources can be considered overlooked. The limitation of a time frame is also significant. Articles outside the selected time frame and the ones currently under peer review have not been captured. As the study only focused on analysing articles published in English, insights from emerging economies that are published in other languages may seem underrepresented. Conclusion To conclude the study, it is important to focus on the core of the study, which is micro-influencers, who were considered the social media voices, have now evolved into building connections with digital marketing, social communication, and branding. Micro-influencers were considered as the main point of the investigation as the influencer marketing arena grows into niche and sophisticated consumer segments. Researchers arrived at key conclusions based on the review. Literature built around credibility, persuasiveness, and authenticity is focused more on micro-influencers than macro and mega influencers. Micro-influencers’ ability to build parasocial relationships, have a positive impact on word-of-mouth behaviours, and ability to influence attitudes are constantly validated empirically. 50 – 52 These findings are crucial as relational branding and consumer decision-making, heightened by emotional anchoring, are trends in marketing in the modern era. Publications are dominated by the West and Asia-Pacific, which shows an imbalance in geographic distribution and has an impact on the methodological preferences and theoretical lenses in the arena. The analysis depicts that, though the literature in the domain is growing, limited theoretical consolidation is evident. Micro and nano influencers can be used in communications that impact beyond commercial objectives. Micro-influencers are utilized in identity construction, leading to entrepreneurial pathways. Further, micro-influencers were identified as grassroots communicators in even geopolitical actors, which is leading towards unleashing the ability to influence multidimensionally. The thematic findings identified five clusters. The clusters depict diverse interests while revealing conceptual silos. Studies focus on isolated concepts with less connection to advertising and communication mechanisms. This calls for the integration of theoretical perspectives from social proof, identity performance, digital labour, and parasocial interaction to better comprehend micro-influencer communication mechanisms. Future research directions have been identified in a broader context and cluster-specifically to address the research gaps and undertheorized areas in the arena. Overall, this review focuses on providing insights as to how the field has evolved, identifying core themes, and determining research gaps in this research area. In order to get a better understanding of the diverse roles played by micro-influencers, the development of integrated frameworks covering various levels and theoretical synthesis is suggested. Ultimately, this SLR identifies micro-influencers beyond a tool of marketing and as economic, social, and cultural actors in the virtual space. The insights from this study provide a foundation for future researchers, scholars, and practitioners to develop rigorous empirical designs and employ rich theoretical explanations to keep exploring the evolving influencer-driven communications. Data availability statement All the main data of this study are included as part of this article and under the references. No additional data were required. Additionally, PRISMA flow diagram, checklist, and other supplementary data are openly available in Zenodo at; https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18068581 . 32 Data are available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license The software utilized for this study is available at: https://www.vosviewer.com/ , https://posit.co/download/rstudio-desktop/ , https://www.zotero.org/ References 1. Libai B, Rosario AB, Beichert M, et al. : Influencer marketing unlocked: Understanding the value chains driving the creator economy. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2025; 53 : 4–28. Publisher Full Text 2. Cialdini RB: The science of persuasion. Sci. Am. 2001; 284 : 76–81. 3. Leung FF, Gu FF, Li Y, et al. : Influencer marketing effectiveness. J. Mark. 2022; 86 : 93–115. Publisher Full Text 4. Marchán Sanz C, Fernández Gómez E, Feijoo B: Micro-influencers: An emerging profession not yet recognized, with a tarnished reputation. Online J. Commun. Media Technol. 2025; 15 (2): e202515. Publisher Full Text 5. Walter N, Föhl U, Zagermann L: Big or small? Impact of influencer characteristics on influencer success, with special focus on micro-versus mega-influencers. J. Curr. Issues Res. Advert. 2025; 46 : 160–182. Publisher Full Text 6. Vu VC, Wang S, Keating BW, et al. : Increasing social media stickiness through parasocial interaction and influencer source credibility. Australas. Mark. J. 2025; 33 : 352–370. Publisher Full Text 7. Borges-Tiago MT, Santiago J, Tiago F: Mega or macro social media influencers: Who endorses brands better? J. Bus. Res. 2023; 157 : 113606. Publisher Full Text 8. Halwani S, Duroldt L: Influencer Marketing in Sustainable Tourism: Evaluating the perceived credibility dimensions among micro-, macro-, and mega-influencers. [dissertation].2025 [cited 2025 Dec 6]. Reference Source 9. Theodorakopoulos L, Theodoropoulou A, Klavdianos C: Interactive viral marketing through big data analytics, influencer networks, AI integration, and ethical dimensions. J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2025; 20 : 115. Publisher Full Text 10. Mulholland S, Lang B, Lee M, et al. : How mega-and micro-influencers strategically manage authenticity: Exploring influencer types and content differences based on social network theory. J. Advert. Res. 2025; 65 : 78–94. Publisher Full Text 11. Chen J, Zhang Y, Cai H, et al. : A comprehensive overview of micro-influencer marketing: Decoding the current landscape, impacts, and trends. Behav. Sci. 2024; 14 : 243. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 12. Massaro M, Handley K, Bagnoli C, et al. : Knowledge management in small and medium enterprises: A structured literature review. J. Knowl. Manag. 2016; 20 : 258–291. Publisher Full Text 13. Pahlevan-Sharif S, Mura P, Wijesinghe SN: A systematic review of systematic reviews in tourism. J. Hosp. Tour. Manag. 2019; 39 : 158–165. Publisher Full Text 14. Petticrew M, Roberts H: Systematic reviews in the social sciences: A practical guide. John Wiley & Sons; 2008. 15. Centobelli P, Cerchione R, Esposito E: Knowledge management in startups: Systematic literature review and future research agenda. Sustainability. 2017; 9 : 361. Publisher Full Text 16. Donthu N, Kumar S, Mukherjee D, et al. : How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. J. Bus. Res. 2021; 133 : 285–296. Publisher Full Text 17. Armitage A, Keeble-Allen D: Undertaking a structured literature review or structuring a literature review. Tales from the field; 2008; 35. 18. Mishra D, Gunasekaran A, Papadopoulos T, et al. : Green supply chain performance measures: A review and bibliometric analysis. Sustainable Prod. Consumption. 2017; 10 : 85–99. Publisher Full Text 19. Thelwall M: Dimensions: A competitor to Scopus and the Web of Science? J. Inf. Secur. 2018; 12 : 430–435. Publisher Full Text 20. Waltman L: A review of the literature on citation impact indicators. J. Inf. Secur. 2016; 10 : 365–391. Publisher Full Text 21. Keupp MM, Palmié M, Gassmann O: The strategic management of innovation: A systematic review and paths for future research. Int. J. Manag. Rev. 2012; 14 : 367–390. Publisher Full Text 22. Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Bachrach DG, et al. : The influence of management journals in the 1980s and 1990s. Strateg. Manag. J. 2005; 26 : 473–488. Publisher Full Text 23. Massaro M, Dumay J, Bagnoli C: Where there is a will there is a way: IC, strategic intent, diversification and firm performance. J. Intellect. Cap. 2015; 16 : 490–517. Publisher Full Text 24. Dumay J: 15 years of the journal of intellectual capital and counting: a manifesto for transformational IC research. J. Intellect. Cap. 2014; 15 : 2–37. Publisher Full Text 25. Feng Y, Zhu Q, Lai K-H: Corporate social responsibility for supply chain management: A literature review and bibliometric analysis. J. Clean. Prod. 2017; 158 : 296–307. Publisher Full Text 26. Van Eck NJ, Waltman L: Citation-based clustering of publications using CitNetExplorer and VOSviewer. Scientometrics. 2017; 111 : 1053–1070. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 27. Silverman D: Doing qualitative research. London: SAGE Publications Ltd; 2021 [cited 2025 Dec 6]. Reference Source 28. Walter C, Ribière V: A citation and co-citation analysis of 10 years of KM theory and practices. Knowl. Manag. Res. Pract. 2013; 11 : 221–229. Publisher Full Text 29. Liao CH, Hsieh J-K, Kumar S: Does the verified badge of social media matter? The perspective of trust transfer theory. J. Res. Interact. Mark. 2024; 18 : 1017–1033. Publisher Full Text 30. Boyack KW, Klavans R: Co-citation analysis, bibliographic coupling, and direct citation: Which citation approach represents the research front most accurately? J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 2010; 61 : 2389–2404. Publisher Full Text 31. Kessler MM: Bibliographic coupling between scientific papers. Am. Doc. 1963; 14 : 10–25. Publisher Full Text 32. Wimalasena LMDO, Dissanayake DMR: Data Set of the Manuscript Titled “Mapping the themes and intellectual structure of micro-influencers: A systematic review and meta-analysis” [dataset]. Zenodo. 2025. Publisher Full Text 33. Bu Y, Parkinson J, Thaichon P: Influencer marketing: Sponsorship disclosure and value co-creation behaviour. Mark. Intell. Plan. 2022; 40 : 854–870. Publisher Full Text 34. Crnjak-Karanović B, Kursan Milaković I, Elez J: Which decision-making stages matter more? Influencer’s perceived credibility, sponsorship and moderating role of trust. Young Consum. 2023; 24 : 649–668. Publisher Full Text 35. Giuffredi-Kähr A, Petrova A, Malär L: Sponsorship disclosure of influencers – A curse or a blessing? J. Interact. Mark. 2022; 57 : 18–34. Publisher Full Text 36. Kay S, Mulcahy R, Parkinson J: When less is more: The impact of macro and micro social media influencers’ disclosure. J. Mark. Manag. 2020; 36 : 248–278. Publisher Full Text 37. Pornsrimate K, Khamwon A: How to convert Millennial consumers to brand evangelists through social media micro-influencers. Innov. Mark. 2021; 17 : 18–32. Publisher Full Text 38. Park J, Lee JM, Xiong VY, et al. : David and Goliath: When and why micro-influencers are more persuasive than mega-influencers. J. Advert. 2021; 50 : 584–602. Publisher Full Text 39. Shen Z: A persuasive eWOM model for increasing consumer engagement on social media: Evidence from Irish fashion micro-influencers. J. Res. Interact. Mark. 2021; 15 : 181–199. Publisher Full Text 40. Gil-quintana J, de León EV , Osuna-acedo S, et al. : Nano-Influencers edutubers: Perspective of centennial generation families in Spain. Media Commun. 2022; 10 : 247–258. Publisher Full Text 41. Steils N, Martin A, Toti J-F: Managing the transparency paradox of social-media influencer disclosures: How to improve authenticity and engagement when disclosing influencer-sponsor relationships. J. Advert. Res. 2022; 62 : 148–166. Publisher Full Text 42. Pozharliev R, Rossi D, De Angelis M: Consumers’ self-reported and brain responses to advertising post on Instagram: The effect of number of followers and argument quality. Eur. J. Mark. 2022; 56 : 922–948. Publisher Full Text 43. Cascio Rizzo GL, Villarroel Ordenes F, Pozharliev R, et al. : How high-arousal language shapes micro- versus macro-influencers’ impact. J. Mark. 2024; 88 : 107–128. Publisher Full Text 44. Syrdal HA, Myers S, Sen S, et al. : Influencer marketing and the growth of affiliates: The effects of language features on engagement behavior. J. Bus Res. 2023; 163. Publisher Full Text 45. Tian Z, Dew R, Iyengar R: Mega or Micro? Influencer selection using follower elasticity. J. Mark. Res. 2024; 61 : 472–495. Publisher Full Text 46. Lv J, Yang R, Yu J, et al. : Macro-influencers or meso-influencers, how do companies choose? Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 2023; 123 : 3018–3037. Publisher Full Text 47. Pradhan D, Kuanr A, Anupurba Pahi S, et al. : Influencer marketing: When and why gen Z consumers avoid influencers and endorsed brands. Psychol. Mark. 2023; 40 : 27–47. Publisher Full Text 48. Valsesia F, Proserpio D, Nunes JC: The positive effect of not following others on social media. J. Mark. Res. 2020; 57 : 1152–1168. Publisher Full Text 49. Hassanzadeh M, Taheri M, Shokouhyar S, et al. : Who one is, whom one knows? Evaluating the importance of personal and social characteristics of influential people in social networks. Aslib J. Inf. Manag. 2023; 75 : 1008–1032. Publisher Full Text 50. Kim DY, Kim H-Y: Social media influencers as human brands: An interactive marketing perspective. J. Res. Interact. Mark. 2023; 17 : 94–109. Publisher Full Text 51. Sheng J, Lee YH, Lan H: Parasocial relationships with micro-influencers: Do sponsorship disclosure and electronic word-of-mouth disrupt? Internet Res. 2024; 34 : 849–867. Publisher Full Text 52. Li W, Zhao F, Lee JM, et al. : How micro- (vs. mega-) influencers generate word of mouth in the digital economy age: The moderating role of mindset. J. Bus Res. 2024; 171. Publisher Full Text 53. Muda M, Hamzah MI: Should I suggest this YouTube clip? The impact of UGC source credibility on eWOM and purchase intention. J. Res. Interact. Mark. 2021; 15 : 441–459. Publisher Full Text 54. Hernández-Méndez J, Baute-Díaz N: Influencer marketing in the promotion of tourist destinations: Mega, macro and micro-influencers. Curr. Issue Tour. 2024; 27 : 1332–1342. Publisher Full Text 55. Bainotti L: How conspicuousness becomes productive on social media. Mark. Theory. 2024; 24 : 339–356. Publisher Full Text 56. Kolo C, Haumer F, Roth A: Formal Professionalization of early-stage Social Media “Influencers”— attitudinal drivers and their relation to personality traits. Int. J. Media Manag. 2022; 24 : 137–163. Publisher Full Text 57. Himelboim I, Golan GJ: A Social Network Approach to Social Media Influencers on Instagram: The strength of being a nano-influencer in cause communities. J. Interact. Advert. 2023; 23 : 1–13. Publisher Full Text 58. Looi J, Kemp D, Song YWG: Instagram influencers in health communication: Examining the roles of influencer tier and message construal in covid-19-prevention public service announcements. J. Interact. Advert. 2023; 23 : 14–32. Publisher Full Text 59. Boichak O: Mapping the russian political influence ecosystem: The night wolves biker gang. Soc. Media Soc. 2023; 9. Publisher Full Text 60. Bonnevie E, Smith SM, Kummeth C, et al. : Social media influencers can be used to deliver positive information about the flu vaccine: Findings from a multi-year study. Health Educ. Res. 2021; 36 : 286–294. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 61. Conde R, Casais B: Micro, macro and mega-influencers on instagram: The power of persuasion via the parasocial relationship. J. Bus Res. 2023; 158. Publisher Full Text 62. Han W, Zhang T: Can residents engage potential tourists as ‘micro’ and ‘nano’ influencers? Curr. Issue Tour. 2024; 27 : 3249–3265. Publisher Full Text 63. Miguel C, Clare C, Ashworth CJ, et al. : Self-branding and content creation strategies on Instagram: A case study of foodie influencers. Inf. Commun. Soc. 2024; 27 : 1530–1550. Publisher Full Text 64. Yadav J, Misra M, Rana NP, et al. : Exploring the synergy between nano-influencers and sports community: Behavior mapping through machine learning. Inf. Technol. People. 2022; 35 : 1829–1854. Publisher Full Text Comments on this article Comments (0) Version 1 VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 16 Jan 2026 ADD YOUR COMMENT Comment Author details Author details 1 University of Kelaniya Faculty of Commerce and Management Studies, Kelaniya, Western Province, 11600, Sri Lanka 2 Department of Marketing Management, University of Kelaniya Faculty of Commerce and Management Studies, Kelaniya, Western Province, 11600, Sri Lanka 3 Adjunct Professor, Taylor’s Business School, Taylor's University, Subang Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia L.M.D.O Wimalasena Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Methodology, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing D.M.R Dissanayake Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Methodology, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Review & Editing Competing interests No competing interests were disclosed. Grant information The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work. Article Versions (1) version 1 Published: 16 Jan 2026, 15:70 https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.175286.1 Copyright © 2026 Wimalasena LMDO and Dissanayake DMR. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Download Export To Sciwheel Bibtex EndNote ProCite Ref. Manager (RIS) Sente metrics Views Downloads F1000Research - - PubMed Central info_outline Data from PMC are received and updated monthly. - - Citations open_in_new 0 open_in_new 0 open_in_new SEE MORE DETAILS CITE how to cite this article Wimalasena LMDO and Dissanayake DMR. Mapping the themes and intellectual structure of micro-influencers: A systematic review and meta-analysis [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2026, 15 :70 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.175286.1 ) NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS track receive updates on this article Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article. TRACK THIS ARTICLE Share Open Peer Review Current Reviewer Status: ? Key to Reviewer Statuses VIEW HIDE Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Version 1 VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 16 Jan 2026 Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Panca G. Reviewer Report For: Mapping the themes and intellectual structure of micro-influencers: A systematic review and meta-analysis [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2026, 15 :70 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.193256.r470676 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/15-70/v1#referee-response-470676 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 06 Apr 2026 Gusti Panca , Universitas Sahid, South Jakarta, Indonesia Approved with Reservations VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.193256.r470676 This paper presents a systematic literature review combined with bibliometric analysis to map the development of micro-influencer research between 2020 and 2025. Using the PRISMA approach and data from Scopus (68 articles), the authors aim to identify key themes, research ... Continue reading READ ALL This paper presents a systematic literature review combined with bibliometric analysis to map the development of micro-influencer research between 2020 and 2025. Using the PRISMA approach and data from Scopus (68 articles), the authors aim to identify key themes, research clusters, and future research directions. Overall, the topic is timely and relevant, especially given the rapid growth of influencer marketing and the broader creator economy. Regarding the clarity of the study, the rationale is generally understandable. The authors highlight the fragmentation of the literature and the need for a structured mapping of the field, which is a valid starting point. The research questions are also clearly stated. However, the justification could be strengthened from a theoretical perspective. The paper tends to position itself as a descriptive mapping exercise rather than clearly explaining what conceptual or theoretical gap it is addressing. Clarifying this would improve the overall contribution of the study. In terms of methodology, the use of PRISMA and the step-by-step selection process are appropriate and provide a good level of structure. The search strategy, database choice, and inclusion criteria are described, which helps readers follow the general process. However, some important details are missing for full replication. In particular, the content analysis process is not explained in sufficient depth, and there is no discussion of how coding consistency was ensured (e.g., inter-coder reliability). In addition, the criteria used to exclude certain articles such as those with “unclear methodology” are not fully transparent. Providing more detail in these areas would improve the rigor and reproducibility of the study. The analytical approach, which relies on bibliometric and descriptive analysis, is appropriate for mapping the literature. However, the paper refers to “meta-analysis,” which is somewhat misleading since no statistical meta-analysis (e.g., effect size estimation or heterogeneity testing) is conducted. This should be corrected either by revising the terminology or by incorporating an actual meta-analytic component. The conclusions are generally consistent with the results presented. The findings related to fragmented literature, dominant themes such as trust and authenticity, and geographical concentration are supported by the analysis. However, some of the broader claims especially those related to theoretical implications would benefit from a stronger and more explicit connection to the empirical findings. At times, the discussion remains descriptive rather than deeply analytical. With regard to the “living systematic review” aspect, the study only partially aligns with this concept. While the review is systematic and structured, it is based on a fixed dataset (2020–2025) and does not provide a clear plan for continuous updating, search frequency, or mechanisms for incorporating new studies. As such, it cannot fully be considered a living systematic review in its current form. If the authors intend it to be one, they should clearly define an update protocol. Overall, this paper has strong potential and addresses an important and growing research area. However, several key issues need to be addressed to strengthen its scientific contribution. These include clarifying the use of the term “meta-analysis,” improving methodological transparency (especially in the content analysis), and enhancing the theoretical integration of the findings. Recommendation: Major Revision The manuscript is promising, but it requires improvements in conceptual clarity, methodological detail, and analytical depth before it can be considered for indexing. 1. Are the rationale for, and objectives of, the Systematic Review clearly stated? Answer: Partly The overall rationale is understandable. The authors clearly point out that research on micro-influencers has grown rapidly and remains fragmented, which justifies the need for a systematic review. The focus on the 2020–2025 period is also reasonable given the post-COVID digital shift. That said, the paper could do a better job in terms of theoretical positioning . It’s not entirely clear what specific gap this study is trying to address beyond “mapping the field.” The contribution feels more descriptive than conceptual. The research questions are clearly stated, but they are quite broad and mainly descriptive. Suggestion: Strengthen the theoretical framing and clarify what new insight this review brings beyond existing studies. 2. Are sufficient details of the methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? Answer: Partly The methodology is generally structured and follows PRISMA, which is a strength. The search strategy, database (Scopus), and inclusion/exclusion criteria are described, so the overall process is understandable. However, some important details are missing: The content analysis process is not explained in enough detail There is no mention of inter-coder reliability or how consistency was ensured The criteria for excluding some papers (e.g., “unclear methodology”) are not fully transparent The settings used in VOSviewer and Biblioshiny could be described more clearly Suggestion: Add more detail on how the analysis was conducted, especially the coding process and validation steps, so others can replicate the study more easily. 3. Is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Answer: Partly The analytical approach (bibliometric and descriptive analysis) is appropriate for mapping the literature. However, the paper refers to “meta-analysis,” which is not actually conducted. There is no statistical synthesis (e.g., effect sizes, heterogeneity), so the term “meta-analysis” is misleading. Suggestion: Either remove “meta-analysis” from the title or include a proper statistical meta-analysis. 4. Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results presented in the review? Answer: Yes (with minor reservations) In general, the conclusions are in line with the results. The findings about fragmentation, dominant themes (e.g., trust, authenticity), and geographical imbalance are supported by the analysis. However, some of the broader claims especially about theoretical gaps could be explained more clearly and linked more directly to the results. Suggestion: Make the connection between findings and conclusions a bit tighter, especially when discussing theoretical implications. 5. Living Systematic Review Answer: Partly Justification: The review follows a structured and systematic approach, which reflects some characteristics of an updateable review. However, it is not explicitly designed or presented as a living systematic review. The authors use a defined time frame (2020–2025) and do not clearly outline a continuous updating process, search schedule, or protocol for incorporating new evidence over time. Suggestion: If the authors intend this work to function as a living review, they should clearly specify an update mechanism, including the frequency of searches and criteria for incorporating new studies. Are the rationale for, and objectives of, the Systematic Review clearly stated? Partly Are sufficient details of the methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? Partly Is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Partly Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results presented in the review? Partly If this is a Living Systematic Review, is the ‘living’ method appropriate and is the search schedule clearly defined and justified? (‘Living Systematic Review’ or a variation of this term should be included in the title.) Partly Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: Influencer marketing, Systematic Literature Review, Tourism Marketing, Tourism Management I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Panca G. Reviewer Report For: Mapping the themes and intellectual structure of micro-influencers: A systematic review and meta-analysis [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2026, 15 :70 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.193256.r470676 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/15-70/v1#referee-response-470676 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Aruman AE. Reviewer Report For: Mapping the themes and intellectual structure of micro-influencers: A systematic review and meta-analysis [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2026, 15 :70 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.193256.r467584 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/15-70/v1#referee-response-467584 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 27 Mar 2026 Akhmad Edhy Aruman , LSPR Instiute of Communication and Business, Jakarta, Indonesia Not Approved VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.193256.r467584 This research can't be called a Living Systematic Review because it's missing the key parts that make a study a living review. The title clearly says it's a "systematic review and meta-analysis", but it doesn't mention the ... Continue reading READ ALL This research can't be called a Living Systematic Review because it's missing the key parts that make a study a living review. The title clearly says it's a "systematic review and meta-analysis", but it doesn't mention the term "living systematic review" or anything similar, which is a basic requirement for being transparent about the study's design. In terms of methodology, not having this label means the authors didn't plan to use a living review approach. They should have included it if they wanted to be clear about their methods. Without it, we can't consider this study a true Living Systematic Review. The title and methods just don't match up with what's expected from this type of research. The way they did the search is more like a traditional review. They looked at a set time period, from 2020 to 2025, and used specific words to find what they were looking for, but they only did it once, in April 2025. This isn't like a living review, which needs to be updated regularly and looks at new information all the time. There's no sign that they plan to keep looking for new information or update what they found. Because of this, the review is more like a snapshot of what was known at one point in time, rather than a constantly updated collection of evidence. It doesn't have the things you'd expect to see in a living review, like repeated searches or plans to update it regularly. In addition, the study provides no explicit search update schedule, such as monthly, quarterly, or annual intervals, nor any justification for the frequency of updates based on the pace of new evidence generation. In a true Living Systematic Review, the update interval is typically justified by factors such as rapid publication rates, clinical urgency, or policy relevance. Although the authors acknowledge that research in this field is expanding and evolving, this observation is not translated into a structured plan for maintaining the review over time. From a methodological standpoint, the issue is not simply missing detail but a mismatch between the expectations of a living review design and the procedures actually implemented. A Living Systematic Review requires a clearly defined mechanism for continuous updating, transparent reporting of the update cycle, and explicit justification for adopting the living approach. None of these components are present in the current study. Integrated Critical Judgment When you look at this study using the standards for a Living Systematic Review, it doesn't quite meet the requirements. The main issue is that the method used isn't really shown to be suitable because it wasn't actually put into practice. The way they searched for information is more of a one-time thing, rather than an ongoing process, and they didn't lay out a plan for updating their findings. As a result, the study doesn't really fit the criteria for a Living Systematic Review, which means it should be seen as a regular systematic review instead of a living evidence synthesis. This is important because living systematic reviews are meant to be constantly updated, which isn't the case here. Are the rationale for, and objectives of, the Systematic Review clearly stated? Yes Are sufficient details of the methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? Partly Is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Yes Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results presented in the review? Partly If this is a Living Systematic Review, is the ‘living’ method appropriate and is the search schedule clearly defined and justified? (‘Living Systematic Review’ or a variation of this term should be included in the title.) No Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to state that I do not consider it to be of an acceptable scientific standard, for reasons outlined above. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Aruman AE. Reviewer Report For: Mapping the themes and intellectual structure of micro-influencers: A systematic review and meta-analysis [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2026, 15 :70 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.193256.r467584 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/15-70/v1#referee-response-467584 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Ambepitiya K. Reviewer Report For: Mapping the themes and intellectual structure of micro-influencers: A systematic review and meta-analysis [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2026, 15 :70 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.193256.r451267 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/15-70/v1#referee-response-451267 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 14 Feb 2026 Kalpana Ambepitiya , Management and Finance, General Sir John Kotelawala Defence University (Ringgold ID: 472733), Rathmalana, Western Province, Sri Lanka Approved with Reservations VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.193256.r451267 The article by Wimalasena and Dissanayake (2026) presents a systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis to map the intellectual structure of micro-influencer research from 2020 to 2025. The topic is timely and highly relevant, particularly given the rapid expansion of ... Continue reading READ ALL The article by Wimalasena and Dissanayake (2026) presents a systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis to map the intellectual structure of micro-influencer research from 2020 to 2025. The topic is timely and highly relevant, particularly given the rapid expansion of the creator economy, post-COVID digital acceleration, and the growing strategic importance of micro- and nano-influencers in marketing communication. By focusing on a recent five-year period, the authors capture contemporary shifts in digital platforms, algorithmic visibility, and evolving consumer influencer dynamics. The study is therefore positioned well within current academic and practitioner debates. The research questions are clearly structured and align with the objectives of bibliometric systematic reviews. The first question examines the development of micro-influencer literature, the second identifies key themes and research focuses, and the third outlines implications for future research. This logical progression enables the authors to move from descriptive mapping toward conceptual interpretation and agenda setting. The use of PRISMA enhances transparency in the selection process, reducing the dataset from 369 initial records to 68 eligible articles. The methodological procedures are clearly described, and the inclusion and exclusion criteria are systematically applied. A major strength of the paper lies in its methodological rigor. The integration of VOSviewer and Biblioshiny enables comprehensive visualisation of keyword co-occurrence, bibliographic coupling, authorship networks, publication trends, and thematic clustering. The identification of seven keyword clusters and five major research areas demonstrates analytical depth. The five research areas, sponsorship disclosure and decision-making, strategic language and engagement, behavioural outcomes and interpersonal dynamics, identity construction and professionalization, and niche-domain persuasion, provide a coherent structure that helps organize a previously fragmented body of literature. This clustering is one of the most valuable contributions of the study. The descriptive analysis further strengthens the paper by highlighting geographic concentration, citation trends, journal fragmentation, and author productivity patterns. The findings show that the literature is heavily skewed toward Western and selected high-income Asian countries, with limited representation from other regions. The authors correctly identify this as a gap affecting generalizability. Additionally, the study notes that publication growth has not always corresponded with citation impact, suggesting the need for stronger theoretical grounding in future work. Despite these strengths, several areas require improvement. First, the use of the term “meta-analysis” in the title is misleading. The study does not conduct a statistical meta-analysis involving effect size aggregation or quantitative synthesis of empirical findings. Instead, it performs a systematic review combined with bibliometric analysis. For academic precision and methodological clarity, the title should be revised to reflect this accurately. This is particularly important because meta-analysis implies a specific statistical approach that is not present in the paper. Second, while the authors repeatedly emphasize theoretical fragmentation within the micro-influencer literature, the review itself does not fully resolve this fragmentation. Although various theories such as social proof, parasocial interaction, trust transfer theory, and identity construction are mentioned, they are not synthesized into an integrated conceptual framework. The article would benefit substantially from the development of a unifying model that links sponsorship disclosure, authenticity, trust, parasocial relationships, and behavioural outcomes. Such integration would elevate the theoretical contribution beyond mapping toward theory-building. Third, the discussion of methodological homogeneity would benefit from stronger empirical support. The authors state that most studies are cross-sectional and that longitudinal designs are limited. However, no systematic breakdown of research designs is presented. Including a table summarizing methodological approaches such as experimental studies, surveys, qualitative research, neuroscientific experiments, and mixed methods would strengthen this claim and enhance the analytical robustness of the review. Additionally, although the geographic imbalance is identified, the discussion could go further in exploring why such concentration exists. Considerations such as digital infrastructure, regulatory environments, advertising disclosure laws, platform penetration rates, and cultural norms could deepen the interpretation. This would allow the paper to move from descriptive observation to structural explanation. From a stylistic perspective, the article would benefit from language refinement. Some sentences are lengthy and repetitive, and certain phrases are used frequently, reducing clarity. Minor grammatical inconsistencies and formatting issues (particularly in the presentation of “micro-influencers”) should be corrected to improve readability and professional presentation. Overall, this study makes a significant contribution by systematically mapping the evolving intellectual landscape of micro-influencer research. It provides a structured overview of thematic development, identifies research gaps, and proposes a comprehensive future research agenda. Its bibliometric mapping is rigorous and valuable for scholars entering the field. However, its theoretical integration remains moderate rather than transformative. With clearer positioning (removal of the “meta-analysis” label), stronger conceptual synthesis, and minor methodological clarifications, the paper has strong potential to become a foundational reference in micro-influencer scholarship. Are the rationale for, and objectives of, the Systematic Review clearly stated? Yes Are sufficient details of the methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? Yes Is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Partly Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results presented in the review? Partly If this is a Living Systematic Review, is the ‘living’ method appropriate and is the search schedule clearly defined and justified? (‘Living Systematic Review’ or a variation of this term should be included in the title.) Not applicable Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: Entrepreneurship, Marketing, Sustainable Development I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Ambepitiya K. Reviewer Report For: Mapping the themes and intellectual structure of micro-influencers: A systematic review and meta-analysis [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2026, 15 :70 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.193256.r451267 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/15-70/v1#referee-response-451267 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Comments on this article Comments (0) Version 1 VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 16 Jan 2026 ADD YOUR COMMENT Comment keyboard_arrow_left keyboard_arrow_right Open Peer Review Reviewer Status info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Reviewer Reports Invited Reviewers 1 2 3 Version 1 16 Jan 26 read read read Kalpana Ambepitiya , General Sir John Kotelawala Defence University (Ringgold ID: 472733), Rathmalana, Sri Lanka Akhmad Edhy Aruman , LSPR Instiute of Communication and Business, Jakarta, Indonesia Gusti Panca , Universitas Sahid, South Jakarta, Indonesia Comments on this article All Comments (0) Add a comment Sign up for content alerts Sign Up You are now signed up to receive this alert Browse by related subjects keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2026 Panca G. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 06 Apr 2026 | for Version 1 Gusti Panca , Universitas Sahid, South Jakarta, Indonesia 0 Views copyright © 2026 Panca G. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (0) Approved With Reservations info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions This paper presents a systematic literature review combined with bibliometric analysis to map the development of micro-influencer research between 2020 and 2025. Using the PRISMA approach and data from Scopus (68 articles), the authors aim to identify key themes, research clusters, and future research directions. Overall, the topic is timely and relevant, especially given the rapid growth of influencer marketing and the broader creator economy. Regarding the clarity of the study, the rationale is generally understandable. The authors highlight the fragmentation of the literature and the need for a structured mapping of the field, which is a valid starting point. The research questions are also clearly stated. However, the justification could be strengthened from a theoretical perspective. The paper tends to position itself as a descriptive mapping exercise rather than clearly explaining what conceptual or theoretical gap it is addressing. Clarifying this would improve the overall contribution of the study. In terms of methodology, the use of PRISMA and the step-by-step selection process are appropriate and provide a good level of structure. The search strategy, database choice, and inclusion criteria are described, which helps readers follow the general process. However, some important details are missing for full replication. In particular, the content analysis process is not explained in sufficient depth, and there is no discussion of how coding consistency was ensured (e.g., inter-coder reliability). In addition, the criteria used to exclude certain articles such as those with “unclear methodology” are not fully transparent. Providing more detail in these areas would improve the rigor and reproducibility of the study. The analytical approach, which relies on bibliometric and descriptive analysis, is appropriate for mapping the literature. However, the paper refers to “meta-analysis,” which is somewhat misleading since no statistical meta-analysis (e.g., effect size estimation or heterogeneity testing) is conducted. This should be corrected either by revising the terminology or by incorporating an actual meta-analytic component. The conclusions are generally consistent with the results presented. The findings related to fragmented literature, dominant themes such as trust and authenticity, and geographical concentration are supported by the analysis. However, some of the broader claims especially those related to theoretical implications would benefit from a stronger and more explicit connection to the empirical findings. At times, the discussion remains descriptive rather than deeply analytical. With regard to the “living systematic review” aspect, the study only partially aligns with this concept. While the review is systematic and structured, it is based on a fixed dataset (2020–2025) and does not provide a clear plan for continuous updating, search frequency, or mechanisms for incorporating new studies. As such, it cannot fully be considered a living systematic review in its current form. If the authors intend it to be one, they should clearly define an update protocol. Overall, this paper has strong potential and addresses an important and growing research area. However, several key issues need to be addressed to strengthen its scientific contribution. These include clarifying the use of the term “meta-analysis,” improving methodological transparency (especially in the content analysis), and enhancing the theoretical integration of the findings. Recommendation: Major Revision The manuscript is promising, but it requires improvements in conceptual clarity, methodological detail, and analytical depth before it can be considered for indexing. 1. Are the rationale for, and objectives of, the Systematic Review clearly stated? Answer: Partly The overall rationale is understandable. The authors clearly point out that research on micro-influencers has grown rapidly and remains fragmented, which justifies the need for a systematic review. The focus on the 2020–2025 period is also reasonable given the post-COVID digital shift. That said, the paper could do a better job in terms of theoretical positioning . It’s not entirely clear what specific gap this study is trying to address beyond “mapping the field.” The contribution feels more descriptive than conceptual. The research questions are clearly stated, but they are quite broad and mainly descriptive. Suggestion: Strengthen the theoretical framing and clarify what new insight this review brings beyond existing studies. 2. Are sufficient details of the methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? Answer: Partly The methodology is generally structured and follows PRISMA, which is a strength. The search strategy, database (Scopus), and inclusion/exclusion criteria are described, so the overall process is understandable. However, some important details are missing: The content analysis process is not explained in enough detail There is no mention of inter-coder reliability or how consistency was ensured The criteria for excluding some papers (e.g., “unclear methodology”) are not fully transparent The settings used in VOSviewer and Biblioshiny could be described more clearly Suggestion: Add more detail on how the analysis was conducted, especially the coding process and validation steps, so others can replicate the study more easily. 3. Is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Answer: Partly The analytical approach (bibliometric and descriptive analysis) is appropriate for mapping the literature. However, the paper refers to “meta-analysis,” which is not actually conducted. There is no statistical synthesis (e.g., effect sizes, heterogeneity), so the term “meta-analysis” is misleading. Suggestion: Either remove “meta-analysis” from the title or include a proper statistical meta-analysis. 4. Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results presented in the review? Answer: Yes (with minor reservations) In general, the conclusions are in line with the results. The findings about fragmentation, dominant themes (e.g., trust, authenticity), and geographical imbalance are supported by the analysis. However, some of the broader claims especially about theoretical gaps could be explained more clearly and linked more directly to the results. Suggestion: Make the connection between findings and conclusions a bit tighter, especially when discussing theoretical implications. 5. Living Systematic Review Answer: Partly Justification: The review follows a structured and systematic approach, which reflects some characteristics of an updateable review. However, it is not explicitly designed or presented as a living systematic review. The authors use a defined time frame (2020–2025) and do not clearly outline a continuous updating process, search schedule, or protocol for incorporating new evidence over time. Suggestion: If the authors intend this work to function as a living review, they should clearly specify an update mechanism, including the frequency of searches and criteria for incorporating new studies. Are the rationale for, and objectives of, the Systematic Review clearly stated? Partly Are sufficient details of the methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? Partly Is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Partly Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results presented in the review? Partly If this is a Living Systematic Review, is the ‘living’ method appropriate and is the search schedule clearly defined and justified? (‘Living Systematic Review’ or a variation of this term should be included in the title.) Partly Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise Influencer marketing, Systematic Literature Review, Tourism Marketing, Tourism Management I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. reply Respond to this report Responses (0) Panca G. Peer Review Report For: Mapping the themes and intellectual structure of micro-influencers: A systematic review and meta-analysis [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2026, 15 :70 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.193256.r470676) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/15-70/v1#referee-response-470676 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2026 Aruman A. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 27 Mar 2026 | for Version 1 Akhmad Edhy Aruman , LSPR Instiute of Communication and Business, Jakarta, Indonesia 0 Views copyright © 2026 Aruman A. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (0) Not Approved info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions This research can't be called a Living Systematic Review because it's missing the key parts that make a study a living review. The title clearly says it's a "systematic review and meta-analysis", but it doesn't mention the term "living systematic review" or anything similar, which is a basic requirement for being transparent about the study's design. In terms of methodology, not having this label means the authors didn't plan to use a living review approach. They should have included it if they wanted to be clear about their methods. Without it, we can't consider this study a true Living Systematic Review. The title and methods just don't match up with what's expected from this type of research. The way they did the search is more like a traditional review. They looked at a set time period, from 2020 to 2025, and used specific words to find what they were looking for, but they only did it once, in April 2025. This isn't like a living review, which needs to be updated regularly and looks at new information all the time. There's no sign that they plan to keep looking for new information or update what they found. Because of this, the review is more like a snapshot of what was known at one point in time, rather than a constantly updated collection of evidence. It doesn't have the things you'd expect to see in a living review, like repeated searches or plans to update it regularly. In addition, the study provides no explicit search update schedule, such as monthly, quarterly, or annual intervals, nor any justification for the frequency of updates based on the pace of new evidence generation. In a true Living Systematic Review, the update interval is typically justified by factors such as rapid publication rates, clinical urgency, or policy relevance. Although the authors acknowledge that research in this field is expanding and evolving, this observation is not translated into a structured plan for maintaining the review over time. From a methodological standpoint, the issue is not simply missing detail but a mismatch between the expectations of a living review design and the procedures actually implemented. A Living Systematic Review requires a clearly defined mechanism for continuous updating, transparent reporting of the update cycle, and explicit justification for adopting the living approach. None of these components are present in the current study. Integrated Critical Judgment When you look at this study using the standards for a Living Systematic Review, it doesn't quite meet the requirements. The main issue is that the method used isn't really shown to be suitable because it wasn't actually put into practice. The way they searched for information is more of a one-time thing, rather than an ongoing process, and they didn't lay out a plan for updating their findings. As a result, the study doesn't really fit the criteria for a Living Systematic Review, which means it should be seen as a regular systematic review instead of a living evidence synthesis. This is important because living systematic reviews are meant to be constantly updated, which isn't the case here. Are the rationale for, and objectives of, the Systematic Review clearly stated? Yes Are sufficient details of the methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? Partly Is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Yes Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results presented in the review? Partly If this is a Living Systematic Review, is the ‘living’ method appropriate and is the search schedule clearly defined and justified? (‘Living Systematic Review’ or a variation of this term should be included in the title.) No Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to state that I do not consider it to be of an acceptable scientific standard, for reasons outlined above. reply Respond to this report Responses (0) Aruman AE. Peer Review Report For: Mapping the themes and intellectual structure of micro-influencers: A systematic review and meta-analysis [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2026, 15 :70 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.193256.r467584) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/15-70/v1#referee-response-467584 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2026 Ambepitiya K. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 14 Feb 2026 | for Version 1 Kalpana Ambepitiya , Management and Finance, General Sir John Kotelawala Defence University (Ringgold ID: 472733), Rathmalana, Western Province, Sri Lanka 0 Views copyright © 2026 Ambepitiya K. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (0) Approved With Reservations info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions The article by Wimalasena and Dissanayake (2026) presents a systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis to map the intellectual structure of micro-influencer research from 2020 to 2025. The topic is timely and highly relevant, particularly given the rapid expansion of the creator economy, post-COVID digital acceleration, and the growing strategic importance of micro- and nano-influencers in marketing communication. By focusing on a recent five-year period, the authors capture contemporary shifts in digital platforms, algorithmic visibility, and evolving consumer influencer dynamics. The study is therefore positioned well within current academic and practitioner debates. The research questions are clearly structured and align with the objectives of bibliometric systematic reviews. The first question examines the development of micro-influencer literature, the second identifies key themes and research focuses, and the third outlines implications for future research. This logical progression enables the authors to move from descriptive mapping toward conceptual interpretation and agenda setting. The use of PRISMA enhances transparency in the selection process, reducing the dataset from 369 initial records to 68 eligible articles. The methodological procedures are clearly described, and the inclusion and exclusion criteria are systematically applied. A major strength of the paper lies in its methodological rigor. The integration of VOSviewer and Biblioshiny enables comprehensive visualisation of keyword co-occurrence, bibliographic coupling, authorship networks, publication trends, and thematic clustering. The identification of seven keyword clusters and five major research areas demonstrates analytical depth. The five research areas, sponsorship disclosure and decision-making, strategic language and engagement, behavioural outcomes and interpersonal dynamics, identity construction and professionalization, and niche-domain persuasion, provide a coherent structure that helps organize a previously fragmented body of literature. This clustering is one of the most valuable contributions of the study. The descriptive analysis further strengthens the paper by highlighting geographic concentration, citation trends, journal fragmentation, and author productivity patterns. The findings show that the literature is heavily skewed toward Western and selected high-income Asian countries, with limited representation from other regions. The authors correctly identify this as a gap affecting generalizability. Additionally, the study notes that publication growth has not always corresponded with citation impact, suggesting the need for stronger theoretical grounding in future work. Despite these strengths, several areas require improvement. First, the use of the term “meta-analysis” in the title is misleading. The study does not conduct a statistical meta-analysis involving effect size aggregation or quantitative synthesis of empirical findings. Instead, it performs a systematic review combined with bibliometric analysis. For academic precision and methodological clarity, the title should be revised to reflect this accurately. This is particularly important because meta-analysis implies a specific statistical approach that is not present in the paper. Second, while the authors repeatedly emphasize theoretical fragmentation within the micro-influencer literature, the review itself does not fully resolve this fragmentation. Although various theories such as social proof, parasocial interaction, trust transfer theory, and identity construction are mentioned, they are not synthesized into an integrated conceptual framework. The article would benefit substantially from the development of a unifying model that links sponsorship disclosure, authenticity, trust, parasocial relationships, and behavioural outcomes. Such integration would elevate the theoretical contribution beyond mapping toward theory-building. Third, the discussion of methodological homogeneity would benefit from stronger empirical support. The authors state that most studies are cross-sectional and that longitudinal designs are limited. However, no systematic breakdown of research designs is presented. Including a table summarizing methodological approaches such as experimental studies, surveys, qualitative research, neuroscientific experiments, and mixed methods would strengthen this claim and enhance the analytical robustness of the review. Additionally, although the geographic imbalance is identified, the discussion could go further in exploring why such concentration exists. Considerations such as digital infrastructure, regulatory environments, advertising disclosure laws, platform penetration rates, and cultural norms could deepen the interpretation. This would allow the paper to move from descriptive observation to structural explanation. From a stylistic perspective, the article would benefit from language refinement. Some sentences are lengthy and repetitive, and certain phrases are used frequently, reducing clarity. Minor grammatical inconsistencies and formatting issues (particularly in the presentation of “micro-influencers”) should be corrected to improve readability and professional presentation. Overall, this study makes a significant contribution by systematically mapping the evolving intellectual landscape of micro-influencer research. It provides a structured overview of thematic development, identifies research gaps, and proposes a comprehensive future research agenda. Its bibliometric mapping is rigorous and valuable for scholars entering the field. However, its theoretical integration remains moderate rather than transformative. With clearer positioning (removal of the “meta-analysis” label), stronger conceptual synthesis, and minor methodological clarifications, the paper has strong potential to become a foundational reference in micro-influencer scholarship. Are the rationale for, and objectives of, the Systematic Review clearly stated? Yes Are sufficient details of the methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? Yes Is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Partly Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results presented in the review? Partly If this is a Living Systematic Review, is the ‘living’ method appropriate and is the search schedule clearly defined and justified? (‘Living Systematic Review’ or a variation of this term should be included in the title.) Not applicable Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise Entrepreneurship, Marketing, Sustainable Development I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. reply Respond to this report Responses (0) Ambepitiya K. Peer Review Report For: Mapping the themes and intellectual structure of micro-influencers: A systematic review and meta-analysis [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2026, 15 :70 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.193256.r451267) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/15-70/v1#referee-response-451267 Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Adjust parameters to alter display View on desktop for interactive features Includes Interactive Elements View on desktop for interactive features Competing Interests Policy Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list: Examples of 'Non-Financial Competing Interests' Within the past 4 years, you have held joint grants, published or collaborated with any of the authors of the selected paper. You have a close personal relationship (e.g. parent, spouse, sibling, or domestic partner) with any of the authors. You are a close professional associate of any of the authors (e.g. scientific mentor, recent student). You work at the same institute as any of the authors. You hope/expect to benefit (e.g. favour or employment) as a result of your submission. You are an Editor for the journal in which the article is published. Examples of 'Financial Competing Interests' You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, any of the following from any commercial organisation that may gain financially from your submission: a salary, fees, funding, reimbursements. You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, shared grant support or other funding with any of the authors. You hold, or are currently applying for, any patents or significant stocks/shares relating to the subject matter of the paper you are commenting on. Stay Updated Sign up for content alerts and receive a weekly or monthly email with all newly published articles Register with F1000Research Already registered? Sign in Not now, thanks close PLEASE NOTE If you are an AUTHOR of this article, please check that you signed in with the account associated with this article otherwise we cannot automatically identify your role as an author and your comment will be labelled as a “User Comment”. If you are a REVIEWER of this article, please check that you have signed in with the account associated with this article and then go to your account to submit your report, please do not post your review here. If you do not have access to your original account, please contact us . All commenters must hold a formal affiliation as per our Policies . The information that you give us will be displayed next to your comment. User comments must be in English, comprehensible and relevant to the article under discussion. We reserve the right to remove any comments that we consider to be inappropriate, offensive or otherwise in breach of the User Comment Terms and Conditions . Commenters must not use a comment for personal attacks. When criticisms of the article are based on unpublished data, the data should be made available. I accept the User Comment Terms and Conditions Please confirm that you accept the User Comment Terms and Conditions. Affiliation ✕ refresh Please enter your institution. Note: To add your institution or organisation, start typing the name and then select the correct name from the list. Where applicable, the name will appear in both the original language and in English. Do not paste in the name. If the name does not appear in the drop-down list, we will display the information you have entered. ✕ refresh Country/Region * USA UK Canada China France Germany Afghanistan Aland Islands Albania Algeria American Samoa Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory British Virgin Islands Brunei Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Cook Islands Costa Rica Cote d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Democratic Republic of the Congo Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands Faroe Islands Federated States of Micronesia Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guam Guatemala Guernsey Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard Island and Mcdonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras Hong Kong Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jersey Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Kosovo (Serbia and Montenegro) Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People's Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Minor Outlying Islands of the United States Moldova Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands Antilles New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island North Korea North Macedonia Northern Mariana Islands Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Palestinian Territory Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Reunion Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Helena Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia and the South Sandwich Is South Korea South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syria Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand The Gambia The Netherlands Timor-Leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu UK USA Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United States Virgin Islands Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela Vietnam Wallis and Futuna West Bank and Gaza Strip Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe Please select your country/region. You must enter a comment. Competing Interests Please disclose any competing interests that might be construed to influence your judgment of the article's or peer review report's validity or importance. Competing Interests Policy Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list: Examples of 'Non-Financial Competing Interests' Within the past 4 years, you have held joint grants, published or collaborated with any of the authors of the selected paper. You have a close personal relationship (e.g. parent, spouse, sibling, or domestic partner) with any of the authors. You are a close professional associate of any of the authors (e.g. scientific mentor, recent student). You work at the same institute as any of the authors. You hope/expect to benefit (e.g. favour or employment) as a result of your submission. You are an Editor for the journal in which the article is published. Examples of 'Financial Competing Interests' You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, any of the following from any commercial organisation that may gain financially from your submission: a salary, fees, funding, reimbursements. You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, shared grant support or other funding with any of the authors. You hold, or are currently applying for, any patents or significant stocks/shares relating to the subject matter of the paper you are commenting on. Please state your competing interests The comment has been saved. An error has occurred. Please try again. Cancel Post var lTitle = "Mapping the themes and intellectual structure...".replace("'", ''); var linkedInUrl = "http://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/15-70/v1" + "&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle) + "&summary=" + encodeURIComponent('Read the article by '); var deliciousUrl = "https://del.icio.us/post?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/15-70/v1&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle); var redditUrl = "http://reddit.com/submit?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/15-70/v1" + "&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle); linkedInUrl += encodeURIComponent('Wimalasena LMDO and Dissanayake DMR'); var offsetTop = /chrome/i.test( navigator.userAgent ) ? 4 : -10; var addthis_config = { ui_offset_top: offsetTop, services_compact : "facebook,twitter,www.linkedin.com,www.mendeley.com,reddit.com", services_expanded : "facebook,twitter,www.linkedin.com,www.mendeley.com,reddit.com", services_custom : [ { name: "LinkedIn", url: linkedInUrl, icon:"/img/icon/at_linkedin.svg" }, { name: "Mendeley", url: "http://www.mendeley.com/import/?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/15-70/v1/mendeley", icon:"/img/icon/at_mendeley.svg" }, { name: "Reddit", url: redditUrl, icon:"/img/icon/at_reddit.svg" }, ] }; var addthis_share = { url: "https://f1000research.com/articles/15-70", templates : { twitter : "Mapping the themes and intellectual structure of micro-influencers:.... Wimalasena LMDO and Dissanayake DMR, published by " + "@F1000Research" + ", https://f1000research.com/articles/15-70/v1" } }; if (typeof(addthis) != "undefined"){ addthis.addEventListener('addthis.ready', checkCount); addthis.addEventListener('addthis.menu.share', checkCount); } $(".f1r-shares-twitter").attr("href", "https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=" + addthis_share.templates.twitter); $(".f1r-shares-facebook").attr("href", "https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=" + addthis_share.url); $(".f1r-shares-linkedin").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[0].url); $(".f1r-shares-reddit").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[2].url); $(".f1r-shares-mendelay").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[1].url); function checkCount(){ setTimeout(function(){ $(".addthis_button_expanded").each(function(){ var count = $(this).text(); if (count !== "" && count != "0") $(this).removeClass("is-hidden"); else $(this).addClass("is-hidden"); }); }, 1000); } close How to cite this report {{reportCitation}} Cancel Copy Citation Details $(function(){R.ui.buttonDropdowns('.dropdown-for-downloads');}); $(function(){R.ui.toolbarDropdowns('.toolbar-dropdown-for-downloads');}); $.get("/articles/acj/175286/193256") new F1000.Clipboard(); new F1000.ThesaurusTermsDisplay("articles", "article", "193256"); $(document).ready(function() { $( "#frame1" ).on('load', function() { var mydiv = $(this).contents().find("div"); var h = mydiv.height(); console.log(h) }); var tooltipLivingFigure = jQuery(".interactive-living-figure-label .icon-more-info"), titleLivingFigure = tooltipLivingFigure.attr("title"); tooltipLivingFigure.simpletip({ fixed: true, position: ["-115", "30"], baseClass: 'small-tooltip', content:titleLivingFigure + " " }); tooltipLivingFigure.removeAttr("title"); $("body").on("click", ".cite-living-figure", function(e) { e.preventDefault(); var ref = $(this).attr("data-ref"); $(this).closest(".living-figure-list-container").find("#" + ref).fadeIn(200); }); $("body").on("click", ".close-cite-living-figure", function(e) { e.preventDefault(); $(this).closest(".popup-window-wrapper").fadeOut(200); }); $(document).on("mouseup", function(e) { var metricsContainer = $(".article-metrics-popover-wrapper"); if (!metricsContainer.is(e.target) && metricsContainer.has(e.target).length === 0) { $(".article-metrics-close-button").click(); } }); var articleId = $('#articleId').val(); if($("#main-article-count-box").attachArticleMetrics) { $("#main-article-count-box").attachArticleMetrics(articleId, { articleMetricsView: true }); } }); var figshareWidget = $(".new_figshare_widget"); if (figshareWidget.length > 0) { window.figshare.load("f1000", function(Widget) { // Select a tag/tags defined in your page. In this tag we will place the widget. _.map(figshareWidget, function(el){ var widget = new Widget({ articleId: $(el).attr("figshare_articleId") //height:300 // this is the height of the viewer part. [Default: 550] }); widget.initialize(); // initialize the widget widget.mount(el); // mount it in a tag that's on your page // this will save the widget on the global scope for later use from // your JS scripts. This line is optional. //window.widget = widget; }); }); } close Error Close Add Reset F1000.MICROSERVICES.AFFILIATION = ''; $(document).ready(function () { $('.js-affiliations-form').each((index, form) => { new AffiliationForm({ formId: form.id, institutionErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-institution', departmentErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-department', placeSelector: '.js-add-comment-place', stateSelector: '.js-add-comment-state', zipCodeSelector: '.js-add-comment-zipcode', countrySelector: '.js-add-comment-country', countryErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-country', }); }); }); $(document).ready(function () { var reportIds = { "467591": 0, "451270": 0, "467590": 0, "451271": 0, "467589": 0, "451268": 0, "467588": 0, "451269": 0, "467587": 0, "451266": 0, "467586": 0, "451267": 7, "467585": 0, "451264": 0, "467584": 11, "451265": 0, "470671": 0, "470670": 0, "451272": 0, "451273": 0, "470679": 0, "470678": 0, "470677": 0, "470676": 9, "470675": 0, "470674": 0, "470673": 0, "470672": 0, "454310": 0, "454311": 0, "454308": 0, "454309": 0, "454307": 0, "454316": 0, "454314": 0, "454315": 0, "454312": 0, "454313": 0, "467583": 0, "467582": 0, }; $(".referee-response-container,.js-referee-report").each(function(index, el) { var reportId = $(el).attr("data-reportid"), reportCount = reportIds[reportId] || 0; $(el).find(".comments-count-container,.js-referee-report-views").html(reportCount); }); var uuidInput = $("#article_uuid"), oldUUId = uuidInput.val(), newUUId = "5bacc6ad-db04-4d2c-883a-79bcc1963821"; uuidInput.val(newUUId); $("a[href*='article_uuid=']").each(function(index, el) { var newHref = $(el).attr("href").replace(oldUUId, newUUId); $(el).attr("href", newHref); }); }); An innovative open access publishing platform offering rapid publication and open peer review, whilst supporting data deposition and sharing. Browse Gateways Collections How it Works Contact For Developers Cookie Notice Privacy Notice RSS Submit Your Research Follow us © 2012-2026 F1000 Research Ltd. ISSN 2046-1402 | Legal | Partner of Research4Life • CrossRef • ORCID • FAIRSharing R.templateTests.simpleTemplate = R.template(' $text $text $text $text $text '); R.templateTests.runTests(); var F1000platform = new F1000.Platform({ name: "f1000research", displayName: "F1000Research", hostName: "f1000research.com", id: "1", editorialEmail: "[email protected]", infoEmail: "[email protected]", usePmcStats: true }); $(function(){R.ui.dropdowns('.dropdown-for-authors, .dropdown-for-about, .dropdown-for-myresearch');}); // $(function(){R.ui.dropdowns('.dropdown-for-referees');}); $(document).ready(function () { if ($(".cookie-warning").is(":visible")) { $(".sticky").css("margin-bottom", "35px"); $(".devices").addClass("devices-and-cookie-warning"); } $(".cookie-warning .close-button").click(function (e) { $(".devices").removeClass("devices-and-cookie-warning"); $(".sticky").css("margin-bottom", "0"); }); $("#tweeter-feed .tweet-message").each(function (i, message) { var self = $(message); self.html(linkify(self.html())); }); $(".partner").on("mouseenter mouseleave", function() { $(this).find(".gray-scale, .colour").toggleClass("is-hidden"); }); }); Sign In Remember me Forgotten your password? Sign In Cancel Email or password not correct. Please try again Please wait... $(function(){ // Note: All the setup needs to run against a name attribute and *not* the id due the clonish // nature of facebox... $("a[id=googleSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("GOOGLE"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); $("a[id=facebookSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("FACEBOOK"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); $("a[id=orcidSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("ORCID"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); }); If you've forgotten your password, please enter your email address below and we'll send you instructions on how to reset your password. The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000. Email address not valid, please try again You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password. To sign in, please click here . If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here . You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password. To sign in, please click here . If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here . Code not correct, please try again Reset password Cancel Email us for further assistance. Server error, please try again. If your email address is registered with us, we will email you instructions to reset your password. If you think you should have received this email but it has not arrived, please check your spam filters and/or contact for further assistance. Please wait... Register $(document).ready(function () { signIn.createSignInAsRow($("#sign-in-form-gfb-popup")); $(".target-field").each(function () { var uris = $(this).val().split("/"); if (uris.pop() === "login") { $(this).val(uris.toString().replace(",","/")); } }); });