Finds that self-efficacy influences strategic flexibility and career adaptability, enhancing metaverse marketing adoption.
This study investigates the impact of self-efficacy among marketing professionals with digital tools affecting their strategic flexibility (ability to adjust marketing strategies to changing trends) and career adaptability (willingness to learn or change roles), and how these variables influence the adoption of metaverse marketing tools. Data were gathered using a cross-sectional online survey of 395 marketing and digital strategy professionals working in the e-commerce, digital marketing, information technology, and educational-technology sectors in China. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) was used to examine a moderated mediation model between self-efficacy, strategic flexibility, career adaptability, and metaverse marketing adoption. Results show that Marketing self-efficacy significantly predicts strategic flexibility (β = 0.35, p < 0.001) and career adaptability (β = 0.30, p < 0.001) which fully mediate its impact on adoption, indicating an indirect behavioral path. Interestingly, avatar anthropomorphism strengthens these relationships (β = 0.20, p < 0.01 for strategic flexibility; β = 0.18, p < 0.01 for career adaptability) with higher human-likeness intensifying the mediated effects and highlighting the impact of anthropomorphic cues in virtual environments. This study provides insights for equipping professionals for digital transformation and offering actionable strategies for designing avatars to improve technology adoption in virtual marketing environments. The findings highlight that well calibrating avatar features—responsiveness, realism, and feedback—can enhance perceived trust and usability and social presence. Overall, this study extends research on virtual environments by identifying avatar anthropomorphism as a key boundary condition in technology adoption and offering design implications for AI-driven metaverse interfaces.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ali et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: