Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42406701›Full record

ArticlePloS one2026

Behind the screen: Unraveling the role of perceived closeness difference in shaping viewers' engagement behaviors.

Runhua Huang, Huichao Guo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Runhua HuangBusiness Technology Innovation and Development Research Center (Hangzhou), Zhejiang Business College, Hangzhou, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0000-8224-3695
Huichao GuoBusiness Technology Innovation and Development Research Center (Hangzhou), Zhejiang Business College, Hangzhou, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-4956-0673

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Viewer engagement is central to the live-streaming economy. While existing literature primarily examines the dyadic relationship between a viewer and a streamer, it largely overlooks the social context: viewers simultaneously witness the streamer's real-time interactions with peers. Drawing on Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) differentiation and Social Comparison Theory, we introduce Perceived Closeness Difference (PCD), defined as the cognitive gap between a viewer's perceived closeness to the streamer and their perception of a peer's closeness. Across six experimental studies (N = 1,980), we examine how PCD is associated with engagement behaviors. Study 1 shows that witnessing a streamer favor a peer (Negative PCD) is associated with lower engagement, whereas witnessing peer rejection (Positive PCD) is associated with higher engagement, partly mediated by participants' subjectively measured PCD scores. Studies 2 and 3 identify boundary conditions, indicating that these effects are stronger in emotional (vs. utility) contexts and among more emotionally oriented viewers. Study 4 shows that the pattern varies with the peer's group identity (in-group vs. out-group). Study 5 indicates that PCD is more strongly related to public/social engagement (e.g., commenting) than to private/financial engagement. Finally, Study 6 links PCD to long-term loyalty via perceived streamer trustworthiness. Together, these findings extend one-and-a-half-sided relationship perspectives and offer implications for community management in interactive media.

Indexed as

Interpersonal RelationsSocial BehaviorAdultEmotionsFemaleGroup DynamicsHumansMalePeer GroupSocial GroupYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID42406701
PMCPMC13336182

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.