This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
CELEBRITY ENDORSER EFFECTS AND ADVERTISING EFFECTIVENESS
consumers, the higher the level of endorsement effectiveness. Till and
Busler (2000) found that celebrity/product fit was effective for only certain
measures of effectiveness such as brand attitude, but not for other meas-
ures such as purchase intention. Regardless of the impact celebrity/prod-
uct fit has on effectiveness, the absolute weight of the existing literature
suggests that the phenomenon should play an important role in celebrity
endorser effectiveness (Till & Busler 2000).
Method
Meta-analysis overview
Meta-analysis is a quantitative review of a research domain that illustratesthe typical strength or effect of a phenomenon, its variability, its statistical
significance, and the nature of the moderator variables from which one can
predict the comparative strength of the effect or phenomenon (Rosenthal
1995). Many advantages result from employing meta-analysis as a research
method. The primary advantage clearly derives from the method’s ability
to scrutinise any literature as a meaningful whole. At that point, similari-
ties and differences among methodologies and the results of many studies
can be uncovered more easily. Meta-analysis also permits small and non-significant effects to contribute to a more complete picture of the results
of a stream of literature (Cooper & Hedges 1994). Finally, meta-analysis
identifies moderators by identifying and exploring potentially meaningful
patterns in quantitative studies.
When meta-analysis is employed, exploration, as opposed to simple
confirmation, of the relevant literature is emphasised. This emphasis is
practically and theoretically significant. Exploration provides a more effec-
tive means of formulating causal influences and understanding, at leastinferentially, why various results occurred (Cooper & Hedges 1994).
Effect size
In accordance with Rosenthal (1995), we focused on providing a meta-
analysis that would provide a succinct look into celebrity endorser source
effects and effect size. Hence, five experts were consulted to aid in evalu-
ating studies for inclusion in this meta-analysis. The majority of studies in
Correlations were obtained from the sample studies using formulas from
Cooper and Hedges (1994). As suggested by Hunter and Schmidt (1990),
weighted correlations were used in the analysis to account for sample size
and also as the dependent variable in the analysis. For the independent
variables, initial coding consisted of coding the independent variables
exactly as the authors articulated them. These independent variables were
then reinterpreted and grouped into redefined variables.
These redefined variables were then presented to five experts in the
area of advertising for confirmation. A content analysis of the studies
yielded six substantive and methodologically meaningful dimensions on
which all studies could be compared. The dimensions were source manip-ulation, celebrity/product fit, experimental effect, study setting, sample
type, and origin. Coding was performed by two trained coders. Any dis-
agreements about potential inconsistencies in the coding were resolved
through discussions involving the authors and consulting experts.
Analysis
Table 2 summarises the effects from the sample studies. Among the orig-inal 266 total effects, 185 were statistically significant ( p < 0.05). Forty-four
per cent of the retained studies examined celebrity/product fit. With
respect to methods characteristics, 86% of studies sampled reported main
effects, 62% used a survey instrument, and 52% used a student sample.
Exactly 60% of the studies used a US-based sample.
These data were skewed. This was expected, given the small effects
characteristic associated with behavioural research (Sawyer & Ball 1981;
Wilson & Sherrell 1993). To ensure that interpretation of the results wasnot influenced by transformation of the data, a nonparametric procedure
was performed on the weighted correlation coefficients. The Kruskal-
Wallis test was used to analyse the data from the non-normal population
(Iman & Conover 1983; Wilson & Sherrell 1993). Kruskal-Wallis provides
a powerful alternative to the t -test for the equality of means (Wilson &
Sherrell 1993). Compared with the F -test, the Kruskal-Wallis test has an
asymptotic efficiency of 95.5% when used with non-normal populations
subsequently followed. Celebrity performance ( MR = 24.04) was the least
influential endorser source effect. The source manipulation variables that
significantly differed from each other ( p < 0.05) are also shown in Table 3.Studies that did not examine celebrity/product fit had a statistically sig-
nificant higher average ranking (χ2 = 77.01, 1 df , p < 0.00) than studies that
examined celebrity/product fit.
Results for methodological variables
The average rankings of effects were statistically significant for all four
method dimensions examined (see Table 3). In studies reporting inter-action effects, the average ranking of the weighted correlation was signif-
icantly greater than in studies reporting main effects (χ2 = 14.23, 1 df , p <
0.00). For experimental studies, the average ranking of the weighted cor-
relation was statistically greater (χ2 = 58.61, 1 df , p < 0.00) than for cross-
sectional studies, where a survey was administered. For studies using
college students as subjects, the average ranking of the weighted correla-
tion was statistically greater (χ2 = 100.34, 1 df , p < 0.00) than for studies
using non-student subjects. Finally, studies using subjects from the UShad a significantly greater average ranking (χ2 = 49.78, 1 df , p < 0.00) of the
weighted correlation than studies using non-US subjects. The practical
and theoretical implications associated with each observed effect are sub-
stantial. These are discussed in the next section.
Notes:1. Mean R should be viewed with caution since it represents the unweighted values.2. The Kruskal-Wallis non-parametric test examines the average rank of the correlation.Vales of R are arranged in order from low tohigh and assigned a rank where 1 = the smallest effect and n = the largest effect. High mean rankings indicate larger effects thanlow average rankings.
CELEBRITY ENDORSER EFFECTS AND ADVERTISING EFFECTIVENESS
long after his retirement, and never once did he deviate from that status
during his active playing days. Jordan features an ideal combination of suc-
cess and charisma and has been one of the most well-managed celebrity
endorsers (Kellner 2000). His success as an athlete transferred to the prod-
ucts he endorsed, leading to impressive business success (Kellner 2000).
So even if the costs of negative information about celebrity endorsers are
high – and undoubtedly, they are – the fact remains that returns can be
high too, when the celebrity’s success transfers to the product/brand.
The source credibility model – composed of celebrity trustworthiness,
celebrity expertise, and celebrity attractiveness – captures each of the
three celebrity source effects identified as most influential in this research.
Practitioners should use the source credibility model as a basis for evalu-
ating consumer perceptions of a celebrity endorser. In addition, celebrityfamiliarity and likeability, each taken from the source attractiveness
model, were also revealed as highly influential source effects. Familiarity
and likeability might each make a substantial additive contribution to the
predictive ability of the source credibility model when it is used in a
celebrity endorsement context.
All cultures place a premium on physical attractiveness (Erdogan 1999).
For this reason alone, researchers should include aspects of physical attrac-
tiveness in their celebrity endorser source effects models. ‘Similarity’, theother source attractiveness model dimension, has not been sufficiently
investigated to be included in this meta-analysis. Additional empirical
studies are needed that apply the source attractiveness model to clarify
any ambiguous findings and verify results uncovered in this meta-analysis.
Adding this dimension to the source attractiveness model should assist
practitioners in their attempts to forecast celebrity endorser effectiveness.
The larger effect size for studies investigating celebrity/product fit also
provides interesting implications for practitioners. Ignoring celebrity/prod-uct fit may inflate market research results. But these results may also indi-
cate that when consumers are asked to consider celebrity/product fit, they
may respond less favourably because they are consciously attempting to
match the celebrity with a product/brand. In the literature, no consensus
was evident regarding what source effects should be matched with a prod-
uct/brand. It remains difficult to know which dimensions should be
CELEBRITY ENDORSER EFFECTS AND ADVERTISING EFFECTIVENESS
*Heath, T., McCarthy, M. & Mothersbaugh, D. (1994) Spokesperson fame and
vividness effects in the context of issue-relevant thinking: the moderating role of
competitive setting. Journal of Consumer Research, 20(4), pp. 520–534.
Homer, P.M. & Kahle, L.R. (1990) Source expertise, time of source identification,
and involvement in persuasion: an elaborative processing perspective. Journal of
Advertising , 19(1), pp. 30–40.
Hovland, C., Irving, J. & Harold, K. (1953) Communication and Persuasion; Psychological
Studies of Opinion Change . New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Hunter, J.E. & Schmidt, F.L. (1990) Methods of Meta-analysis: Correcting Error and Bias
in Research Findings. Newbury Park: Sage.
Iman, R.L. & Conover, W.J. (1983) A Modern Approach to Statistics. New York: Wiley.
*James, K. & Ryan, M. (2001) Attitudes toward Female Sports Stars as Endorsers.
Unpublished manuscript.
Joseph, W.B. (1982) The credibility of physically attractive communicators: a review.
Journal of Advertising , 11(3), pp. 15–25.
*Kahle, L.R. & Homer, P. (1985) Physical attractiveness of the celebrity endorser: asocial adaptation perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 11(4), pp. 954–961.
Kaikati, J.G. (1987) Celebrity advertising: a review and synthesis. International Journal
of Advertising , 6(2), pp. 93–105.
*Kamins, M.A. (1990) An investigation into the ‘match-up’ hypothesis in celebrity
advertising: when beauty may be only skin deep. Journal of Advertising , 19(1),
pp. 4–13.
Kamins, M.A. (1989) Celebrity and noncelebrity advertising in a two-sided context.
Journal of Advertising Research, 29(3), pp. 34–42.
Kamins, M.A. & Gupta, K. (1994) Congruence between spokesperson and product
type: a match-up hypothesis perspective. Psychology and Marketing , 11(6),pp. 569–587.
*Kamins, M.A., Brand, M., Hoeke, S. & Moe, J.C. (1989) Two-sided versus one-sided
celebrity endorsements: the impact on advertising effectiveness and credibility.
Journal of Advertising , 18(2), pp. 4–10.
Kellner, D. (2000) The sports spectacle, Michael Jordan, and Nike: unholy alliance?
Unpublished manuscript.
Kelman, H.C. (2006) Interests, relationships, identities: three central issues for
individuals and groups in negotiating their social environment. Annual Review of
Psychology, 57(1), pp. 1–26.
*Louie, T. & Obermiller, C. (2002) Consumer response to a firm’s endorser(dis)association decisions. Journal of Advertising , 31(4), pp. 41–52.
Lynch, J.G. (1999) Theory and external validity. Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science , 27(3), pp. 367–376.
McCracken, G. (1986) Culture and consumption: a theoretical account of the
structure and movement of the cultural meaning of consumer goods. Journal of
Consumer Research, 13(1), pp. 71–85.
McCracken, G. (1989) Who is the celebrity endorser? Cultural foundations of the
endorsement process. Journal of Consumer Research, 16(3), pp. 310–322.
McGinnies, E. & Ward, C. (1980) Better liked than right: trustworthiness and
expertise as factors in credibility. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 6(3),
pp. 467–472.
Miller, G.P. & Basehart, J. (1969) Source trustworthiness, opinionated statements, and
response to persuasive communication. Speech Monographs, 36(1), pp. 1–7.
*Misra, S. & Beatty, S. (1990) Celebrity spokesperson and brand congruence. Journal
of Business Research, 21(2), pp. 159–173.
*Moore, D., Mowen, J. & Reardon, R. (1994) Multiple sources in advertising appeals:
when product endorsers are paid by the advertising sponsor. Journal of the Academy
of Marketing Science , 22(3), pp. 234–243.
Morgan, R.M. & Hunt, S. (1994) The commitment–trust theory of relationship
marketing. Journal of Marketing , 58(3), pp. 20–38.
*Mothersbaugh, D.L. (1995) Advertising as a Search Heuristic. Unpublished Doctoral
dissertation. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh.
*Mowen, J.C. & Brown, S. (1981) On explaining and predicting the effectiveness of
celebrity endorsers. Advances in Consumer Research, 8, pp. 437–441.Mowen, J.C. & Minor, M. (2006) Consumer Behavior: A Framework. Mason, OH:
Thompson.
*Ohanian, R. (1990) Construction and validation of a scale to measure celebrity
endorsers’ perceived expertise, trustworthiness, and attractiveness. Journal of
Advertising , 19(3), pp. 39–52.
Ohanian, R. (1991) The impact of celebrity spokesperson’s perceived image on
consumers’ intention to purchase. Journal of Advertising Research, 31(1), pp. 36–52.
*O’Mahoney, S. & Meenaghan, T. (1998) The impact of celebrity endorsements on
consumers. Irish Marketing Review, 10(2), pp. 15–24.
*Pornpitakpan, C. (2003) The effect of celebrity endorsers’ perceived credibility onproduct purchase intention: the case of Singaporeans. Journal of International
Consumer Marketing , 16(2), pp. 55–73.
*Priester, J.R. & Petty, R. (2003) The influence of spokesperson trustworthiness on
message elaboration, attitude strength, and advertising effectiveness. Journal of
Consumer Psychology, 13(4), pp. 408–421.
Rosenthal, R. (1991) Meta-analytic Procedures for Social Research. Newbury Park, CA:
Sage.
Rosenthal, R. (1995) Writing meta-analytic reviews. Psychological Bulletin, 118(2),
pp. 183–192.
Rosenthal, R. & DiMatteo, M. (2001) META-ANALYSIS: Recent developments inquantitative methods for literature reviews. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1),
pp. 59–82.
Sawyer, A.G. & Ball, D. (1981) Statistical power and effect size in marketing research.
Journal of Marketing Research, 18(3), pp. 275–290.
*Sengupta, J., Goodstein, R. & Boninger, D. (1997) All cues are not created equal:
obtaining attitude persistence under low-involvement conditions. Journal of
Consumer Research, 23(4), pp. 351–361.
Shimp, T. (2000) Advertising Promotion: Supplemental Aspects of Integrated Marketing
Communications, 5th edn. Fort Worth, TX: Dryden Press.