Impact of Celebrity Credibility On Advertising Effectiveness
Impact of Celebrity Credibility On Advertising Effectiveness
Impact of Celebrity Credibility On Advertising Effectiveness
Abstract
Advertisers often make use of endorsers or representatives as trustworthy sources of
persuasion for consumers' attitudes. Promotion of products through celebrities is a trendy
advertising practice around the world. The present study judged the impact of celebrity
credibility on advertising effectiveness in terms of consumers attitude towards the
advertisement, attitude towards the brand and their purchase intention. This study also
explored the differences of respondents responses towards the advertisements of brand
through famous celebrities as well as unknown celebrities. Different TV advertisements
were used for the experiment. Several statistical tools were applied to test the hypotheses
and identify significant differences & the proposed relationships among the variables.
Overall findings suggests that the respondents considered the famous celebrities of the
brand as the most credible celebrities, having positive impact on consumers attitude
towards the advertisement, attitude to the brand and their favorable purchase intentions as
compare to the unknown celebrity with less credibility.
Keywords: Celebrity credibility, advertisement, attitude toward advertisement, attitude
toward brand, purchase intention.
1. Introduction
Endorser or representative credibility has established significant consideration in the
scholarly literature (Goldberg and hartwick, 1990; Aronson et al., 1963; Bochner and
Insko, 1966; Bergin, 1962; Sternthal et al., 1978).Today one of the main common types
of trade promotion is all the way through use of spokesperson support. In reality,
superstar supporters are being employed in about 25 percent of every small screen
commercials for the purpose to endorse products (Baker et al., 2001).
Celebrities build up a particular reflection or identity over the time as a result of their
108
Aziz et al
109
110
Aziz et al
In their study, they evaluated the influence of endorser and business integrity on feelingsto-the-ad, toward-the-products, along with buying objectives. They identified the
integrity of the advertisements endorser, the integrity of the business, plus approach-tothe-advertisement, mind-set-to-the-product, and buying objectives. Their conclusion
proposes to the company that integrity plays an essential task in customers response to
promotions and products, free of the evenly vital position of endorser trustworthiness.
Their results advocate that endorser integrity helps simply in the course of its influence
on Ad, in addition to advertisements impacts on further variables.
The thought that attitude toward an advertisement affects the possibility of a buying
assessment is expressed in a representation by Mitchell and Olson (1981). They
recognize a consumers approach-toward-advertisement: a construct manipulating
approach toward the brand, as well as feelings to the buying and using the brand. Their
study set out to check the effect of ideas about four brands of a product on attitude toward
each brand. They identified that they could better forecast brand attitude and behavioral
objectives if they took feelings toward the ad into account, along with ideas about
product characteristics linked with each brand.
In a country like Pakistan, there is a lack of research in this area. This study, therefore,
endeavors to investigate the influence of celebrity credibility on consumer thoughts about
advertisements, sensation to the brands and their buying plans.
3. Hypotheses
Prior research studies illustrate that so much is acknowledged regarding spokesperson
credibility, we initiate through this building block to place a general base furthermore to
present a counterpoint in support of how celebrity trustworthiness is expected to support
in publicity usefulness (Goldsmith et al., 2000).
After locating the study in light of the previous studies on consumers approach to the
advertisement and the results by Lafferty and Goldsmith (1999) provided a base for
proposing and testing a model of celebrity credibilitys influence on consumers feelingsto the-advertisement, approach toward-the-brand and its impact on their buying
objectives.
Particular hypotheses were experienced practically for the influence of celebrity integrity
on mind-set and buying objectives. Broad investigation has been carried out on the
impact of celebrity reliability on advertising effectiveness.
A convincing endorser can provide an essential predecessor in assessment of
commercials along with product. Specially, a trustworthy endorser has been exposed to
encompass an encouraging impact on customers feelings to-the-advertisement along with
consumers approach-to-the- product (Atkin and Block, 1983; Goldberg and Hartwick,
1990; Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975; Mitchell and Olson, 1981).Different studies indicate that
celebrity credibility is in fact positively associated to mind-set toward the advertisement
Consequently, it is assumed that:
HI: Advertisements using credible celebrities will achieve more positive attitude towards
the advertisement than the advertisements using less credible celebrities.
Lafferty and Goldsmith (1999) furthermore signify that the correlation of celebrity
credibility to attitude to-the-brand is reconciled by approach to-the advertisement.
Celebrity impact have conventionally be related by the mode to manner modification plus
111
112
Aziz et al
One hundred and forty five students contributed in the research, both male and female.
Upon entering the class room, participants were seated in front of the multimedia. They
were then shown six television advertisements of different cola drinks one by one.
After watching the advertisements, the respondents were invited to fill all the three
sections of questionnaires. The first section was filled by the participants to recognize the
celebrity credibility, secondly to identify the respondents attitude towards ads and brands
and the final portion was filled to know their purchase intention towards the specific
brand.
4.4. Variables
4.4.1. Advertising Effectiveness
We expected to find the impact of celebrity credibility on advertising effectiveness. We
judged the advertising effectiveness with three dimensions including feelings toward the
advertisement linked with thoughts toward the brand, which is then connected to buying
intentions of consumer.
4.4.2. Celebrity Credibility
A general study has been accomplished on the impact of endorser credibility on
promotion usefulness. A convincing supporter can provide as an essential predecessor in
assessment of commercials and Products. A particular variable measuring celebrity
reliability was worked out by combining the three celebrity trustworthiness subscales.
Research studies have considered the procedure by which a celebrity visible
attractiveness, trustworthiness, and expertise arbitrate rapid and delayed attitude change
and affiliation (Anderson and Clevenger, 1963; Baker and Churchill, Jr. 1977; Hovland
and Weiss, 1951; Johnson et al., 1968; Kelman and Hovland, 1953; Patzer 1983; Simon,
Berkowitz and Moyer, 1970; Whittaker and Meade, 1968).
4.5. Measurement Scales
The advertising effectiveness was measured through consumers attitude towards the ad,
attitude towards the brand and purchase intention (Ohanian and Roobina ,1990). The
scales have been used in several studies (Muehling and Laczniak, 1988; Grossman and
Till, 1998) and therefore they have greater validity. To further, ensure that the measures
were relevant in the Pakistani context face validity was assessed through experts in the
field of marketing and they found that items have strong face validity. Questioner was
adopted from and researcher found items to have stronger content validity (Muehling and
Laczniak, 1988; Grossman and Till, 1998; Ohanian and Roobina ,1990).
Convergent validity was analyzed through the correlation and items for each variable
were highly correlated. Convergent validity for celebrity credibility was analyzed through
correlation and minimum correlation among the fourteen items was 0.87 which is
resonabbly high. For attitude toward advertisement, among six items minimum
correlation was 0.89. Minimum correlation among the three items for attitude toward
brand was 0.91. which shows the higher level of convergent validity.
Discriminant Validity as also analyzed through the results of correlation. Twenty four
measures (each is an item on a scale) were included for analyzing discriminant validity.
Here, however, fourteen of the items were thought to reflect the construct of celebrity
credibility. While six items were thought to reflect attitude toward advertisement. Further
113
114
Aziz et al
were used for this study (Lafferty and Goldsmith, 1999 and Ohanian, 1990).
Expertise
This aspect is known as dependability (McCroskey 1966), capability, expertise or
requirement. Adjectives like "trained-untrained, informed-uninformed, educateduneducated usually have been exercised to evaluate this element. We assumed five items
scale (Expert--Not an expert Experienced--Inexperienced Knowledgeable-Unknowledgeable Qualified--Unqualified SkilledUnskilled) for determining capability
of the celebrity (Lafferty and Goldsmith, 1999 and Ohanian, 1990
5. Results and Analysis
Different statistical tools were applied to test the hypotheses and identify significant
differences and the proposed relationships among the variables. As the variances among
the variables were not equal across the groups, so the Robust test having the Welch and
Brown Forsythe statistics were used as alternative for F test.
Table: 1 Oneway ANOVA Test for Celebrity Credibility
F
Welch
Brown
Forsyth
Test Values
73.091
69.951
73.091
Significant
0.00
0.00
0.00
Mean
Std. Deviation
Catch Cola
145
3.8291
0.56553
Stim Cola
145
3.9537
0.73538
Limca Cola
145
2.7557
0.68598
Chusing Cola
145
3.5414
0.67147
Zenny Cola
145
3.7158
0.66871
Brands
Total
725
3.5591
0.78957
115
(J) Celebrity
Credibility
Mean
Difference (I-J)
Std. Error
Catch Cola
Stim Cola
-.12463
.07704
.677
1.07340(*)
.07383
.000
.28768(*)
.07290
.001
Zenny Cola
.11330
.07273
.723
Catch Cola
.12463
.07704
.677
Limca Cola
1.19803(*)
.08352
.000
Chusing Cola
.41232(*)
.08270
.000
Zenny Cola
.23793(*)
.08254
.042
Catch Cola
-1.07340(*)
.07383
.000
Stim Cola
-1.19803(*)
.08352
.000
Chusing Cola
-.78571(*)
.07972
.000
Zenny Cola
-.96010(*)
.07956
.000
Catch Cola
-.28768(*)
.07290
.001
Stim Cola
-.41232(*)
.08270
.000
Limca Cola
.78571(*)
.07972
.000
Zenny Cola
-.17438
.07870
.243
Catch Cola
-.11330
.07273
.723
-.23793(*)
.08254
.042
.96010(*)
.07956
.000
.17438
.07870
.243
Limca Cola
Chusinng Cola
Stim Cola
Limca Cola
Chusing Cola
Zenny Cola
Stim Cola
Limca Cola
Chusing Cola
Sig.
(Tamhane)
* The mean difference is significant at the .05 level.
The results from the above table for the advertisements of all the five brands provide
basis for the extent of celebrity credibility. The overall mean differences in the above
table indicate that the respondents considered the celebrity of Stim Cola as the top most
credible celebrity. There are no more significant differences between the Stim Cola and
Catch Cola celebrity credibility. They are almost the same. Similarly, the credibility of
the celebrities in the advertisements of Zenny Cola and Chinsung Cola were ranked as
third and fourth respectively by the respondents. Whereas, on the other hand the
unknown endorser in the advertisement of Limca Cola was considered as the least
credible celebrity.
It is also clear from the above table of multiple comparisons that the third brand having
the unknown celebrity has significant differences with all the four brands. According to
the respondents response the unknown celebrity in Limca Cola is not credible celebrity.
116
Aziz et al
Brands
Mean
Catch Cola
145
3.74
0.56713
Stim Cola
145
3.893
0.65705
Limca Cola
145
3.12
0.75000
Chusing Cola
145
3.46
0.65735
Zenny Cola
145
3.67
0.65162
Test Values
Significant
Total
725
3.590
0.71278
117
Welch
F
Brown
Forsythe
31.634
27.76
31.63
0.00
0.00
0.00
(J) Attitude
towards Ad
Catch Cola
Stim Cola
Stim Cola
Limca Cola
Chusing Cola
Zenny Cola
Mean
Difference (I-J)
Std. Error
Sig.
-.18522
.07208
.102
Limca Cola
.62069(*)
.07809
.000
Chusing Cola
.27882(*)
.07210
.001
Zenny Cola
.06995
.07174
.982
Catch Cola
.18522
.07208
.102
Limca Cola
.80591(*)
.08280
.000
Chusing Cola
.46404(*)
.07718
.000
Zenny Cola
.25517(*)
.07685
.010
Catch Cola
-.62069(*)
.07809
.000
Stim Cola
-.80591(*)
.08280
.000
Chusing Cola
-.34187(*)
.08282
.000
Zenny Cola
-.55074(*)
.08251
.000
Catch Cola
-.27882(*)
.07210
.001
Stim Cola
-.46404(*)
.07718
.000
Limca Cola
.34187(*)
.08282
.000
Zenny Cola
-.20887
.07687
.068
Catch Cola
-.06995
.07174
.982
-.25517(*)
.07685
.010
.55074(*)
.08251
.000
.20887
.07687
.068
Stim Cola
Limca Cola
Chusing Cola
118
Aziz et al
Brands
Mean
Catch Cola
145
3.7770
.60611
Stim Cola
145
3.8851
.80256
Limca Cola
145
2.6598
.97616
Chusing Cola
145
3.5126
.68157
Zenny Cola
145
3.6184
.85344
Welch
F
Brown
Forsythe
Test Values
54.23
41.468
54.23
Significant
0.00
0.00
0.00
Total
725
3.4906
.90397
119
(J) Brand
Attitude
Mean
Difference (I-J)
Std. Error
Catch Cola
Stim Cola
-.10805
.08352
.888
1.11724(*)
.09542
.000
.26437(*)
.07574
.006
Zenny Cola
.15862
.08693
.512
Catch Cola
.10805
.08352
.888
Limca Cola
1.22529(*)
.10495
.000
.37241(*)
.08744
.000
Zenny Cola
.26667
.09729
.063
Catch Cola
-1.11724(*)
.09542
.000
Stim Cola
-1.22529(*)
.10495
.000
Chusing Cola
-.85287(*)
.09887
.000
Zenny Cola
-.95862(*)
.10768
.000
Catch Cola
-.26437(*)
.07574
.006
Stim Cola
-.37241(*)
.08744
.000
Limca Cola
.85287(*)
.09887
.000
Zenny Cola
-.10575
.09070
.940
Catch Cola
-.15862
.08693
.512
Stim Cola
-.26667
.09729
.063
.95862(*)
.10768
.000
.10575
.09070
.940
Limca Cola
Chusing Cola
Stim Cola
Chusing Cola
Limca Cola
Chusing Cola
Zenny Cola
Limca Cola
Chusing Cola
Sig.
120
Aziz et al
Standard
Deviation
Brands
Catch Cola
145
3.78
.731
Stim Cola
145
3.89
.883
Limca Cola
145
2.58
1.045
Chusing Cola
145
3.48
.834
Zenny Cola
145
3.63
.896
Welch
F
Brown
Forsythe
Test values
50.695
40.573
50.69
Significant
0.00
0.00
0.00
Total
725
3.47
.998
121
(J) Purchase
Intension
Mean
Difference (I-J)
Standard
Error
Sig.
Catch Cola
Stim Cola
-.110
.095
.942
Limca Cola
1.200(*)
.106
.000
Chusing Cola
.303(*)
.092
.011
Zenny Cola
.145
.096
.759
Catch Cola
.110
.095
.942
Limca Cola
1.310(*)
.114
.000
Chusing Cola
.414(*)
.101
.001
Zenny Cola
.255
.104
.142
Catch Cola
-1.200(*)
.106
.000
Stim Cola
-1.310(*)
.114
.000
Chusing Cola
-.897(*)
.111
.000
Zenny Cola
-1.055(*)
.114
.000
Catch Cola
-.303(*)
.092
.011
Stim Cola
-.414(*)
.101
.001
Limca Cola
.897(*)
.111
.000
Zenny Cola
-.159
.102
.721
Catch Cola
-.145
.096
.759
Stim Cola
-.255
.104
.142
Limca Cola
1.055(*)
.114
.000
Chusing Cola
.159
.102
.721
Stim Cola
Limca Cola
Chusing
Cola
Zenny Cola
122
Aziz et al
123
124
Aziz et al
125
126
Aziz et al
McCroskey, J. C. and Young, T. J. (1981). Ethos and Credibility: The Construct and Its
Measurement after Three Decade. Central States Speech Journal, 32(1), 24-34.
McGinnies, E. and Charles D. W. (1980). Better Liked Than Right: Trustworthiness and
Expertise as Factors in Credibility. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 6 (3),
467-472.
Mitchell, A. A. and Jerry C. O. (1981).Are Product Attribute Beliefs the Only Mediator
of Advertising Effects on Brand Attitude? Journal of Marketing Research, 18 (3), 318332.
Miller, G and Baseheart, T. (1969). Source Trustworthiness, Opinionated Statements, and
Response to Persuasive Communication. Speech Monographs, 36, 1-7.
Muelhing, D. D. and Russell N. L. (1988). Advertisings immediate and delayed
influences on Brand attitudes: consideration across message involvement levels. Journal
of advertsing, 17, 23-24.
Ohanian,, R. (1990). Construction and Validation of a Scale to Measure Celebrity
Endorsers' Perceived Expertise, Trustworthiness, and Attractiveness. Journal of
Advertising, 19 (3), 39-52.
Ohanian, R. (1991).T he Impact of Celebrity Spokespersons' Perceived Image on
Consumers' Intention to Purchase. Journal of Advertising Research, 31 (1), 46- 54.
Patzer G.L. (1983). Source credibility as a function of communicator physical
attractiveness. Journal of Business Research, 11 (2), 229-241.
Ranjbarian B., Shekarchizade, Z. and Momeni Z. (2010). Celebrity Endorser Influence on
Attitude Towards Advertisements and Brand European. Journal of Social Sciences,
13(3), 112-123.
Ronald, E., Goldsmith, B. A., Lafferty, S. J. and Newell, J. (2000):, The Impact of
Corporate Credibility and Celebrity Credibility on Consumer Reaction to Advertisements
and brand. Journal of Advertising, 29(3), 43-54.
Sternthal, B. Lynn, W. P. and Dholakia, R. (1978). The Persuasive Effect of Source
Credibility: A Situational Analysis. Public Opinion Quarterly, 42 (2), 285-314.
Severin W. J and Tankard, J. W. Jr. (2001). Communication Theories, (5th Ed.), New
York: Longman.
Shimp, T. A. (2000). Advertising Promotion. Supplemental Aspects of Integrated
Marketing Communications, 5th Ed., Dryden Press: Forth Worth, TX.
Shimp, T. A. (1981).Attitude Toward the Ad as a Mediator of Consumer Brand Choice.
Journal of Advertising, 10(2), 9-14.
Self, C. C. (1996). Credibility in Salwen, Michael B.; Stacks, Don W. (Eds.), An
Integrated Approach to Communication Theory and Research, Lawrence Erlbaum:
Mahwah, NJ, 421-441.
Simon H. W., Berkowitz, N. N and Moyer, R. J. (1970). Similarity, Credibility, and
Attitude Change: A Review and a Theory. Psychological Bulletin, 73(1), 1-16.
Whittaker, J. and Meade, T. (1968). Retention of Opinion Change as a Function of
Differential Source Credibility, International Journal of Psychology, 3, 103-108.
127