Download Who to Choose? Source Credibility and Attractiveness of Endorsers

ASSOCIATION FOR CONSUMER RESEARCH
Labovitz School of Business & Economics, University of Minnesota Duluth, 11 E. Superior Street, Suite 210, Duluth, MN 55802
Who to Choose? Source Credibility and Attractiveness of Endorsers in the 2008 Presidential Primaries
Pamela Grimm, Kent State University, USA
Hyunjung Lee, Kent State University, USA
Neslihan Yilmaz, Kent State University, USA
This research examines endorsements in the 2008 presidential primary elections. Four categories of endorsers are identified and
examined within the Source Credibility framework. Results show that categories vary significantly in terms of perceived credibility
with politicians viewed as most credible (4.9), followed by newspapers (4.32), interest groups (4.24) and celebrities (3.61). These
results mirror the importance rating of specific endorsers representing each of the categories. Source Attractiveness is also used to
examine subjects’ evaluation of celebrity endorsers. There is a significant relationship between celebrity attractiveness and evaluation
of the celebrity’s importance as an endorser (r = .41, p
[to cite]:
Pamela Grimm, Hyunjung Lee, and Neslihan Yilmaz (2009) ,"Who to Choose? Source Credibility and Attractiveness of
Endorsers in the 2008 Presidential Primaries", in NA - Advances in Consumer Research Volume 36, eds. Ann L. McGill and
Sharon Shavitt, Duluth, MN : Association for Consumer Research, Pages: 866-867.
[url]:
http://www.acrwebsite.org/volumes/14640/volumes/v36/NA-36
[copyright notice]:
This work is copyrighted by The Association for Consumer Research. For permission to copy or use this work in whole or in
part, please contact the Copyright Clearance Center at http://www.copyright.com/.
866 / WORKING PAPERS
Carmon, Ziv and Dan Ariely (2000), “Focusing on the Foregone: How Value Can Appear So Different to Buyers and Sellers,”
Journal of Consumer Research, 27 (3), 360-70.
Cialdini, Robert B. (1993), Influence: Science and practice (3rd ed.). New York, NY, US: HarperCollins College Publishers.
Frederick, Shane and George Loewenstein (1999), “Hedonic adaptation,” in Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology.,
Daniel Kahneman and Ed Diener and Norbert Schwarz, Eds. New York, NY, US: Russell Sage Foundation.
Higgins, E. Tory (2006), “Value From Hedonic Experience and Engagement,” Psychological Review, 113 (3), 439-60.
Kahneman, Daniel and Jack L. Knetsch (1991), “The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias,” Journal of Economic
Perspectives, 5 (1), 193-206.
Kahneman, Daniel, Jack L. Knetsch, and Richard H. Thaler (1990), “Experimental tests of the endowment effect and the Coase
theorem,” Journal of Political Economy, 98 (6), 1352.
Kahneman, Daniel and Jackie Snell (1992), “Predicting a Changing Taste: Do People Know What They Will Like?,” Journal of
Behavioral Decision Making, 5 (3), 187-200.
Shin, Jiwoong and Dan Ariely (2004), “Keeping Doors Open: The Effect of Unavailability on Incentives to Keep Options Viable,”
Management Science, 50 (5), 575-86.
Thaler, Richard (1985), “Mental Accounting and Consumer Choice,” Marketing Science, 4 (3), 199-214.
(1980), “Toward a Positive Theory of Consumer Choice,” in Choices, Values, and Frames, Daniel Kahneman and Amos
Tversky, Eds. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Tversky, Amos and Daniel Kahneman (1973), “Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability,” Cognitive Psychology, 5 (2), 207-32.
Advice from a Caterpillar: Mainstreaming Hookah Consumption Into American Pop Culture
Merlyn A. Griffiths, University of North Carolina-Greensboro, USA
Tracy R. Harmon, Syracuse University, USA
Hookah smoking is a less known entity for consumer behavior researchers. Research on consumers’ smoking behaviors have been
vast in the marketing area, and has offered compelling evidence of the negative effects of smoking. The majority of these studies have
focused primarily on cigarette consumption and the effects of advertising messages, antismoking messages and placement in media, as
well as the addictive effects on adolescents, teenagers and young adults (see Pechmann and Reibling 2006; Pechmann and Reibling 2000;
Pechmann and Shih 1999; Pechmann and Ratneshwar 1994; Pechmann et al. 2003). However, no studies to date have focused on American
consumers’ adoption or practice of hookah smoking. Just what is the appeal of this practice, and to what might we attribute its epidemiclike spread in mainstream culture. We investigate this phenomenon and identify factors relating to consumer attitudes, beliefs and
attributed meanings that are contributing to the proliferation of hookah smoking.
Employing qualitative methods, our findings point to a significant disconnect for consumers in their perceptions. We have found
nostalgic emotional disconnections, and disconnection of the risks and consequences involved in hookah consumption relative to cigarette
and cigar smoking. Hookah consumption is viewed as a positive pleasurable experience that fosters group bonding.
References
Pechmann, C. and E.T. Reibling (2006), “Antismoking Advertisements for Youths: An Independent Evaluation of Health, CounterIndustry, and Industry Approaches,” American Journal of Public Health, 96 (5), 906-13.
Pechmann, C., G. Z. Zhao, M. E. Goldberg, and E. T. Reibling (2003), “What To Convey In Antismoking Advertisements For
Adolescents: The Use Of Protection Motivation Theory To Identify Effective Message Themes,” Journal of Marketing, 67 (2), 118.
Pechmann, C. and E. T. Reibling ( 2000), “Anti-smoking Advertising Campaigns Targeting Youth: Case Studies From USA and
Canada,” Tobacco Control, 9 (Summer ),18-31.
Pechmann, C. and C. Shih (1999), “ Smoking Scenes in Movies and Antismoking Advertisements before Movies: Effects on Youth,”
Journal of Marketing, 63 (3), 1-13.
Pechmann, C. and S. Ratneshwar (1994), “The Effects of Antismoking and Cigarette Advertising on Young Adolescents Perceptions
of Peers Who Smoke,” Journal of Consumer Research, 21 (2), 236-51.
Who to Choose? Source Credibility and Attractiveness of Endorsers in the 2008 Presidential
Primaries
Pamela Grimm, Kent State University, USA
Hyunjung Lee, Kent State University, USA
Neslihan Yilmaz, Kent State University, USA
Endorsements in politics are ubiquitous, especially in the run-up to a presidential election. Though both marketers and politicians
try to influence consumer/voter behavior through endorsements, the endorsement process in politics is more complicated than in
marketing for several reasons. First, in marketing the endorser is usually a celebrity or expert on the product category, is paid for his or
Advances in Consumer Research (Volume 36) / 867
her endorsement and, typically, an endorsement is not made unless a relationship (usually contractual) exists between the firm and the
endorser.
In politics, celebrity endorsements seem less important that endorsements from sources such as other politicians. Endorsements in
politics are not paid, there are no contractual relationships and some endorsements are rejected by the candidate because they are viewed
as liabilities rather than assets. This rejection of an endorsement is a phenomenon seldom seen outside of the political arena.
It is especially clear in the 2008 Presidential Primary that endorsements matter. The campaigns make a point of sharing news about
positive endorsements and several candidates have found themselves in the position of either having to reject or explain endorsements
from sources viewed as negative by some voters. Yet, despite this obvious importance, there is only a limited understanding of the relative
importance of different types of endorsers or the factors that drive the importance of an endorser.
This research provides insight into four broad categories of endorsers. These categories are: politicians, newspapers, organizations
representing interest groups (ex: labor and religious groups) and celebrities. Evidence of the importance of most of these types of
endorsements is found primarily in the Political Science literature, though the popular press has also been weighing in on this question
as well. Political endorsements (Schulte 2008; Thomas 2008; Tumulty 2008), newspaper endorsements (Cooper,2007; Erikson 1976;
Stengel 2008), interest group endorsements (Grossman & Helpman 1999; Maher 2008; McDermott 2006; Rapoport, Stone, &
Abramowitz 1991), and celebrity endorsements (Celeb in chief 2007; Goodnight 2005; Jones & Carroll 2007; Payne, Hanlon, & Twomey
III 2007; Weiskel 2005) have all been studied, though typically in isolation from other types of endorsements.
This paper examines and compares these different types of endorsers utilizing the Source Credibility and, in the case of celebrities,
the Source Attractiveness models of endorser effects (Ohanian 1990). Application of these models in the context of political endorsements
has not been done, though this application was suggested by Ohanian (1990). Using these models should provide greater insight into the
mechanisms underlying endorsement effects in a political context.
Subjects in the research were undergraduate students from an Ohio public university who were given extra credit for participating
in the research. The survey was administered online and was made available 36 hours before the March 2008 Primary in Ohio. The survey
included items designed to gather information regarding party affiliation, primary candidate preferences, source credibility for each of
the four categories of endorsers (politicians, newspapers, interest groups and celebrities) and attractiveness and importance of eight
specific endorsers. Subjects rated two actual endorsers for each of the four categories of endorsers, for a total of eight endorsers. The eight
specific endorsers rated by a subject depended on the subject’s primary candidate preference. The items used for source credibility and
attractiveness were those developed by Ohanian (1990). A single seven point item (with 1 as “not at all important” and 7 as “very
important”) was used to gauge the importance that a subject assigned to a given endorser.
Overall, 355 surveys were retained; 85 respondents were registered Republicans, 135 were Democrats and 40 were independent. The
remaining subjects were not registered. The source credibility items were administered to all subjects, but the source attractiveness and
importance items were only administered to those subjects who were registered to vote.
The ten items representing source credibility were averaged, as were the five items representing source attractiveness. The results
demonstrate that, in general, consumers/voters evaluate the different endorsers in significantly different ways based on source credibility.
Other politicians are viewed as most credible (mean=4.9 average on a seven point scale), followed by newspapers (4.3), interest groups
(4.2) and celebrities (3.6) (p<.001).
The rank ordering produced by the Source Credibility items is mirrored in the importance ratings assigned to the specific celebrities
in each category for each candidate. The average importance for politicians was 4.7; for newspapers 4.3; for interest groups 3.9 and for
celebrities 2.9. Politicians are considered most credible and important and celebrities are considered least credible and important.
The Source Credibility scale can be further decomposed into two sub-factors: trustworthiness and expertise. A factor analysis of the
scale items for each of the four categories of endorsers showed that the pattern of factor loadings followed the results of Ohanian except
for celebrity endorsers. Means were computed on the two sub-factors for politicians, newspapers and interest groups. Results show
significant differences between the three groups in terms of trustworthiness and expertise. Politicians are rated higher in terms of both
expertise (5.42) and trustworthiness (4.39) than the other two groups, though the difference between politicians and interest groups, in
terms of trustworthiness, is not significant. Newspapers are rated second in terms of expertise (4.49) but third, behind interest groups, in
terms of trustworthiness (4.14). Interest groups are not significantly different from politicians in terms of trustworthiness (4.31) but are
significantly lower than politicians and newspapers in terms of expertise (4.17).
Source attractiveness measures were collected for the two celebrities endorsing each of the four specific candidates. The average
attractiveness measure was 4.11 across the eight celebrities included in the study. The relationship between attractiveness and the
importance assigned the endorser was positive and significant (r=.406, p<.001).
This research demonstrates the value of utilizing the Source Credibility and Attractiveness framework in a political context. There
are significant differences in how different types of endorsers are viewed in terms of credibility in general, and trustworthiness and
expertise in particular. Further, credibility is mirrored in the importance assigned to endorsers by consumers. Celebrity attractiveness is
also linked to the importance assigned to a celebrity’s endorsement.
References
“Celeb in chief,” (2007), Time, 170 (26), 25.
Cooper, Christopher (2007), “Odds are on obama to get iowa paper’s endorsement,” Wall Street Journal-Eastern Edition, 250 (141),
A2.
Erikson, Robert S. (1976), “The influence of newspaper endorsements in presidential elections: The case of 1964,” American Journal
of Political Science, 20 (2), 207-33.
Goodnight, G. T. (2005), “The passion of the christ meets fahrenheit 9/11: A study in celebrity advocacy,” American Behavioral
Scientist, 49 (3), 410-35.
Grossman, Gene M., and Elhanan Helpman (1999), “Competing for endorsements,” The American Economic Review, 89 (3), 501-24.