THESIS
“What is the role of fashion bloggers as brand ambassadors? The
impact that, Consumer-Blogger Identification can cause on
Customer Equity.”
Name: Maria Papandroulidaki Student number: 11087730
Thesis supervisor: Toon Meulemans Date: 23 June 2016
Word count: 19313
MSc Business Administration, track Marketing
Statement of Originality
This document is written by student Maria Papandroulidaki, who declares to take full responsibility for the contents of this document.
I declare that the text and the work presented in this document, is original and that no sources other than those mentioned in the text and its references have been used in creating it.
The Faculty of Economics and Business is responsible solely for the supervision of completion of the work, not for the contents.
Abstract
We live in a world of constant development. All the aspects of our lives, including businesses are constantly changing. Among the most influential changes, which have occurred in the last years, is the introduction and rise of Social Media. Social Media have not only changed our lives forever but also the way that businesses work. A relatively new channel, that yet has started to take huge dimensions, is blogs. This study aims to examine the influence of Consumers’ Identification with the bloggers, on the relationship between perceived brand personality and Customer Equity, as both a direct effect and an indirect effect when moderating the effect of people personality on the relationship between brand personality and Customer Equity. Data were collected from 163 males and females of different nationalities, ages and backgrounds. Personality of the respondents was assessed according to the five dimensions from the Big Five personality model: (1) Extraversion, (2) Neuroticism, (3) Conscientiousness, (4) Agreeableness and (5) Openness. Personality of the Brands was depicted by using the five dimension of the “Big 5” for brands by Aaker: (1) Excitement, (2) Competence, (3) Sincerity, (4) Sophistication and (5) Ruggedness. Results show that there is a significant relationship between all traits of brands’ personality and Customer Equity. Further, when there is a fit between the personality of the brand and the personality of the blogger, higher levels of identification with the blogger will result in higher Customer Equity. The dimensions of the respondents’ personality, on the other hand, do not appear to have a significant effect on the relationship between personality of the brand and Customer Equity. Implications of these findings are discussed.
Contents
1 Introduction ... 5
2 Literature review ... 9
2.1 Customer Equity (CE) ... 9
2.2 Social Media (or Social Network Sites) ... 10
2.3 Social Media in Marketing ... 12
2.3.1 Social Media and Branding ... 13
2.4 Brand Identity ... 16
3 Research ... 22
3.1 Conceptual Framework and Hypothesis development ... 22
3.2 Research Question ... 25
3.3 Research Design and analysis ... 25
3.3.1 Method ... 25
3.3.2 Measurement of variables ... 26
3.3.3 Statistical procedure ... 28
4 Results and Discussion ... 32
4.1 Analysis ... 32
4.2 Results and Discussion ... 35
5 Conclusions ... 38
5.1 Contributions and Implications ... 38
5.2 Limitations... 39
5.3 Future Research ... 40
List of tables and figures
Tables
Table 1 Reliabilities (Cronbach’s Alpha) 27
Table 2 Means, Standard Deviations, Correlations Q2 28
Table 3 Means, Standard Deviations, Correlations Q1 29
Table 4 Results of Excitement, Competence, Sophistication and Sincerity as predictors of Customer Equity (Q2)
32
Table5 Results of Excitement, Competence, Sophistication and Sincerity as predictors of Customer Equity (Q1)
32
Table 6 Results of Identification with the blogger as moderator of the relationship between Personality of the Brand and Customer Equity (Q2)
34
Table 7 Results of Identification with the blogger as moderator of the relationship between Personality of the Brand and Customer Equity (Q1)
34
Figures
Figure 1 The stimuli-response Model 15
Figure 2 The Big Five model of McCrae and Costa 18
Figure 3 The Big Five of Aaker for Brands 18
Figure 4 Conceptual Framework 21
Figure 5 PROCESS Model 1 94
1 Introduction
The world which we live in is constantly developing. Our daily routine is changing, as new products and services are introduced, that affect the way we used to accomplish everyday tasks. These changes apart from our routine, apply to businesses as well. Some years back, one of the biggest of those changes, the term Web 2.0, was introduced to the world. This term is used to describe World Wide Web sites that emphasize user-generated content and usability. The fact, that Web 2.0 is a relatively new term, does not imply, in this case, that there were significant updates or technical changes, but rather that differences have occurred in the way Web pages are made and used. More specifically, Web 2.0 allows users to interact in social media and create user-generated content, something that was not easy before, and therefore people had to passively observe the content. Some representative examples of Web 2.0 include social networking sites, blogs, and Web applications.1 The internet world, which we take for granted
today, did not exist some years ago, and in fact, it has made a huge difference for the world, people's lives and consequently, of course, for business ethics.
The last term includes differences in how companies make a decision about production of a product, how they design or distribute it, and in general, differences on all the stages of the production chain. Most importantly though, it has affected the marketing of a product namely the way a product is promoted, advertised or branded. Nowadays, with the Web 2.0, there are endless possibilities in these fields and firms seem to be interested in exploiting all of them. Social Media is probably one of the most favorable and easy ways to promote products and brands these days, since the enormous amount of users help to “spread the news” about a product much more easily, less costly and in no time. To understand the power of Social Networking Sides, consider that 74% of all internet users are now active on social media, 28% ask social network friends or followers about a product they're considering buying, and 30% use blogs to confirm their purchase choices.2 As a subset of this marketing madness, a new trend has
started to rise rapidly: the blogs (or weblogs), i.e. sites which the owner uses to express
1 http://www.oreilly.com/pub/a/web2/archive/what-is-web-20.html
2 Sources: http://www.social4retail.com/the-blog-economy-blogging-stats-infographic-2014.html
http://www.pewinternet.org/fact-sheets/social-networking-fact-sheet/
his/herself. Weblogs are widely used today to advertise a product and to influence the consumers’ opinion about this product and, of course, their buying intentions. In fact, according to a survey which took place by “Blogher”, in 2012 and included over 2000 women, the numbers of the consumers that were indeed influenced were impressive. Results indicated that 61% of the total U.S. population had bought products because of recommendations they read on blogs. Furthermore, according to “blog.hubspot.com”, 57% of companies with a blog have acquired a customer from their blog. Taking into account the great resonance of the blogs, except for promoting reasons, I believe they can be also used for building and enhancing customer equity. Customer equity (CE) is the total customer lifetime value of all of the company’s customers, currently and in the future, and it is driven by three key elements: value equity, brand equity and relationship equity (Zeithaml, Lemon, & Rust, 2000), which are explained later in this paper. The audience of the blogs seems to respect and espouse the opinion of bloggers, who can have enormous numbers of followers, thus making it easier to increase brand awareness and create a favorable attitude for a new brand, resulting in some cases also in brand loyalty.
A representative example of the power that blogs can have, are fashion blogs and through studying them I aim to explore if, and how much they can influence and enhance customer equity, as they seem to have a great potential to help brands to become known and raise.
Web 2.0 is not the only impressive term that was recently introduced though. Among others, in the Marketing field, consumer-brand identification is a theory that is gaining more and more interest. A new insight in the field of consumer behavior has emerged; the idea of brand personality and the role that it can play in helping consumer feel closer to the brand. The explanation of the identification of a person with an object as found by Tuškej, Golob, & Podnar, (2013): “Identification in this respect is identification with an object instilled with meanings that, in relation to the individual, functions as a pseudo person, while the consumer perceives its meanings and characteristics as his or her own.” The Consumer-Brand Identification, in other words, means that consumers see some of their own characteristics in the brand and identify themselves with those characteristics and consequently with the brand.. It is undoubtable that that bloggers can actually influence their followers in a lot of different ways and for diverse reasons. One of them can be through managing to make consumers identify with them (as they do with brands) and consequently influence them to buy specific brands. For the needs of this study, I will only focus on the investigation of this specific way, namely
consumer-blogger identification. We already know that brands have their own personalities and, in many cases, consumers identification with a brand, results in increased trust and loyalty (Tuškej, Golob, & Podnar, 2013). But how strong is that identification? What if a(n) (perceived) expert (i.e. fashion blogger in this case), proposes another brand (other than the one that an individual identifies) in the same category? Is there a chance that consumers’ identification with the blogger would be stronger and thus the consumers would actually choose the proposed brand, and not the one which they perceive as more similar to their personality? Or would they change the way they perceived the brand? There is no evidence of the importance of fashion bloggers as brand ambassadors, and this is in my opinion something worth investigating, if we take into account the significant impact they can have for the brands.
To this end, this study aims to examine these questions. More specifically I will examine how identification of the consumers with a blogger can affect the customer equity of a brand, concerning brands with different identities. The different identities will be determined according to the Big 5 model for brands of Aaker (1997). Moreover the different personalities of individuals (according to Big 5) as moderators of the abovementioned relationship will be tested. To make sure that the results will be unbiased, two different fashion bloggers and 4 different, imaginative brands will be used in the survey. By doing this, I can make sure that the results are actually valid under different circumstances.
This initial section presented the motivations for conducting the current research. The second part introduces the literature review regarding all the issues concerning this paper, namely Customer Equity, Social Media and the meaning of Brand Identity. Further, in the next part, the research gap and research question are illustrated. Subsequently, that section indicates the research methodologies that will be adopted to answer the research question. After that, the exact procedures that were used, and the results from the analysis are discussed in detail. Later in the document, the conclusions and contributions, as well as the limitations of this study are analyzed. Some directions for future research are given at the end of this paper.
2 Literature review
Above I referred to a variety of terms that will be included in this study. In this section I am going to analyze and clarify every one of them separately, in order to help the readers understand what exactly each of them stands for. First of all, what is “Customer Equity”? Taking a more detailed look in its definition and drivers may set more light to its importance for the firms.
2.1 Customer Equity (CE)
Customer Equity is the total customer lifetime values of all of the company’s customers currently and in the future. In other words, the value of one customer is not only the profit that the person will bring today, but also the profitability that the company will realize by this customer in total, over time. Although customer equity is not the total value of a company, it is critical for a firm’s success, especially in the long-term (Lemon, Rust, ZeithamI (2001)). There are three key elements that drive customer equity: i) value equity, ii) brand equity and iii) relationship (or retention) equity.
There is a shift in marketing, which indicates that it is more important to focus on enhancing customer equity as a whole, rather than value equity as a unit. Of course the importance of the product itself cannot be ignored but having the perfect product, alone, is not enough. Under the intense competition that exists in the markets nowadays, companies should actually develop all the three aspects of customer equity in order to be successful and to manage to maintain their position in the market. More analytical the three aspects of CE:
Value equity: Value equity refers to the consumers’ perception of the product’s (or service’s) value. This perception of value usually is formed depending on three key levers: quality (i.e. the objective physical and non-physical attributes of the product), price (i.e. what the customers give up to acquire the product/service) and convenience (actions that help reduce the customer's time costs, search costs, and in general minimizing the effort needed in order to do business with the firm). (Zeitham, Lemon, & Rust, 2000)
Brand equity: Brand equity is defined as “the customer's subjective and intangible assessment of the brand, above and beyond its objectively perceived value” (Lemon, Rust, ZeithamI (2001)). It is built through the image, and the meaning it has for the consumers, and its role is to attract new customers, to serve as a “reminder” for the consumers about what the brand is offering and
as the emotional tie between the customer and the firm. Brand Equity, like value equity, is also formed depending on three key levers, namely brand awareness, attitude toward the brand and corporate ethics (Lemon, Rust, Zeithaml, 2001). The first one, brand awareness, refers to the tools that can actually influence and enhance brand awareness, in other words, the communication of the firm. Attitude toward the brand encompasses the ability of a company to create emotional bonds with its customers, while corporate ethics are defined as the specific actions of an organization that can influence consumers’ perception about it. (Lemon, Rust, Zeithaml (2001))
Relationship equity: (Lemon, Rust, Zeithaml (2001)) define relationship (or retention) equity as “the tendency of the customer to stick with the brand, above and beyond the customer's objective and subjective assessments of the brand”. As Brand equity and Value equity, Retention equity depends also on some key levers, namely loyalty programs, special recognition and treatment, affinity programs, community-building programs, and knowledge-building programs. (Zeithaml, Lemon, & Rust, 2000). Defining some of them, loyalty programs refers to actions that reward customers for specific behaviors, special recognition and treatment to actions that recognize how important, are for the company, some specific behaviors of its customers, while affinity programs to actions that target to create strong emotional ties with the consumers (Lemon, Rust, Zeithaml, 2001). Furthermore, Community-building programs seek to strengthen the customer-firm connection by linking the customer to a larger community of people similar to him, (Muniz, & O'guinn, 2001), and knowledge-building programs create structural ties between the consumer and the firm, making the customers less willing to create a relationship also with another company. Determining which of these three is the most important driver for customer equity in any case, usually depends on the specific conditions of the industry and the market. Customer Equity clearly is of great important of brands and can be influenced (as a whole or the drivers separately) by a huge range of different factors. Between them are, especially nowadays, social media and blogs.
2.2 Social Media (or Social Network Sites)
Social network sites (SNS) are “web-based services that allow individuals to (1) construct a public or semi-public profile within a bounded system, (2) articulate a list of other users with whom they share a connection, and (3) view and traverse their list of connections and those
made by others within the system.” (Boyd, Ellison, 2008). In other words, Social media are channels that allow people to create, share and exchange information and ideas (possibly through pictures, videos or music) in virtual communities. Nowadays, social media are ubiquitous in our lives and have attracted millions of users, who have incorporated SNS into their daily routines. Examples of Social Network Sites are Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, LinkedIn and the Weblogs (blogs).
Blogs (or weblogs) are a specific kind of Social Network Sites that arising promptly during the last years. They are like personal journals that the writer uses in order to share one’s own experiences, opinions and activities with the readers (the ones who “follow” the blog)3. In the
blogs, the “posts”4 are displayed in reverse-chronological order and they are often concerned
with a specific topic. Blogs, as all the social media, have been integrated in our lives and are now a tool that people use to communicate, as they enable ordinary people to share their creations online, and spread information, thus removing some of the traditional barriers. What is also important about blogs is the fact that they allow readers to directly comment under the writers’ posts, thus enabling the personal interaction with the blogger and consequently making it possible for the readers to get to “know” the blogger, and create a bond between the two (Halvorsen, Hoffmann ,Coste-Manière & Stankeviciute, 2013).
Fashion Blogs
:
Fashion blogs, obviously, are blogs that are especially concerned with fashion, i.e. with fashion brands, trends, products, e-commerce, street style, and personal style (Halvorsen et al., 2013). Fashion blogs are quite popular nowadays, with their number to rise rapidly. They can be owned either by fashion professionals or everyday people that are interested in fashion (a trend that keeps growing every day). The writers’ role is to update readers regarding fashion trends, and to inspire them with their style. A representative example of how popular fashion blogs are nowadays is Chiara Ferragni, an Italian fashion blogger born in 1987. Until 2011, her blog had more than 1 million unique visitors and 12 million impressions per month, while by 2014, her Instagram account was counting 2.9 million followers.5
3 Source: http://www.mednet-tech.com/newsletter/blogs/what-are-blogs 4Posts of the blog are the entries that the writer(s) post(s) in the blog 5Facts from: http://www.theblondesalad.com/ , Instagram and Wikipedia
2.3 Social Media in Marketing
After the introduction of Web 2.0 the last years, the rules of marketing has changed, together with the rule of other fields of businesses, and with the increasing usage of Social Network Sites they keep evolving every day. There is evidence that Social Media can and should be used as a marketing tool to promote products. (Mangold & Faulds 2009) argue that Social media should be included in the “promotion mix” during the business’ integrated marketing communications (IMC) strategies, as they contend that in this way, they can communicate more effectively with their target markets.
But what exactly is the “Marketing mix”? The marketing mix introduced around 1960, and in the beginning it represented the process of putting the right product in right the place, at the proper time, and at the right price. In other words it consisted of the 4P’s of Marketing (product, place, price, promotion).6
However, the world is evolving, and the initial Marketing Mix had to evolve with it. And it evolved in various ways. First of all, three other P’s where added to the first model of 4P’s, as an attempt of the Marketers to better describe the Marketing process as the needs of the markets changed in the earlier years. Except for the 4P’s, in this new era, the “Packaging, Positioning and People” also matter.7 The most important of them (regarding this study) is the last P, the People.
People are very important “assets” of a business, since they are the ones that actually deliver the product/service and communicate with the customers (Enache, 2011). People are also the spokespeople of the brand, with whom the consumers associate the brand in their minds. It is essential for a firm to recruit, hire and retain the people that possess the skills and abilities to do the job. This can actually be an “internal” competitive advantage a company has in order to dominate in the market.
As it is obvious, there is a shift from product marketing to relationship marketing8. As Kotler, &
Armstrong, (2010, p. 12) defines the term, “customer relationship management, is the overall process of building and maintaining profitable customer relationships by delivering superior
6
https://www.marsdd.com/mars-library/the-marketing-mix-in-marketing-strategy-product-price-place-and-promotion/
7 http://marketingmix.co.uk/
8 Definition of relationship marketing: “Marketing is to establish, maintain, and enhance relationships with
customer value and satisfaction. It deals with all aspects of acquiring, keeping, and growing customers.” Marketing is thus nowadays considered more as an interactive process in a social context where relationship building is vital. Establishing a relationship with customers can be divided into two steps: to attract the customer and to build a strong relationship to maintain that customer (Grönroos 1994).
2.3.1 Social Media and Branding Giving a definition; Branding is:
“The process involved in creating a unique name and image for a product in the consumers' mind, mainly through advertising campaigns with a consistent theme. Branding aims to establish a significant and differentiated presence in the market that attracts and retains loyal customers.” (Definition from: the business dictionary.com).
As one can understand from the abovementioned definition, branding is a very important procedure during the introduction of a new product and for the creation of the company’s value. The brand itself, and also its image, are very important competitive advantages and create tremendous value for the product. Thus there is an imperative need for businesses to understand what takes to build a brand. As far as fashion is concerned, Fionda and Moore (2009) indicated that luxury fashion brands are created using nine dimensions: clear brand identity, marketing communications, product integrity, brand signature, premium prices, exclusivity, heritage, environment and service, and culture. Gorp, Hoffmann & Coste-Manière (2012) contacted a study on luxury fashion brand and found some interesting evidence about the second dimension from the ones mentioned above (marketing communications). More specifically they concluded that all the companies they studied (namely Delvaux, Bottega Veneta, Hermès & Loewe) not only owned a website but they also considered it as a very important asset for their business, since it allowed customers to interact and become more familiar with the brand’s values. Subsequently this recognition of the significance of the website was generalized to include social media in general. There are also other studies that confirm these results and consequently supporting the effect of Social Network Sites in brand building. Langaro, Rita & Salgueiro (2015) investigated the influence that active brand page participation (ABPP) has on brand awareness and brand attitude. Their results indicate that there is a positive and significant effect of ABPP on brand awareness and brand attitude. Obviously these findings mean that Social Media should be considered as effective communication tools, which influence brand perceptions, build brand
knowledge and maybe even increase sales, if we take into account that, usually, raising brand awareness has a positive effect on buying intention.
There is no doubt that Social Media, including blogs, can have a significant influence in the drivers of customer equity. More specifically, Huang (2012) conducted a study to explore travel agencies that develop their own travel blogs as a marketing tool. The results clearly showed that blogs help form brand images. Furthermore, it appears that a blog marketing channel offers enormous business opportunities to promote products and to increase revenues. Specifically in the fashion industry, Kim & Ko (2010) claimed that there is an association between purchase intention and trust, while the latest was found in their study to be strengthened “via interaction with other users as well as brand on social media sites”. Furthermore, Halvorsen et al. (2013) conclude that fashion blogs can indeed be used as marketing tools in order to affect consumer behavior, as they found evidence that, lots of readers had ended up buying products because they saw them on a fashion blog. It is obvious that blogs are being incorporated as a supportive marketing tool in fashion business these days, as part of overall marketing strategies. Renata Certo-Ware commented related to this topic in the website ‘Business of Fashion’:
“Bloggers are a crucial part of the fashion ecosystem. [They] are some of the hardest working...writers, photographers and critics in fashion — and, collectively, have just as much power (if not more) to generate consumer interest and drive sales as traditional print editors”. (Schertler, Kreunen & Brinkmann)9
Now, we have a clear picture of the influence that blogs can have in the different drivers of customer equity. How is this influence explained though? Why can a specific person who is writing about a product or using it, make such a huge difference in how much consumers are willing to buy it? As mentioned earlier, in this new Marketing era, the initial prototype model of 4P’s have been developed to include other 3P’s, Packaging (or Physical Evidence), Positioning (or Process), and People10. Regarding the last P, as (Enache, 2011) wrote, regarding the factor
“people” in education: “Having the right people to develop and deliver the knowledge is a key step to design a successful educational service. The ability to deliver the content in a correct manner is paramount”. This fact can be generalized as it applies to most product categories.
9 Online article only, Accessed January 2016
http://www.professionalacademy.com/blogs-and-advice/marketing-theories---the-marketing-mix---People are nowadays a very significant factor and having the right people to promote a product can definitely make a difference. Gladwell (2000) explains that people are actually a very important factor for a product to reach its tipping point. The tipping point, the author explains is a certain point in popularity of the product, which once is overpassed, the product will tip. When the tipping point is reached, the situation turns into an “epidemic”. Epidemics are the known to everyone diseases that once infect someone, they can spread from one person to another with incredible quick rhythms, but can also take the form of social epidemics or fashion epidemics11.
The three rules of epidemics, i.e. the three factors that can influence the start and the spread of an epidemic are: i) the law of the few, ii) the stickiness factor, and iii) the power of context (Gladwell, 2000, p.5-9). For the needs of this study I will focus on the first of these elements, the law of the few. The law of the few, essentially states that there is a relatively small number of charismatic people that are connected to everyone else, and that the rest of us are linked with the remaining word through those people. These are the “connectors”. Just as, there are “people specialist”, the connectors, on whom we rely on in order to connect us with other people, there are also information specialists. These are people on whom we rely upon in order to link us to new information. These people Gladwell calls the Mavens. There is a third category the “Salesmen”, who are particularly persuasive. So in a few words, Mavens are “data banks” and can give you the most valuable information, connectors are the “social glue”, the people who will spread the information and salesmen are the ones that can persuade someone who is not convinced by the Word-of-Mouth. All these three categories are critical regarding epidemics and can make the difference in spreading the epidemics, in our case, the fashion trends (Gladwell, 2000, p.30-88). Of course one person can have more than one of these “talents”, they don’t have to be three different people.
Concluding, it is safe to assume that finding the right people to inform consumers about a product, to spread the news about it, and convince the skeptical ones, is quite critical and can determine if a product/service will turn into epidemic or it will stay in the medium levels of consumers’ desire lists. At this point is where bloggers can fit in the promotion mix of a company as the last P (people) and it is clear why they can play a huge role in influencing customers to buy a product.
11 The term fashion epidemic refers to a trend that after appears for the first time, people start to adopt it so rapidly,
Moreover, there is another possible explanation why fashion bloggers can have an impact in consumers’ minds about a product/service, namely the stimulus-response model. This model demonstrates that a marketing, or environmental stimuli, gets in the consumers’ consciousness and a bunch of psychological processes, consolidate with certain consumer characteristics to result in decision processes and purchase decisions, as indicated in Figure 1 below.
Figure 1: The stimuli-response Model
In this case, we can perceive fashion bloggers as the stimuli used to incite customers’ buying decision, and their attitudes toward a product/service or brand. Till, Stanley and Priluck (2008) actually proved that celebrity endorsers can be used as stimuli to influence consumers’ attitude toward a brand. They conducted an experiment and the results indicated that Individuals exposed to pairing of a brand with a celebrity (treatment group), actually developed a more favorable attitude toward the brand than the control group did (i.e without celebrity pairing). The same thing can happen if companies use bloggers as stimuli to lead their consumers’ attitudes. As stated earlier, there is a variety of ways with which a fashion blogger can influence his/her follower, but in this case, I will focus on the possibility of consumers identification with bloggers, in a way that the abovementioned relationship is stronger than the actual identification of the consumers with the brand itself.
2.4 Brand Identity
“Identity is any category label to which a consumer self-associates either by choice or endowment a category label becomes an identity once the consumer has begun to incorporate it into his or her sense of, who he or she is and has initiated the process to become that kind of person”. (Reed II, Forehand, Puntoni, Luk Warlop 2012).
Lam, Ahearne, Mullins, Hayati, & Schillewaert, (2013) found evidence that consumers are in fact increasingly attracted to a new brand mostly because of its “symbolic values (self–brand congruity) rather than its instrumental attributes (e.g., initial perceived quality)”. Consumers like products, brands and consumption behaviors that are linked to category labels with which they self-associate. For example, consumers, that view themselves as having a specific characteristic, (i.e. being fashionable), are likely to behave in ways that are consistent with what it means to “be” fashionable. This can initiate a variety of “identity driven effects”, including increased attention to identity-related stimuli (they are more likely to notice and evaluate certain products), a preference for identity-linked brands (in this case brands that are perceived as fashionable), more positive reactions to advertisements featuring spokespeople who possess the desired identity, the selection of media catering to the identity, the adoption of behaviors linked to an identity and biased attention toward identity-consistent memories (increased ease of recalling fashion related facts) (Reed II,Forehand, Puntoni, Warlop 2012).
Hence, there is a kind of identification of consumers with the brands they prefer/use. Consumer–brand identification (CBI), is defined as “a consumer's perceived state of oneness with a brand, is a valid and potent expression of our quest for identity-fulfilling meaning in the marketplace of brands”. (Stokburger-Sauer, Ratneshwar, Sen, 2012). The authors also proposed that there are six antecedents which affect CBI. According to their analysis three of these factors are more cognitive in nature (namely: brand–self similarity, brand distinctiveness, and brand prestige), and the other three (i.e. brand social benefits, brand warmth, and memorable brand experiences) are mainly “affect-based”.
Dolich (1969), suggested that consumers prefer to buy products and brands that best reflect their personality12. Findings of his study verified that individuals have the tendency to relate the brand
symbolic meaning to the concept they want to present for themselves. Birdwell (1968) examined car-owners and how they perceive the brand of their cars. Results showed that the most favored brand was consistent with the self-concept. All ownership groups examined in that study, perceived their cars as they perceived themselves. It appears that an individual’s cognitive structure and his self-image are major influences on the choice of brand. Consumers use brand
12 Personality is defined as the intrinsic organization of an individual’s mental world that is stable over time and
personality13, as a mean to express their own personality. In essence, the brand is borrowing
other associations. Due to the fact that consumers can identify the brand with another entity, they may infer that “the brand shares associations with that entity— even if it does not directly relate to it”. (Keller 2005)
In other words, brands carry symbolic meanings (Levy, 1959) and thus can help consumers achieve their fundamental identity goals and desires. This essentially means that “we are what we have”—the brands we own and use define us to others as well as to ourselves.
It is widely recognized that brands have the ability to embody and communicate desirable consumer identities. Products and brands have images that are perceived by the individuals as having various symbolic meanings, and thus they are part of the identity symbolized by the person. Consequently only brands similar to the self-concept will maintain and enhance it. People can be extremely different with each other and they can have millions of different characteristics. In order to limit the number of those characteristics, McCrae and Costa (1990), defined the five most common and important of them, and constructed a framework, namely “The Big Five”. The framework of the Big Five personality traits, also known as the five- factor model (FFM), is a widely accepted theory of five broad dimensions used by some psychologists to describe the human personality. A number of correlated and more specific primary factors are claimed which include different aspects. For example, extraversion is said to include such related qualities as gregariousness, assertiveness, excitement seeking, warmth, activity, and positive emotions.
Conscientiousness is exemplified by being disciplined, organized, and achievement oriented. Neuroticism refers to emotional stability, impulse control, and anxiety. Extraversion means a higher degree of sociability, assertiveness, and talkativeness. Openness is displayed through a strong intellectual curiosity and a preference for novelty and variety. Finally, agreeableness resembles with being helpful, cooperative, and sympathetic towards others
Figure 2: The Big Five model of McCrae and Costa
Respectively, brands, like humans, can have lots of perceived different characteristics. Aaker (1997) identified the brand personality dimensions as perceived in consumers' minds resulted in a five factor solution. The nouns determined to represent best the types of concepts subsumed in each of the five dimensions were Sincerity, Excitement, Competence, Sophistication, and Ruggedness.
Figure 3: Big 5 for brands
Further, Mulyanegara, Tsarenko, & Anderson, (2009), in their study that was conducted with the context of fashion product, expanded these results, in terms that they examined the impact of consumer personality on preferences towards specific brand personality. The results of their
study suggested that some particular dimensions of The Big Five model, regarding individuals’ personality, are significantly related to preferences on determined dimensions of brand personality. More specifically, it was shown in the study that consumers who display a Conscientious personality, stated preferences towards ‘Trusted’ brands. This brand characteristic basically resembles Aaker’s “Competence”. Further, the findings indicated that people with the trait of Extraversion, tended to be attracted from “Exciting” brands, while Agreeable people demonstrated preferences for “Sincere” brands.14 From these outcomes it seems reasonable to
assume that consumers use brand personality as a conveyance, which helps them signal their own personality.
Brand managers are interested in promoting a brand personality that attracts consumers’ attention such that they may form a preference for a brand. Marketing strategies that are successful in establishing perceived psychological values for brands seem to reject or accept the brand by the similarity of these values to the self- concept (Dolich 1969).
Stokburger-Sauer, Ratneshwar, Sen (2012) proved that the more the brand–self similarity, the more the consumers will identify with that brand, and as a consequence of this identification, they will be more loyal to that brand and they will advocate that brand to others. The literature provides strong support that identification is linked to a sustainable, long-term preference for the identified-with company's products (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2003). Homburg, Wieseke, and Hoyer (2009), also report a strong influence of customer–company identification on customer loyalty. Furthermore, One of the key consequences of identification is the promotion of the identified-with organization or of company (e.g., Ashforth & Mael, 1989 in Bhattacharya & Sen, 2003), the recommendation of the company to others or the defense of the company when it is attacked by others. Clearly all these studies suggest that CBI can influence some of the drivers of customer equity, which is, as explained earlier, a term of increasing importance nowadays.
Lastly, it seems that identities, except for the brands, can also be “anchored” in different types of referents: objective membership groups (e.g., gender or family), culturally determined membership groups (e.g., ethnicity and religion, abstracted role ideals (e.g., mother, friend, philanthropist), groups premised on association with a known individual (e.g., a graduate
advisor), with an individual who is not known personally (e.g. fashion blogger) , or with dimensions of self that are imagined (Reed II, Forehand, Puntoni, Luk Warlop 2012). So clearly there is a possibility that consumers can “anchor” their identity also on fashion bloggers.
3 Research
3.1 Conceptual Framework and Hypothesis development H1
H3 H2b + H2a
Figure 4:Conceptual Framework
It is widely known, and academically proven, as described above that people when choosing to buy a brand these days, are considering a variety of aspects apart from price and quality that were the only influential things the previous years. Nowadays, the associations with the brand, brand image and brand personality will also play an important role in consumer choices. Thus when a brand have a distinctive personality, it is logical to assume that this personality will result in higher customer equity.
H1: Brand characteristics (according to the Big 5 model) will positively influence CE.
Of course not all types of people have the same reactions to a specific brand or blogger.
Consumers with different personality traits will identify more or less with specific brands and will produce different effects on Customer equity. So, it is logical to assume, that the more a
consumer identifies with a brand, the stronger the outcome of this identification in customer equity.
H2a: The relationship between brand characteristics and customer equity is moderated by the characteristics of the consumers, so that this relationship is stronger for higher levels of similarity of consumer characteristics with the brand characteristics.
Brand identity (Big 5)
Customer Equity (Drivers: Value Equity, Brand Equity, and
Relationship Equity)
Personal Characteristics (Big 5)
Consumer Blogger Identification
23
We know when consumers identify with brands; this relationship can affect some aspects of Customer Equity, as for example loyalty (Kim, Han, Park 2001). From the previous section it is obvious that people can also identify with people. It is known that celebrities and spokespersons with characteristics corresponding to an individual or members of a community can intensify the in-group salience and establish brand connections between consumers (Dwivedi, Johnson & McDonald, 2015; Kumar, Aksoy, Donkers, Venkatesan, Wiesel & Tillmanns, 2010). This happens through the generation of positive associations with the brand. Consumers, who want to identify with a reference group, can choose the same brands used by the reference group. Respectively, consumers who identify with a fashion blogger will choose the brand that the blogger proposes.
H2b: The abovementioned moderation (H2a), will be moderated by the consumers’ identification with the blogger.
H3: The relationship between Brand traits and customer equity is also directly moderated by the Identification with the blogger, so that this relationship is stronger for higher levels of the consumer Identification with the blogger.
A more detailed Conceptual Framework Brand Identity (Big 5) Sophisticated Exciting Sincere Competence (Trusted) Ruggedness Customer Equity (3 drivers)
Consumer Identity (Big 5) Extroversion Openness Agreeableness Conscientiousness Consumer Blogger Identification
H1a: Sophistication of a brand will positively influence CE H1b: Excitement of a brand will positively influence CE. H1c: Sincerity of a brand will positively influence CE. H1d: Competence of a brand will positively influence CE. H1e: Ruggedness of a brand will positively influence CE.
H2a1: The relationship between Sophistication of a brand and customer equity is moderated by the Openness of the consumers, so that this relationship is stronger for higher levels of Openness of the consumer
H2a2: The relationship between Excitement of a brand and customer equity is moderated by the Extraversion of the consumers, so that this relationship is stronger for higher levels of Extraversion
H2a3: The relationship between Sincerity of a brand and customer equity is moderated by the Agreeableness of the consumers, so that this relationship is stronger for higher levels of Agreeableness.
H2a4: The relationship between Competence of a brand and customer equity is moderated by the
Conscientiousness of the consumers, so that this relationship is stronger for higher levels of Conscientiousness. H2b1-4: The abovementioned moderations (H2a1-H2a4 respectively) , will be moderated by the consumers’ identification with the blogger.
H3a: The relationship between Sophistication and customer equity is also directly moderated by the Identification with the blogger, so that this relationship is stronger for higher levels of the consumer Identification with the blogger. H3b: The relationship between Excitement and customer equity is also directly moderated by the Identification with the blogger, so that this relationship is stronger for higher levels of the consumer Identification with the blogger. H3b: The relationship between Sincerity and customer equity is also directly moderated by the Identification with the blogger, so that this relationship is stronger for higher levels of the consumer Identification with the blogger. H3b: The relationship between Competence and customer equity is also directly moderated by the Identification with the blogger, so that this relationship is stronger for higher levels of the consumer Identification with the blogger.
The aim of this study is to explore if identification with a fashion blogger can exist, and if it can make a big difference. I examine if identification with fashion bloggers can be stronger than identification with the brand, and if it can actually change consumers’ preferences for a brand. Furthermore, I study what is the effect of consumer-blogger identification, on customer Equity. To examine these hypotheses I will use 2 different and very popular fashion bloggers, Negin Mirsalehi and Chiara Ferragni. The two bloggers have distinctive personalities, as Negin was perceived as more open and Chiara as having the trait of “Extraversion” in the pre-test that was
conducted. Moreover, 4 different brands are used (2 paired with each blogger), so that the results will be more reliable and avoid the risk of a result occurring only for one blogger or one product category to be mistakenly generalized.
3.2 Research Question
Earlier in this document, I provided evidence to support the importance of Social Media (including blogs) nowadays in our daily routine, as marketing tools and also as communication channels in building and enhancing Customer Equity, by influencing its drivers. For the needs of this study, I will focus on fashion blogs, i.e. blogs that are mainly concerned with fashion. There is evidence that fashion blogs can be used as marketing tools to influence consumer behavior and purchase intention in different ways. One of them is through achieving consumers’ identification with the bloggers. I believe that identifying with the bloggers can have a great impact in one or more drivers of Customer Equity and thus CE as a whole. Given the importance of fashion industry, and the continuously growing interest of consumers on blogs - and consequently fashion blogs- the role of fashion bloggers as spokespersons on Customer Equity and its sub-elements should be investigated. Thus the research question that has been formulated is:
“What is the role of fashion bloggers as brand ambassadors? The impact that, Consumer-Blogger
Identification can cause on Customer Equity.”
3.3 Research Design and analysis
In this section the procedure of how the research was designed, including sample, measures and data collection will be described. There is previous research conducted on CBI, hence many concepts are already operationalized. The research question is answered through a quantitative analysis.
3.3.1 Method
For the needs of this study a quantitative research was conducted, using a cross-sectional survey design. Two different surveys were prepared, to create a 2 (with/ without blogger) x 1 (Big 5) between-subjects factorial research design to gather cross-sectional data. One in which Brand X was shown without a blogger and Brand Y was be presented as endorsed by the blogger, and one with the opposite condition, in order to identify the different responses between the two
situations. In order for the results to be more generalized, two bloggers with distinctive personalities were tested, along with 4 brands, 2 paired to each blogger. For the analysis of the data from the questionnaires, IBM SPSS statistics was used in order to test hypotheses and generalize the findings. The questionnaires were administered via the internet (social media), as it is a costless and easy way to gather a large number of answers.
A pre-test was performed to determine the different personality of the blogger (according to “Big Five” model) and what brands they would spontaneously buy (with which they identify), in order to try and create similar to them imaginative brands.
Data was collected through online surveys, as internet provides easy access to a great number of diverse (in terms of demographic and cultural) people, saves costs in a variety of ways and reassures that most participants will remain in their familiar environment, i.e. their own computer at home or at work, increasing the external validity of the study (Reips, 2000).
Sample
The sample consisted of International men and women, of age 18 and 50 years old, because this age group has the highest penetration rate for blog users. The survey was distributed through the internet, mostly social Media, or in some cases with personal e-mails. This means that my sample is a non-probability sample, as people decided themselves if they wanted to take part in the research (self-selection sampling). From the 255 volunteers that started filling out the questionnaire, only 163 respondents fully completed the questionnaire (response rate 64%). Almost 85% of these respondents were female, and under 30 years old, which is normal if we take into account the objective of this study, 56,2 % possessed a Bachelor’s degree and 36,3% had completed a Master’s degree.
3.3.2 Measurement of variables Translation, back-translation procedure
All the items that were used in the questionnaires were derived from English studies. Since I wanted to distribute the survey also to my home-country (Greece), and thus the first language of many respondents was the Greek language, the original items were also translated into Greek. In
order to make sure that the content of the items remained unchanged, the translated items were back translated into English by a third person.15
Personality of the Person
Personality of the Respondents was examined according to four out of five dimensions of the “Big 5” model of McCrae and Costa. Respondents were asked to rate their selves according to 15 characteristics in a scale from 1-7 (Not at all – Very much). These characteristic then were summarized in four general traits of personality (Extraversion, Conscientiousness, Openness and Agreeableness). No Hypothesis was formulated for Neuroticism.
Personality of the Brand
Personality of the brands respectively was examined using the “Big 5” for brands, by Aaker (1997). Participants were again asked to rate four (imaginative in this case) brands as having some traits in a scale from 1-7 (Not at all-very much). Fifteen adjectives were again used that resulted in four characteristics for the brands (Sincerity, Competence, Sophistication and Excitement).
Customer Equity
Customer Equity is dependent on three drivers, Value Equity, Brand Equity and Relationship Equity and was measured taking all three into account. Questions like “I have a clear image of the type of person who would use the brand”, “How Likely is it that you would buy this brand in the future?”, “If another person would ask your advice, how likely is it that you would recommend this brand?” etc., rating in a scale from 1-7 (Strongly disagree- Strongly agree, Highly Unlikely - Highly likely).
Control variables
Results of current study are controlled for three control variables namely Gender, Age and Education. These items were included in the last section of the questionnaire.
15 The appropriateness of the procedure was also validated from the paper: Berger, J. R. EMPLOYEE
REACTIONS TO PSYCHOLOGICAL CONTRACT BREACH, which was posted on blackboard under the course: Quantitative Data Analysis Workshop.
Scales
One moderator variable in this study is consumer-blogger identification, which was measured by the scale, used by McCroskey, Richmond & Daly (1975). They used a seven-point Likert scales where 1 = “Strongly disagree” and 7 = “Strongly agree”, to rate how people identify with people regarding to four dimensions: attitude, background, value and appearance. The scale consists of 8 items (all with α >0.7). The personality traits were measured using part of a 7-point Likert scale of the “Big Five” framework for brands of Aaker (1997). It consists of 15 items, resulting in 5 dimensions (Big 5 characteristics) all with Cronbach's Alpha between 0.90 and 0.95. After, rating their selves according to “Big Five” model, participants were asked to indicate their brand preferences, so that I could compare them to the preferences the treatment group would indicate (the one showed the brand supported by a blogger). For measuring customer Equity, I used a scale with a combination of Aaker (1996), again with a 7-point Likert scale (“Strongly disagree”-“Strongly agree”), as well as some items of Selnes (1993), consisting in total of 9 items, with questions regarding perceived quality of the brand, loyalty and relationship with the brand. 3.3.3 Statistical procedure
Data were collected by means of an online survey. Survey administration started on May 12th 2016. The survey was closed almost four weeks later on June 5th 2016. To perform the statistical analyses, the Statistical software Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) was used. New variables as a function of existing variables were created for hypothesis testing. I calculated the mean of all items that were used to describe a variable. Means and standard deviations of all variables are exhibited in Table 1 and Table 2. After that, scale reliabilities, descriptive statistics, skewness, kurtosis and normality tests were computed. The Cronbach’s alpha, which represents the estimator of the internal consistency, has been tested for the scales that were not already checked in the articles, to verify if all the items in one scale measure the same, or if some questions should not be used for analysis (Table 1). All variables had a Cronbach’s alpha > .7, which indicates high level of internal consistency and therefore all scales are reliable. (See table 1). Most of the variables were normally or close to normally distributed with skewness and kurtosis between -0, 94 and O, 89. (Find the relative table in the Appendices). The variables: agreeableness, excitement of brand Y and Sophistication of brand X, were not normally distributed. The absence of a normal distribution in these variables can be explained by the fact that people may like to perceive themselves as “honest” and “wholesome”, which are adjectives
related to agreeableness and thus tended to rate their selves higher for this “characteristics” than the truth. Regarding the brands personality, brands Y and X were perceived as “exciting” and “sophisticated” respectively and thus it was normal to score higher in this traits. Regression analyses were undertaken to test the hypothesized moderation effects between the variables. Direct relationships were examined by the use of hierarchical regression. The regression analyses were conducted for the dependent variables: (1) Customer Equity of Brand Y without a blogger, (2) Customer Equity of Brand X without a blogger, (3) Customer Equity of Brand M without a blogger, (4) Customer Equity of Brand L without a blogger. In step 1, the control variables gender, age and education were used. In step 2 the personality dimensions of the brands were entered into the models. In step 3, the personality traits of the respondents as moderators and the Identification with the bloggers as moderator of the moderators were entered into the equitation, while in the last step the identification with the blogger was entered in to the model as a moderator alone. In order to test the moderating roles of personality characteristics of the respondents and of the identification with the blogger, Process macro written by Andrew F. Hayes for SPSS was used. More specifically the conceptual and statistical Process models for simple moderation and Moderated Moderation (three-way-interactions) were used to analyze the hypotheses.
Table 1: Cronbach’s Alpha
Variable Cronbach’s Alpha Value Equity ,722 Brand Equity ,868 Relationship Equity ,935 Identification with the blogger ,930
Variables Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1. Gender 1.86 ,352 - 2. Education 2.29 .598 -,201* - 3. Age 1.2216 ,554 ,019 -,274* - 4. Openness 4,590 1,0920 -,156 ,180* -,094 5. Extraversion 4,986 ,85899 -,163* ,148 -,163 ,353** 6. Agreeableness 5,523 ,78485 ,028 ,045 -,001 ,232* ,354** 7. Consiet. 5,517 ,77246 -,106 ,264** ,026 ,514** ,468** ,358** 8.Identification with blogger 2,877 1,3260 -,064 -,080 ,174 ,135 ,046 ,125 ,017 (.93) 9. Competence 4,910 ,97497 ,094 -,125 ,302* ,136 ,007 ,278* ,009 ,439** (,93) 10.Excitement 4,781 1,1211 ,118 ,021 ,171 ,112 ,122 ,307* -,005 ,326** ,699** (,95) 11. Sincerity 4,583 1,1305 ,120 -,243 ,183 ,153 ,125 ,372** -,014 ,395** ,769** ,620** (,93) 12.Sophisticated 5,325 1,1150 ,173 ,010 ,172 ,050 ,051 ,119 -,044 ,492** ,660** ,666** ,388** (,91) 13.CE 4,578 1,1560 ,190 -,127 ,149 ,043 -,013 ,226 -,071 ,551** ,772** ,637** ,675** ,654** (,85)
Note: N=66. Reliabilities are reported along the diagonal ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed) * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)
Table 3: Means, Standard Deviations, Correlations for Questionnaire 1 Means, Standard Deviations, Correlations (Blogger Chiara)
Variables Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1. Gender 1.86 ,352 - 2. Education 2.29 .598 -,201* - 3. Age 1.22 ,554 ,019 -,274* - 4. Openness 4,590 1,0920 -,156 ,180* -,094 5. Extraversion 4,986 ,85899 -,163* ,148 -,163 ,353** 6. Agreeableness 5,523 ,78485 ,028 ,045 -,001 ,232* ,354** 7.Consientiousn ess 5,517 ,77246 -,106 ,264** ,026 ,514** ,468** ,355* * 8. Identification with the blogger
3,2287 1,53926 -,152 ,048 -,306* * ,064 ,208 ,027 -,079 (,951) 9. Competence 4,5833 1,29498 -,073 -,059 ,154 -,038 -,052 ,156 ,088 ,394** (,93) 10.Excitement 5,4438 1,35927 -,091 -,040 -,005 -,061 -,034 ,045 ,076 ,328** ,722** (,95) 11.Sincerity 4,1667 1,21681 -,004 ,115 -,079 ,012 ,110 ,252* ,207 ,472** ,714** ,633* * (,93) 12.Sophisticated 4,4767 1,52991 -,049 -,026 ,022 ,042 -,017 ,151 -,012 ,449** ,691** ,589* * ,551** (,91) 13.CE 3,82 1,34604 ,092 -,103 -,101 -,015 ,098 ,073 -,062 ,822** ,554** ,402* * ,540** ,591** (,88)
Note: N=86. Reliabilities are reported along the diagonal ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed) * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)
4 Results and Discussion
4.1 Analysis Direct effects
A direct relationship was found between all variables regarding brand personality and Customer Equity. Excitement, competence (trusted), sophistication and sincerity, were all positively related to Customer Equity (β from 0.33 to 0, 7 and p < .5 for all brand personality traits and all four brands examined). This means that hypotheses H1a-e were all supported. Results are shown at Table 4 and Table 5. To examine the contribution of each predictor to the explained variance in the dependent variable (R2) results of relative weight analysis were examined. Results indicated
that the explained variance in Customer Equity of all Brands can be attributed for between 8% and 54% to the personality of the brand (exciting, sophisticated, trusted, , whereas the control variables Gender, education and age only explained small percentages (around 0.8%). Lastly, people were directly asked how much they were willing to pay extra to acquire an item that a fashion blogger has proposed. Results showed that by average they would pay at least 20% as a price premium, with a Standard deviation (sd≈1,5), to buy a fashion item suggested by a fashion blogger. This means that some people would be willing to pay an even higher price premium for a brand that a blogger supports.
Table 4
Results of Excitement, Competence, Sophistication and Sincerity as predictors for Customer Equity (Questionnaire 2) Customer Equity Variable B SE B Β Step 1 Age 0.086 0.259 -0.40 Gender -.535 0.439 .145 .145* Education -.098 0.206 -.059 -. Step2 Age -.149 ,207 -0.73 Gender -.363 0.396 -0.95 Education -.191 0.180 -.112 Sincerity 0.506 0.089 ,564** Excitement ,425 0.107 ,444** Competence 0.479 0.101 ,480** Sophistication 0.393 0.085 ,484** Ruggedness 0.213 0.074 ,332** Note: N = 66.
For Customer Equity, R2 = .022for step 1; ΔR2 = .411** for step 2. * p < .05. ** p < .01.
Table 5
Results of Excitement, Competence, Sophistication, Ruggedness and Sincerity as predictors for Customer Equity (Questionnaire 1) Customer Equity Variable B SE B β Step 1 Age 0.557 0.303 -0.92 Gender .391 0.362 .138 Education -.224 0.272 -.108 Step 2 Age 0.373 0.282 .159 Gender -.261 0.379 -.092 Education -.306 0.249 -1.48 Sincerity 0.491 0.130 .439** Excitement .460 0.131 -.468** Competence 0.74 0.115 .066** Sophistication 0.680 0.09 .709** Ruggedness 0.400 0.114 .411** Note: N = 86.
For Customer Equity, R2 = .132* for step 1; ΔR2 = .588** for step 2. * p < .05. ** p < .01
Three-way interaction effects
In order to test Hypotheses H2a1-4 and H2b1-4, that the results of the personality traits of a brand on customer equity would be moderated by the characteristics of the people personality, and this relationship was moderated by the Identification with the blogger, additional analyses were done to explore potential three-way interactions. The macro PROCESS Model 3 (see Appendix for the model) for SPSS was used to perform hierarchical regression analyses and subsequently to compute the test of individual slopes differences. In all analyses, age, gender, education were included as covariates. Results from regression analyses showed that there were no significant three-way interaction effects (for all tests p>0.5). These results indicate that the personality of the respondents does not significantly affect the relationship between the brand personality, customer equity and identification with the blogger.
Two-way interaction effects
Further analysis was conducted on the role of Identification with the Blogger as direct moderator of the relationship between perceived personality of the brands (Excitement, Sincerity, Competence, and Sophistication) and Customer Equity. Hypotheses H3a-d predicted a positive moderation effect of Identification with the blogger on the relationship between perceived personality of the brands and Customer Equity. Results from the regression analysis were in support only of hypothesis H3a for the one blogger (with the “Open” personality), for both brands that were paired with her, and moderate support for H3b for the second blogger (with the trait “Extraversion”), for only one out of two brands that were paired with her.17 This means
that Identification with the blogger was significant for both Brands related to one blogger and only one brand related to the other blogger, and only when the personality of the brand was a fit with the personality of the blogger (Identification with the blogger: B≈ 0,59, p = 0,08, Interaction between Identification and Personality: p= 0,0073 < 0,05). Identification with the blogger moderated the relationship between perceived personality traits of the brand and Customer Equity in such a way that the more sophisticated, or exciting the particular brand was perceived, the higher was the Customer Equity as a result of the Identification with the blogger that matched the personality of the brand. No support was found for hypotheses H3 c, and d.
17 The blogger with the “Open” personality is Negin Mirsalehi and the the trait “Extraversion” was attributed to
Identification with the blogger did not significantly moderate the relationship between other perceived personality traits of the brands, except the ones that fitted with the personality of each blogger, and Customer Equity.
Table 6
Results of Identification with the blogger as moderator of the relationship between Personality of the Brand and Customer Equity (Q2)
Customer Equity
Variable B SE B t
B
Interaction Variables
Identification with the blogger 0.58977 0.3329 1.7715 -0.00
Personality of the brand .0633 0.1859 .3403
0.03
Id. With blogger x Personality -.1643 0.0591 -2.7785**
-0.27 Note: N = 66.
* p < .05. ** p < .01.
Table 7
Results of Identification with the blogger as moderator of the relationship between Personality of the Brand and Customer Equity (Q1)
Customer Equity
Variable B SE B t
B
Interaction Variables
Identification with the blogger 1.9859 0.7750 2.5625*
-0.00
Personality of the brand .4336 0.3363 1.2893
0.03
Id. With blogger x Personality -.2766 .1392 -1.9874*
-0.27 Note: N = 66.
