An experimental study on the effects of Instagram Stories on consumers’ brand
attitude, the mediating role of story attitude and the moderating role of
presentation style
Charlotte van Schijndel 10797459
Master’s Thesis Persuasive Communication Graduate School of Communication
University of Amsterdam
Master’s programme Communication Science Supervisor: Guda van Noort
Date of completion: 28-06-2019 Word count: 7490
Abstract
These days 2 million brands incorporate Instagram Stories to share their messages and stories became part of their communication strategy. Despite its popularity little is known about the effects of Instagram Stories and whether it is able to create favourable brand attitudes. This study aimed to examine the effect of different source types (brand versus influencer) of Instagram Stories on consumers’ story attitude and brand attitude, to what extent the effect of the stories on brand attitude is mediated by story attitude and whether this mediation model is moderated by presentation style (prominent versus subtle) of the story. In the story the brand logo was present in a subtle or prominent way. An online experiment was conducted (N= 160), among female Instagram users aged between 20 and 35, to examine responses to Youtube videos showing the Instagram flow a fictional female Instagram user in which the first story was manipulated to test the impact of source and presentation style. The results showed that there is no direct effect of Instagram Story source on brand attitude and story attitude. In addition, story attitude does not mediate the effect of source type on brand attitude. But, the results did demonstrate the moderated mediation. In such a way that an influencer positively predict brand attitude via story attitude if the presentation style is subtle and negatively predict brand attitude via story attitude if the presentation style is prominent. Based on the results of this study, marketers could take the different aspects of Instagram Stories into account by creating and investing in them. There are many alternatives to
manipulate Instagram Stories; this study can serve as a basis for future research in Instagram Stories to measure the effect on consumers’ brand attitude.
Keywords: social media marketing, ephemeral content, Instagram Stories, influencer marketing, FGC, CGC, presentation style, story attitude, brand attitude
Introduction
Searching for articles about the use of ephemeral content on social media channels did not give any results 10 years ago. Nowadays, the number of ephemeral communication platforms has increased and become progressively popular. These platforms provide ephemeral content, that is described as visual and temporal material, where the availability has been determined in advance (Carlsson & Eager, 2017; Cavalcanti, Pinto, Brubaker & Dombrowski, 2017). In 2011 Snapchat introduced this new form of social media and it was an enormous success (Charteris, Gregory & Masters, 2014). An ephemeral communication platform that is still growing in popularity is Instagram (Van der Veer, Boekee & Hoekstra, 2019). Instagram is a photo and video-sharing social media platform, launched in 2010 and reaching over 4.9 million users in the Netherlands (Van der Veer et al., 2019). In 2016 Instagram became an ephemeral communication platform by introducing Instagram Stories. Instagram Stories are full-screen visuals posted on users’ account, which exist for 24 hours and have a maximum duration of 15 seconds (Gulden, 2016). Worldwide, 500 million people use Instagram Stories every day and 2 million brands incorporate Instagram Stories to their communication strategy. A third of the most viewed Instagram Stories are created by brands (Hutchinson, 2019). Despite Instagram’s popularity, relatively little is known about the effect of Instagram Stories for brands. Why do brands use Instagram stories?
People are confronted with an enormous amount of advertising on a daily basis (Hutter, 2015). It is becoming a hard challenge for brands to attract consumers’ attention in this advertising clutter (Rauwers & Van Noort, 2015). Many brands use social media platforms to promote their products and brand (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010). The modern consumer would like to see, hear and learn as much as possible within a very short space of time. Instagram responds to this need, because it is mainly focused on visuals and consumers are exposed to more content in the same time compared to other social media platforms. This
Hermkens, McCarthy & Silvestre, 2011; Killian & McManus, 2015; Carah & Shaul, 2016). Instagram Stories are focused on visuals and quickness as well, but what can science research tell about the effectiveness of stories for brands? How to use Instagram Stories effectively?
The use of influencer marketing for Instagram Stories is an important consideration for brands. Influencer marketing entails brands to collaborate with influencers to endorse their product or service and is thriving on Instagram. Influencers are people that are especially powerful on consumers on the social media platform where they are active on (Freberg, Graham, McGaughey & Freberg, 2011). This type of marketing offers the
opportunity for brands to use two types of content and advertising channels; brand itself for firmed-generated content (FGC) and influencers for consumer-generated content (CGC) (Goh, Heng & Lin, 2013). Influencer marketing is often seen as non-persuasive and
consumers will reject commercial brand content quicker than commercial influencer content (Evans, Phua, Lim & Jun, 2017). The popularity and impact of influencer marketing could be explained by different theories, such as the two-step flow theory (Katz & Lazarsfeld,
1955). However, the question is whether this effect is the same for Instagram Stories. Therefore, the first aim of the current study is to find out whether there is a difference
between stories posted by a brand or by an influencer on consumers’ story and brand attitude. In examining the impact of Instagram Stories the current study focuses on story and brand attitude to measure story effectiveness. Former research shows that both ad attitude and brand attitude are principal indicators of ad effectiveness (Belanche, Falvián & Pérez-Rueda, 2017). Thereby, the primarily goal of stories are affective responses. It is not about sharing the story, reacting on the story or liking the story. Research shows that ad attitude is
positively related to brand attitude (Biehal, Stephens & Curio, 1992) and therefore the current study suggests that story attitude mediates the impact of source type on brand attitude. The second aim of the current study is thus to examine the mediating role of story attitude.
The impact of a message does not depend on the source alone, but also on the
presentation style of the message. An important distinction that is stressed out by research is a prominent and a subtle presentation style. Research focused on product placement shows that more prominent product placements are less effective than less prominent placements and will lead to less favourable brand attitudes (Matthes, Schemer & Wirth, 2007; Cowley & Barron, 2008; Van Reijmersdal, 2009; Marchand, Hennig-Thurau & Best, 2015). In a story the brand logo could be clearly or not obvious visible (Wilson & Till, 2011; Avery & Ferraro, 2000). Research about product placement is used to emphasize the importance of presentation style. Brand prominence is also part of the content of a story and theories to explain the effect of presentation style are utilizable for stories as well, such as the Persuasion Knowledge Model (Friestad & Wright, 1994; Russell, 2002). These results have been found for
traditional media platforms, that is why this study aims to investigate whether the impact of the source type via story attitude on brand attitude is moderated by the presentation style of the story in Instagram Stories as well.
This leads to the following research question:
RQ: To what extent is there an effect of Instagram Story source on brand attitude and story attitude, to what extent is the effect on brand attitude mediated by story attitude, and is this mediation moderated by the presentation style of the story?
This study contributes to theory development in several important ways. In the first place Instagram is existing for 9 years already and previous studies have especially focused on Instagram posts in the context of influencer marketing, the effect of sponsorship
disclosure, purchase intention and brand attitude (Kim & Ko, 2012; Lee & Sin, 2016; De Veirman, Cauberghe & Hudders, 2017; Djafarova & Rushworth, 2017). There is no extensive
research about the influence of Instagram Stories on consumers’ story and brand attitude. In fact, research about ephemeral content as Instagram Stories is quite rare. Furthermore, this study delves into comparing the source type (brand versus influencer) of Instagram Stories. This comparison has not been investigated before; previous research compared posts and ads from the same source (Campbell, Mohr & Verlegh, 2013; Lawrence, Fournier & Brunel, 2013). This is relevant to investigate because Instagram Stories are a different, new and popular form of marketing. But an incorrect use of stories could have undesirable effects. This study could make a start with a number of characteristics of stories, so that future research can elaborate on it. Eventually, it can be used for ephemeral content on other channels.
The insights of the current study also have important practical implications. First of all, marketers could use the results of this study to advise brands about the use of Instagram Stories, if they want to have a more favourable brand attitude or not to harm consumers’ brand attitude. The popularity of the use of Instagram Stories by brands was mentioned, so it is important that marketers develop a story strategy. Secondly, this research can also
contribute financially to a brand. Should a brand invest in Instagram Stories and what is the added value for investing in influencer marketing? Lastly, this research could contribute to a social goal; the results could be interesting for non-profit companies to gain a more
favourable brand attitude.
Theoretical framework
Social media marketing, Instagram marketing & Instagram Stories
Instagram marketing is part of social media marketing, which can be defined as a marketing strategy that uses the ideological and technical characteristics of social media channels to achieve marketing objectives (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010). When the number of
social media users increased, the number of business and governmental organizations who uses social media marketing increased as well (Kim & Ko, 2010). Social media marketing became part of the corporate marketing strategy of organizations and turned out to be the most popular channel for brands to attempt to strengthen the relation between consumer and brands, products and organizations (Killian & McManus, 2015; Jaakonmäki, Müller & Brocke, 2017). Quickly companies switched from traditional media to social media, this gave them new opportunities to increase consumers’ engagement (Godey et al., 2016). Brands are evolving into publishing firms, where they provide content that aims to satisfy consumers’ wants and needs and keep the connection to a brand story during the day (Ashley & Tuten, 2015; Martin & Todorov, 2010). Instagram is seen as the most important advertising tool for marketers (Shelly, 2016).
Instagram responded to the high social media use of brands and consumers by
designing special businesses profiles by the end of 2016 to distinguish brand’s accounts from consumer’s accounts. For example, they implement a contact button; consumers can click on this button to send a direct email to the brand (Perez, 2016). Besides, Instagram makes it possible for brands to receive data about their followers and visitors, these data driven
insights gives the brand an impression of their target group, could adjust their communication focused on this target group and could check the posts and campaigns effectiveness (Johnson, 2017). In 2018, there were more than 25 million brands with an Instagram business account. Additionally, over 80% Instagram users follow a business account (Gramlike, 2019).
Instagram adapts itself to brands; this could explain the increase of Instagram business accounts.
In 2016 Instagram introduced Instagram Stories. An Instagram Story could be viewed multiply times by others, but will disappear after 24 hours. Users can post as many stories as they want with a maximum length of 15 seconds (Gulden, 2016).
Defining story effectiveness
To examine story effectiveness, it is important to determine what the principal indicators of story effectiveness are. Academic advertising literature shows that both brand and ad attitude are used to measure ad effectiveness in social media marketing studies (Belanche et al., 2017). This cannot be directly translated to the effectiveness of stories, because stories are a different type of content than most social media advertisements. The actions that are taken on stories are not publicly visible; liking a story is not even possible. Thus, to measure effectiveness the focus should be on the feelings that consumers experience after viewing the story and the feelings towards the brand posting the story. Therefore, this study examines story effectiveness in terms of brand attitude and story attitude.
The conceptualisation for story attitude is based on the definition of ad attitude, because a story is a relatively new concept in scientific literature. The definition for ad attitude of MacKenzie, Lutz and Belch will be used (1986, p. 130): ‘’predisposition to respond in a favourable or unfavourable manner to a particular advertising stimulus during a particular exposure situation”. So for this research story attitude can be defined as the consumer responses towards the Instagram Story, where the Instagram Story is seen as ephemeral content (Kerkhofs, 2016). Brand attitude is the dependent variable in this study and can be explained as consumers’ overall feelings towards a brand.
Influencer marketing on Instagram and source type
A first choice that must be made by brands when using Instagram Stories is the source of the story: a brand with FGC or an influencer with CGC. Influencers are people who shape consumers’ attitudes on the social media platform where they are active on (Freberg et al., 2011). They could be recognized as opinion leaders who communicate information. Influencer marketing entails brands to collaborate with these influencers to endorse their
product or service. It is expected that influencers are more powerful as source to post the story than the brand itself.
Research shows that the source of messages influence the way messages are perceived and brands could benefit from CGC posted by influencers. The remarkable difference
between FGC and CGC is the word-of-mouth (eWOM) effect of CGC. Consumers develop a positive brand attitude when the information is communicated by a non-brand, which is perceived as more credible and authentic (Gensler, Völckner, Liu-Thompkins & Wiertz, 2013). Consequently, consumers trust the content provided by peers more compared to brands because peers are evaluated as non-commercial and autonomous (Hautz, Füller, Hutter, & Thürridl, 2014). Thereby, influencers could be perceived as micro-celebrities on social media and are highly trusted in several markets (Lee & Youn, 2009). They are known for their honest and personal communication with their followers (De Veirman et al., 2017). Influencers become brand ambassadors when they collaborate with a brand to endorse their products (Erdogan, Baker & Tagg 2001). Research shows that eWOM communication has more impact on influencing brand preferences and brand attitudes than FGC (Booth & Matic, 2011; Bergkvist, Hjalmarson, & Magi, 2016). Explanations for the positive effect of CGC as compared to FGC can be found in The Persuasion Knowledge Model and two-step flow theories.
Impact of the story source: two theoretical perspectives
The Persuasion Knowledge Model draws attention to people’s awareness of a persuasion attempt so that they activate their persuasion knowledge and decide how to cope with this persuasion attempt (Friestad & Wright, 1994; Cowley & Barron, 2008; Boerman, Van Reijmersdal & Neijens, 2012). Research showed that the online presence of brands activates persuasion knowledge of consumers (Boerman, Willemsen & Van Der Aa, 2017).
Persuasion knowledge is formed over time in a consumer’s life and could be reinforced by interpersonal and emotional experiences gathered through social interactions (Boerman, van Reijmersdal & Neijens, 2014). Before consumers’ persuasion knowledge will be activated, the consumer has to be aware of a persuasive attempt (Friestad & Wright, 1994). Research found that FGC has a more negative effect on consumers’ brand attitude than CGC
(Campbell et al., 2013; Lawrence et al., 2013). When the source is an influencer, people could not experience the story as an advertisement. And the positive characteristics as mentioned in previous section will lead to positive attitudes because consumers’ persuasion knowledge will not be activated.
Another theory can confirm the positive effect of influencer as source for the story: the two-step flow theory (Katz & Lazarsfeld, 1955; Uzunoğlu & Kip, 2014). According the theory, specific individuals are recognized as opinion leaders who communicate information. The theory suggests that mass media communication by brands does not always have a direct effect on consumers, but that there are opinion leaders who have more effect and can
establish social interactions. These offline opinion leaders could be online influencers, so that influencers have a positive effect on more favourable attitudes. Research shows that engaging with digital influencers is an essential part for brands to obtain an honest and authentic online presence leading towards positive attitudes towards ads (Uzunoğlu & Kip, 2014).
The previous studies describe the positive effect of influencers as source on
consumers’ attitudes if the CGC is received as eWOM. These studies did not used Instagram Stories as content, but on the basis of the explanations how eWOM will be evaluated by consumers and in combination with the PKM and two-step flow theory, the following hypothesis has been formulated:
H1: An influencer (versus a brand) as Instagram Story source leads to a more favourable (a) story attitude and (b) brand attitude.
How story attitude mediates the effect of source type on brand attitude Brand attitude can be developed through several marketing activities and communications (Keller, 1993; Batra & Keller, 2016). Different studies found out that consumers’ ad attitude is an important factor to determine ad effectiveness. MacKenzie, Lutz and Belch (1986) suggested that more likeable ads generate more favourable ad attitudes. In sequence, they suggested that more favourable ad attitudes lead to more favourable brand attitudes. This is in line with the study of Biehal, Stephens and Curio (1992); they found out that consumer’s ad attitude positively influences the overall brand attitude. In their study participants had a more favourable brand attitude to brands of which they had a positive ad attitude. Previous research about online video ads showed that the ads have a positive effect on consumers’ brand attitude (Gunawan, 2015). Other studiest that investigate ads showed in the beginning of a video, stated that irritating advertisement could harm consumers’ brand attitude (Li, Edwards & Lee, 2002; McCoy, Everard, Polak & Galletta, 2008; Rejón-Guardia & Martínez-López, 2014). Advertisement irritation is the most effective negative antecedent for brand attitude and purchase intention (Dehghani, Niaki, Ramezani & Sali, 2016).
Additionally, a study in the beauty industry confirmed the crucial role of ad attitude as mediator to determine ad attitude (Hasanah & Wahid, 2019).
Studies focused on different advertising channels and industries suggested the mediating role of ad attitude on consumers’ brand attitude. There is no scientific literature where stories are investigated as advertisement. But in this research setting, the Instagram Story portrays as the advertisement, whereas attitude towards the ad is defined as consumers’ responses towards the Instagram Story. This leads to the following hypothesis:
H2: The effect of Instagram Stories posted by an influencer (versus a brand) on brand attitude is mediated by story attitude.
How presentation style moderates the effects of Instagram Stories
A second important choice that brands have to make is the presentation style of the story. The presentation style could influence the visibility of a brand in a story and even though a brand is not the source of a story, brands can still instruct influencers about the prominence of the brand in a story. Influencers could have complete creative freedom, but there are also collaborations in which preconditions for the post (e.g., presentation style) are agreed between brand and influencer (Gürkaynak, Kama & Ergün, 2018; Spaans, 2019). Research shows that consumers are less resistant to persuasion if the presentation style is subtle, in a way that the persuasive character is not visible (Balasubramanian, Karrh & Patwardhan, 2006; Boerman et al., 2012). Persuasion Knowledge Model (Friestad & Wright, 1994) and the Reactance Theory (Brehm, 1966) could explain the expected effect of
presentation style.
When a brand is clearly visible in a story the persuasion knowledge and consumers’ alertness against the persuasion attempt will increase (Friestad & Wright, 1994). A study of Boerman and colleagues (2012) showed that activation of persuasion knowledge leads to more negative attitudes. Different studies found that if the consumers are aware of the
persuasive attempt they develop counter arguments towards the message, which lowers brand attitude as well (Lee, 2010; Campbell, 1995).
The Reactance Theory explains people reactions if they have the feeling to lose their freedom. This reactance will be activated when people feel pressure to accept a certain attitude (Brehm, 1996). Because a story with a prominent presentation style could feel as a potential threat to freedom, consumers will embrace the attitude that is being threatened more
strongly and sequentially become sceptical towards the story (Van Reijmersdal, 2009). Another possibility is ignoring the advertisement, forming negative brand attitudes and the boomerang effect could occur; the desired persuasive effect will be counterproductive (Burgoon, Alvaro, Grandpre, & Voulodakis, 2002).
The commercial nature of a prominent presentation style potentially eliminates the positive effect of an influencer as source type. Research shows that eWOM communication has more impact on influencing brand preferences and brand attitudes than FGC (Booth & Matic, 2010; Bergkvist et al., 2016). A brand can only benefit from sponsored CGC if consumers evaluate the source to be more credible and authentic (Gensler et al., 2013). The source credibility plays a role; consumers develop a positive attitude towards the brand being endorsed whenever the information is originated from a credible source (Luo, Luo,
Schatzberg & Sia, 2013; Djafarova & Rushworth, 2017). As sponsored CGC by influencers is categorized as eWOM, consumers trust the content provided by peers more than the
information shared by brands because peers are evaluated as non-commercial and independent of brands (Lee & Youn, 2009; Hautz et al., 2014).
These positive effects could disappear if the presentation style is prominent and has a brand as Instagram story type its advantages. Brands already have a persuasive character, but for consumers influencers do not have the intention to persuade. So, if a brand is the source, the persuasion knowledge is activated immediately, whatever the presentation style is
(Kapitan & Silvera, 2016). The presentation style is more important if brands use influencers as Instagram Story source type; if an influencer posts a story with a prominent presentation style, consumers’ persuasion knowledge will be activated earlier than exposed to a subtle presentation style. Since the persuasive character of the story will be noticed earlier (Boerman et al., 2017). This is not the case if a brand is the source (Gazley, Hunt, & McLaren). This leads to the following hypotheses:
H3a: An influencer (versus a brand) as Instagram Story source leads to a more favourable story attitude and consequently leads in a more favourable brand attitude, only if the presentation style is subtle (versus prominent).
H3b: A brand (versus an influencer) as Instagram Story source leads to a more favourable story attitude and consequently leads in a more favourable brand attitude, only if the presentation style is prominent (versus subtle).
Figure 1. Conceptual model
Method Design and sample
This research employed a fully randomized 2 (source type: brand versus influencer) x 2 (presentation style: prominent versus subtle) experimental between-subjects design.
A convenience sample was used to gather respondents. The target group 20 – 39 was chosen for this sample, because research has shown that 35% of this age group uses Instagram daily. For ethical reasons, the target group of 15-19 years is not chosen, of which 58% uses
Instagram daily (Van der Veer et al., 2019). Since this study is focused on Instagram and a female influencer, only female Instagram users were allowed to participate in the experiment. By using this sample, participants could be recruited quickly, cheaply and simply. A total of 185 participants took part in this experiment. 25 participants had to be removed from the sample before analysis: 24 participants because they did not complete the entire survey and 1 participant because of her age. A total of 160 participants were used for the analyses. Their age varied from 20 to 35 years old (M = 25.23, SD = 3.06). The vast majority completed higher education, namely 90.7% (N = 145) and all participants had a Dutch nationality (N = 160).
Pre-test
A pre-test was conducted to increase the quality of the stimulus material of the experiment (N = 21, Mage = 26.05, SD = 3.22, 100% female, 56.49% completed higher education). The pre-test was developed to check attitudes towards several restaurant brands and influencers, to make sure the results of the experiment were not due to pre-existing attitudes. Based on a list of top influencers in the Netherlands (DeMedia100, 2018) 9 influencers were chosen to test participants’ attitude towards them. These influencers
consisted of Claartje Rose, Monica Geuze, Lizzy van de Ligt, Vivian Hoorn, Anna Noushin, Kae Sutherland, Rianne Meijer, Juultje Tieleman and Yara Michiels. The influencer sample contained one fictional influencer, Olivia Juun, because it could be possible participants evaluate a fictional influencer more neutral than non-fictional influencers.
In the pre-test the restaurant brands Baut, Plantage, George, Cannibale Royale, Five Brothers Fat, Van ‘t Spit, Boca’s, Loetje, Spaghetteria and the Duchess were used for testing. This list is based on popular restaurants in Amsterdam of tripadvisor.nl, because most of the participants will be living in Amsterdam based on the convenience sample that was used in
this research. The next criterion was that restaurants must have a clear logo that is reflected in their interior or exterior. This criterion has been included because it must be possible to trace back the restaurant brand from the story, otherwise the variable presentation style could not be manipulated. Finally, this set of restaurants represented different price ranges.
To measure participants’ attitudes towards the restaurant brands and influencers the framework of Spears and Singh’s was used (2004). The participants were asked to describe their overall feelings about the restaurants and influencers on five seven-point semantic differential scales: unappealing – appealing, bad – good, unpleasant – pleasant, unfavourable – favourable, unlikeable – likable. The closer the influencer or restaurant scored to the center of the scale (4), the more neutral the attitude of the participants towards the influencer or restaurant. The top 3 influencers close to neutral were Vivian Hoorn (M = 4.01, SD = 1.61), Olivia Juun (M = 3.96, SD = 0.63) and Claartje Rose (M = 4.50, SD = 1.85). The top 3 brands close to neutral were George (M = 4.07; SD = 0.99), Baut (M = 4.15, SD = 1.66) and Loetje (M = 4.76, SD = 2.04). An overview of the pre-test outcomes can be found in table 1. The pre-test showed participants had the most neutral attitude towards Vivian Hoorn.
Because of the little difference with Olivia Juun and the high standard deviation of influencer attitude for Vivian Hoorn, the fictional influencer was chosen (Olivia Juun) for the stimuli materials, in order to eliminate any (un)favourable effects of a known influencer on
consumers’ awareness, attitudes and knowledge. George restaurants scored most neutral on the attitude scale for restaurant brands. Besides, their logo is clearly visible in their interior and exterior. Therefore, George restaurants was chosen as restaurant brand for the
Table 1
Pre-test outcomes.
Attitude* Attitude*
Influencer M SD Restaurant M SD
Claartje Rose 4.50 1.85 Baut 4.15 1.66
Monica Geuze 2.85 1.38 Plantage 6.05 0.81
Lizzy van de Ligt 4.82 1.58 George 4.07 0.99
Vivian Hoorn 4.01 1.61 Cannibale Royale 5.40 1.20
Olivia Juun 3.96 0.63 Five Brothers Fat 6.02 0.77
Anna Noushin 2.93 1.47 Van ‘t Spit 5.56 1.34
Kae Sutherland 5.88 1.26 Boca’s 5.93 1.25
Rianne Meijer 5.10 1.80 Loetje 4.76 2.04
Juultje Tieleman 4.94 1.33 Spaghetteria 6.28 0.71
Yara Michiels 5.11 1.17 Duchess 5.35 1.49
Note. *1 = low, 7 = high, N = 21
Stimuli material
The stimuli materials used for this experiment consisted of four Youtube videos showing the Instagram flow of a fictional female Instagram user who just opened her Instagram account, which displayed her Story timeline and an Instagram post of someone who she follows. This post was posted by a fictive account: fayevansteenbruggen. To make sure the attention is not too distracted to this post, a photo of the side of the woman was chosen, where the head cannot be recognized. So that facial expressions or other facial features could have no influence on the evaluating of the video. After being exposed to this post for 3 seconds, two stories are showed of two different accounts. Each story had a duration of 6 seconds, after these stories the Youtube video ended.
All participants saw the same flow, but the conditions differed for the first story in this flow. This story was posted by Olivia Juun (influencer source) or George Amsterdam (brand source) and the presentation style of the George logo was prominent or subtle (i.e., presentation style). The account logo and account name were seen at the Instagram feed and if was clicked on the story. The presentation style was manipulated by either placing one (i.e., subtle) or two products (i.e., prominent) of George restaurants in the story. The subtle version consisted of two coffees and one logo was shown on one coffee cup. The prominent version consisted of exactly the same two coffees, but the George menu has been added with the George logo on it. So, in the prominent version the George logo was clearly visible and in the subtle version the George logo was not obvious visible. The four manipulated stories are visualized in Appendix A.
The flow is chosen because it reflects to a real-life situation of watching an Instagram feed and stories. If the participants made the survey on their phone, the YouTube video played on full screen, which reflects to a real-life situation as well. To increase external validity George Amsterdam’s account name was manipulated and through video editing edited as the official George Amsterdam account.
Procedure
The experiment was administered online, participants were invited by a post on the researcher’s Facebook account, a post on the Facebook page ‘Respondenten gezocht’, an Instagram Story and messages through Whatsapp Messenger, which contained a link to the online survey. After clicking on this link, the information sheet and informed consent were showed. If participants agreed the informed consent they could continue participating in the study. Then the participants were asked some general questions to make sure the participants met the inclusion criteria. First, their age and gender were checked. In case they were male or
questions followed about their education level, nationality and whether they had an Instagram account. In case they did not have an Instagram account, they were redirected to the end of the survey as well.
After these introductionary questions a short introduction of Instagram Stories was written and it was emphasized to pay close attention to the first story (with the coffee cups) in the video. The next page showed the YouTube video with the Instagram flow. Participants were randomly exposed to one of the four videos, representing four Instagram Stories
conditions. Subsequently, participants continued the questionnaire and the measurements for story and brand attitude followed.
Afterwards, the participants were asked to answer seven control questions about their Instagram use and familiarity with George restaurants. Next, for the manipulation check participants were asked to answer the question by whom the first story was posted and what the presentation style of the George logo was (i.e., prominent or subtle). Finally, the
participants were debriefed and were thanked for their participation. The researcher explained them the purpose of the study and communicated the researcher’s mailadres for more
information. All data were collected between 28 April 2019 and 14 May 2019.
Measures
Demographic and control variables. To check for confounding variables, general demographic questions and several control questions about participants’ Instagram use and familiarity with George restaurants were asked. Firstly, participants’ gender, age, highest completed education level and nationality were asked. The control questions consisted of seven questions that could all be answered with yes or no: ‘’Do you use Instagram on a daily basis?; Do you publish Instagram Stories?; Do you watch Instagram Stories of friends?; Do
you watch Instagram Stories of brands?; Do you watch Instagram Stories of influencers?; Do you know George restaurants?; Have you been to a George restaurant in the last two years?’’.
Story attitude. Story attitude was measured with four items on seven-point semantic differential scales, based on Holbrook and Batra (1987). Participants were asked to rate the following items: dislike - like the story, react favourably - unfavourably to the story, feel negative - positive towards the story and if they think the story is bad - good. The second item was reversed to check participants’ attention and was reversed before analysing the data. A reliability analysis was conducted and showed that Cronbach’s Alpha could be improved by 0.08 by removing an item. The item ‘react (un) favourably to the story’ was removed from the Story attitude scale (EV = 2.45, α = .89, M = 4.84, SD = 1.16).
Brand attitude. Brand attitude was measured in accordance with the framework of Spears and Singh’s (2004), with the question: ‘’Please describe your overall feelings about George restaurants.’’ Participants could answer this question on five seven-point semantic differential scales: unappealing – appealing, bad – good, unpleasant – pleasant, unfavourable – favourable, unlikeable – likable (EV = 4.42, α = .97, M = 4.93, SD = 1.12).
Manipulation check. In order to assess whether the various levels of Source type and Presentation style were perceived according to the research goals, a manipulation check was conducted. In all four experimental conditions the participant is asked two multiple choice questions. The first question was: ‘’The first story I saw was posted by…. ‘’ (0= George café Amsterdam; 1= Olivia Juun). To check for the presentation style the participants were asked the following question: ‘’The presence of the logo of George was …. ‘’ (0=
Results Manipulation check
To check if participants perceived the conditions as intended, a manipulation check was conducted. A Chi-square test was conducted with Source type (brand versus influencer) as independent variable and the Manipulation check questions for source type as dependent variable. A significant difference was found, χ2 (1) = 85.080, p < .001. 92.6% of the
participants in the conditions with Olivia Juun (i.e., influencer source) correctly indicated that the story was posted by Olivia Juun and 81% of the participants in the conditions with
George Amsterdam (i.e., brand source) correctly indicated that the story was posted by George Amsterdam. A second Chi-square was conducted with Presentation style (prominent versus subtle) as independent variable and the Manipulation check question for presentation style as dependent variable. The results showed a significant difference, χ2 (1) = 72.562, p < .001. 97.6% of the participants in the prominent presentation style condition indicated that the presence of George’s logo was prominent and 67.1% of the participants in the subtle
presentation style condition indicated that the presence of George’s logo was subtle. Thus, the manipulation checks for source type and presentation style were successful.
Confound Checks and Randomization Check
Confound checks revealed that the control variable Daily Instagram Use was significantly related to story attitude (F (1,158) = 7.98, p = .005, Mdaily= 4.89, SD = 1.15 versus Mnon-daily= 3.56, SD = .75) and brand attitude (F (1,58) = 7.29, p = .008, Mdaily= 4.97, SD = 1.11 versus Mnon-daily= 3.73, SD = .76). None of the other variables were significantly related to story attitude and brand attitude (see Table 2).
To check the distribution of the Daily Instagram Use variable over the experimental conditions a Chi-square test was conducted. The four conditions did not significantly differ for the Daily Instagram Use, χ2 (3) = .770, p = .857. Thus, randomization of Daily Instagram
Use was successful. Based on the analyses there was no need to include control variables as covariates (Gruijters, 2016).
Table 2
The significance levels (p) to check for covariates between demographic and control variables on story attitude and brand attitude
Story attitude Brand attitude
Age .665 .618
Education .776 .504
Daily Instagram Use .005* .008*
Publish Instagram Stories .572 .638
Watch Instagram Stories friends .469 .411
Watch Instagram Stories brands .732 .837
Watch Instagram Stories influencers .347 .132
Know George .259 .827
Been to George in last two years .290 .859
Note. * = significant related to story attitude and brand attitude
Hypotheses testing
To test the hypotheses and answer the research question PROCESS model 7 (Hayes, 2013) is used with 5000 bootstrap samples to estimate the bias corrected bootstrap confidence intervals (BCBCI) and a confidence interval of 95%. Model 7 is a moderated mediation,
Model 7 showed that source type is not a significant predictor of story attitude, b = -.10, t(156) = -.59, p = .559, 95% BCACI [-.45; .25], Mbrand= 4.89 , SD= 1.08, Minfluencer = 4.79, SD= 1.24. The hypothesis that an influencer (versus a brand) as Instagram Story source leads to a more favourable story attitude, should be rejected (H1a). Besides, analysis showed that source type is not a significant predictor of brand attitude, b = .10, t(157) = .77, p = .442, 95% BCACI [-.15; .34] either, Minfluencer= 4.94, SD = 1.16, Mbrand= 4.91, SD = 1.10. The hypothesis that an influencer (versus a brand) as Instagram Story source leads to a more favourable brand attitude, should be rejected (H1b).
The second hypothesis suggested that the effect in H1b is mediated by story attitude. But H1a already showed that source type is not a significant predictor of brand attitude, therefore there was no possibility of a mediation effect. Thus, the hypothesis that the effect of Instagram Stories posted by an influencer on a more favourable brand attitude compared to stories posted by a brand, is mediated by story attitude, could not be accepted (H2).
Hypotheses 3 tested the moderated mediation; whether an influencer as Instagram Story source leads to a more favourable brand attitude via story attitude, only appears if the presentation style is subtle (a). Whereas a brand leads to a more favourable brand attitude if the presentation style is prominent (b). The interaction effect of Source type (brand versus influencer) and Presentation style was a positive significant moderator of story attitude, R²= .08, F (1, 156) = 13.91, p <.001. A story with a prominent presentation style posted by an influencer results in a less favourable story attitude compared to a brand, in contrast to a subtle presentation style this leads to a more favourable story attitude if the story is posted by an influencers (versus brand). A significant moderated mediation effect was found with story attitude as mediator and presentation style as moderator, b = .91, SE= .26, 95% BCBCI [.41; 1.45]. The indirect effect of source type on brand attitude via story attitude is contingent by the presentation style as the bootstrap confidence interval based on 5,000 bootstrap samples is
different. This means if the presentation style is subtle an influencer as source leads to a more favourable brand attitude via story attitude (compared to an influencer), b = .41, SE= .19, 95% BCBCI [.05; .79]. If the presentation style is prominent a brand as source (compared to an influencer) leads to a more favourable brand attitude via story attitude, b = -.51, SE= .17, 95% BCBCI [-.84; -.18]. So an influencer positively predict brand attitude for a subtle
presentation style and negative for a prominent presentation style. Therefore, both hypotheses could be accepted (H3a & H3b).
Discussion
The aim of this study was to provide insights about the impact of Instagram Stories of brands to generate positive brand attitudes. A brand should make many choices in order to formulate an Instagram Story strategy. This study examined two aspects for creating an Instagram Story: source type and presentation style. An online experiment was conducted which included four experimental conditions that consisted of Youtube videos showing an Instagram flow of a fictional female Instagram user. The first story in this flow was manipulated; Olivia Juun (influencer) or George Amsterdam (brand) as Instagram Story source combined with one (subtle) or two product(s) with George logo (prominent) as presentation style. Based on the results, the research question could be answered: ‘’To what extent is there an effect of Instagram Story source type on brand and story attitude, to what extent is the effect on brand attitude mediated by story attitude, and is this mediation moderated by the presentation style of the story.’’ Three conclusions can be drawn.
First of all, source type is not a significant predictor of story and brand attitude. Thus, rejecting H1a and H1b, the results showed that an influencer (compared to a brand) as
Instagram Story source does not lead to a more favourable story and brand attitude. The reason why this study did not found support for these hypotheses could be due to the fact that
influencers are differently evaluated on ephemeral communication platforms. Persuasion knowledge could be activated quickly if Instagram users do have the feeling that the story has a persuasive character. If users’ persuasion knowledge is activated the two-step flow theory cannot be used as an explanation, because then the influencer will be recognized as opinion leaders who communicate commercial information. Besides the perceived trustworthiness of influencers could be low on ephemeral communication platforms, which leads into less favourable brand attitudes (Dekker & Van Reijmersdal, 2013). Lastly, the results could support the findings of Fournier and Avery (2011), that the bad perception of brands online might be altering. It is possible that consumers on ephemeral content platforms are used to the only presence of brands. This idea should be kept in mind when researching ephemeral content platforms.
The second conclusion concerns the mediating role of story attitude. H2 should be rejected; story attitude does not mediate the effect of source type on brand attitude. The mediation of story attitude was not possible in this study, because source type was not a significant predictor of story and brand attitude. But the results showed a positive significant effect of story attitude on brand attitude, which is in line with previous studies who did not use source type as independent variable and Instagram Stories as manipulation material (MacKenzie et al., 1986; Biehal et al., 1992; Li et al., 2002; McCoy et al., 2008; Rejón-Guardia & Martínez-Lopez, 2014; Hasanah & Wahid, 2019). This means that Instagram Stories have a mediating role on brand attitude, if the source type is not taken into account. Therefore, there is a possibility that theories used to explain this effect for traditional media could also be used for social media marketing research.
Third, hypotheses 3a and b showed that there is a mediation effect of story attitude if presentation style is included as moderator. Thus, accepting H3a and H3b, the results showed that an influencer (versus a brand) leads to more favourable brand attitudes via story attitude,
only if the presentation style is subtle (versus prominent). In addition, a brand leads to more favourable story attitudes, only if the presentation style is prominent (versus subtle).
Accordingly, a brand beats an influencer on brand attitude as soon as the presentation style is prominent. Influencers had a negative effect if the presentation style was prominent. The following applies for influencers: the more prominent the presentation style, the more negative the brand attitude. This is in line with previous studies, PKM and the Reactance Theory (Friestad & Wright, 1994; Brehm, 1966). The significant moderated mediation shows science that Instagram Stories must be viewed in a broad context, because characteristics of a message could explain whether an effects occurs or not.
Limitations and future research
Despite conscientious preparation and design of the study, it contains limitations. First, the sample asks for caution with generalizing the results towards a broader population. The study is focused on Dutch females aged between 20 and 39. Any comparison across countries is not possible, because social media marketing content could have a different effect on consumers. Since countries differ in development level, social media usage in terms of platform and time spent, legal laws concerning social media and culture type in terms of collectivism versus individualism and habits (Weijenborg, 2012; Bouwman, 2018; Kras, 2018). Brands often operate and create their social marketing strategy internationally. To give an overall view for marketers and brands, future research could focus on different
populations. This would also contribute to academic research; there is no previous Instagram research where populations are compared on the effects of social media marketing content on consumers’ brand attitude.
Besides, the experiment was less externally valid because of several reasons. The Instagram flow could have not reflected to reality, because the manipulation material was not
based on participants’ Instagram account. Future research should make the experiment appear as realistic as possible by integrating the stories into the participants’ own accounts.
Additionally, it must be a requirement that participants follow the manipulated brand and influencer. Finally, the experiment was less externally valid because participants could participate via computer or mobile. Most people use Instagram on their mobile phones and using a desktop often has other environmental factors, like the presence of other people and various distractions. So, requiring to participate the experiment on a mobile is the third additional requirement for future research.
The following limitation has to do with the chosen characteristics of the manipulated stories. Scientific literature showed that source type and presentation style were important considerations for brands in their Instagram Story strategy. But nothing has been manipulated in terms of interactivity level, while Instagram Stories features are very suitable for
interactivity (Instagram Business, 2019). Besides, literature shows a linear effect of
interactivity social media content to built a relation between consumer and brand (Coyle & Thorson, 2001; McMahan, Hovland & McMillian, 2009). Future research could response to this and adding this variable to their conceptual model of examining Instagram Stories to gain a overall view of the effectively use of Instagram Stories.
Implications
The findings of the study have several theoretical and practical implications. The results of this study are a starting point for further research concerning Instagram Stories, the effect of source type and presentation style. It is important to note that this study showed a discrepancy between brand and influencer as Instagram Story source, but only by controlling the presentation style. Which indicates influencer marketing is an important aspect to
differently in Instagram Stories than traditional social media content if there is a difference in presentation style. Besides, the results could be used for other ephemeral communication platforms as well. Because ephemeral content is a quite new form of marketing and now it can be investigated whether ephemeral content is experienced differently on empehral communication platforms. Such as Facebook and Snapchat.
The outcomes of this experiment contribute insights to marketers and brands to improve their Instagram Story marketing strategy. How should Instagram Stories be used and to what extent should brands invest in influencer marketing? Regarding the results, the answers should be combined. It depends on the presentation style of the story or brands should invest in influencer marketing. By creating a story brands must keep in mind that their logo is not too obvious, because this will lead to a less favourable brand attitude as well. In addition, this study advice brands to stay in close contact with the influencers to make sure they use a subtle presentation style; otherwise a boomerang effect will occur and will influencers predict brand attitude negatively. So, it is important that brands do not underestimate the impact of influencer marketing and approach them as professionals
(Domingues Aguiar & Van Reijmersdal, 2018). This also applies to non-profit organizations to get their benefits from Instagram Stories, so that every kind of organization could say: Sorry Not Sorry, we use Insta Story.
References
Ashley, C., & Tuten, T. (2015). Creative strategies in social media marketing: An exploratory study of branded social content and consumer engagement. Psychology &
Marketing, 32(1), 15-27.
Avery, R. J., & Ferraro, R. (2000). Verisimilitude or advertising? Brand appearances on prime‐time television. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 34(2), 217-244.
product placements: An integrative framework and future research agenda. Journal of
Advertising, 35(3), 115-141.
Batra, R., & Keller, K. L. (2016). Integrating marketing communications: New findings, new lessons, and new ideas. Journal of Marketing, 80(6), 122-145.
Belanche, D., Flavián, C., & Pérez-Rueda, A. (2017). Understanding interactive online advertising: Congruence and product involvement in highly and lowly arousing, skippable video ads. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 37, 75-88.
Bergkvist, L., Hjalmarson, H., & Mägi, A. W. (2016). A new model of how celebrity
endorsements work: attitude toward the endorsement as a mediator of celebrity source and endorsement effects. International Journal of Advertising, 35(2), 171-184.
Biehal, G., Stephens, D., & Curio, E. (1992). Attitude toward the ad and brand choice. Journal of Advertising, 21(3), 19-36.
Boerman, S. C., Van Reijmersdal, E. A., & Neijens, P. C. (2012). Sponsorship disclosure: Effects of duration on persuasion knowledge and brand responses. Journal of
Communication, 62(6), 1047-1064.
Boerman, S. C., Van Reijmersdal, E. A., & Neijens, P. C. (2014). Effects of sponsorship disclosure timing on the processing of sponsored content: A study on the effectiveness of European disclosure regulations. Psychology & Marketing, 31(3), 214-224.
Boerman, S. C., Willemsen, L. M., & Van Der Aa, E. P. (2017). “This post is sponsored”: Effects of sponsorship disclosure on persuasion knowledge and electronic word of mouth in the context of Facebook. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 38, 82-92. Bolton, R. N., Parasuraman, A., Hoefnagels, A., Migchels, N., Kabadayi, S., Gruber, T., &
Solnet, D. (2013). Understanding Generation Y and their use of social media: a review and research agenda. Journal of Service Management, 24(3), 245-267. Booth, N., & Matic, J. A. (2011). Mapping and leveraging influencers in social media to
shape corporate brand perceptions. Corporate Communications: An International
Journal, 16(3), 184-191.
Bouwman, B. (2018, January 23). Waarom Duitsland de ‘censuur’ van sociale media
voorlopig niet zal aanpassen. Retrieved from https://www.svdj.nl/nieuws/duitsland-censuur-sociale-media/
Brehm, J. W. (1966). A theory of psychological reactance.
Burgoon, M., Alvaro, E., Grandpre, J., & Voulodakis, M. (2002). Revisiting the theory of psychological reactance. The persuasion handbook, 213-232.
Campbell, M. C. (1995). When attention-getting advertising tactics elicit consumer inferences of manipulative intent: The importance of balancing benefits and
investments. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 4(3), 225-254.
Campbell, M. C., Mohr, G. S., & Verlegh, P. W. (2013). Can disclosures lead consumers to resist covert persuasion? The important roles of disclosure timing and type of
response. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 23(4), 483-495.
Carah, N., & Shaul, M. (2016). Brands and Instagram: Point, tap, swipe, glance. Mobile
Media & Communication, 4(1), 69-84.
Carlsson, N., & Eager, D. (2017). Ephemeral content popularity at the edge and implications for on-demand caching. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems,
28(6), 1621-1634.
Cavalcanti, L. H., Pinto, A., Brubaker, J., & Dombrowski, L. (2017). Media, Meaning, and Context Loss in Ephemeral Communication Platforms: A Qualitative Investigation on
Snapchat. CSCW ’17 Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer
Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing, 1933–1945.
data. Rhetoric and Reality: Critical perspectives on educational technology.
Proceedings of ascilite Dunedin 2014.
Chernev, B. (2019, April 4). The Most Incredible Instagram Statistics for 2019. Retrieved from https://techjury.net/stats-about/the-incredible-instagram/
Cowley, E., & Barron, C. (2008). When product placement goes wrong: The effects of program liking and placement prominence. Journal of Advertising, 37(1), 89-98 Coyle, J. R., & Thorson, E. (2001). The effects of progressive levels of interactivity and
vividness in web marketing sites. Journal of Advertising, 30(3), 65-77.
Dehghani, M., Niaki, M. K., Ramezani, I., & Sali, R. (2016). Evaluating the influence of YouTube advertising for attraction of young customers. Computers in Human
Behavior, 59, 165-172.
Dekker, K., & van Reijmersdal, E. A. (2013). Disclosing celebrity endorsement in a television program to mitigate persuasion: How disclosure type and celebrity credibility interact. Journal of Promotion Management, 19 (2), 224-240.
DeMedia100. (2018). DeInfluencer50 2019. Retrieved from
http://www.demedia100.nl/deinfluencer50.html
De Veirman, M., Cauberghe, V., & Hudders, L. (2017). Marketing through Instagram influencers: the impact of number of followers and product divergence on brand attitude. International Journal of Advertising, 36(5), 798-828.
Djafarova, E., & Rushworth, C. (2017). Exploring the credibility of online celebrities' Instagram profiles in influencing the purchase decisions of young female users. Computers in Human Behavior, 68, 1-7.
Domingues Aguiar, T., & van Reijmersdal, E. (2018). Influencer marketing.
AmsterdamStichting Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek Commerciële Communicatie, SWOCC9789076802763.
Erdogan, B. Z., Baker, M. J., & Tagg, S. (2001). Selecting celebrity endorsers: The practitioner's perspective. Journal of Advertising Research, 41(3), 39-48.
Evans, N. J., Phua, J., Lim, J., & Jun, H. (2017). Disclosing Instagram influencer advertising: The effects of disclosure language on advertising recognition, attitudes, and
behavioral intent. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 17(2), 138-149.
Fournier, S., & Avery, J. (2011). The uninvited brand. Business Horizons, 54(3), 193-207. Freberg, K., Graham, K., McGaughey, K., & Freberg, L. A. (2011). Who are the social media
influencers? A study of public perceptions of personality. Public Relations
Review, 37(1), 90-92.
Friestad, M., & Wright, P. (1994). The persuasion knowledge model: How people cope with persuasion attempts. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(1), 1-31.
Gazley, A., Hunt, A., & McLaren, L. (2015). The effects of location-based-services on consumer purchase intention at point of purchase. European Journal of
Marketing, 49(9/10), 1686-1708.
Gensler, S., Völckner, F., Liu-Thompkins, Y., & Wiertz, C. (2013). Managing brands in the social media environment. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 27(4), 242-256.
Godey, B., Manthiou, A., Pederzoli, D., Rokka, J., Aiello, G., Donvito, R., & Singh, R. (2016). Social media marketing efforts of luxury brands: Influence on brand equity and consumer behavior. Journal of Business Research, 69(12), 5833-5841.
Goh, K. Y., Heng, C. S., & Lin, Z. (2013). Social media brand community and consumer behavior: Quantifying the relative impact of user-and marketer-generated
content. Information Systems Research, 24(1), 88-107.
Gramlike. (2019, May 9). 30 Instagram Statistics Every Marketer Needs To Know In 2019 [Infographic]. Retrieved from https://famemass.com/instagram-statistics/ ]
should have broken yesterday. The European Health Psychologist, 18(5), 205–209.
Gulden, M. (2016, August 3). Instagram Stories en Snapchat, wat zijn de verschillen?
Retrieved from https://themarketingfactory.nl/instagram-stories/
Gunawan, L. (2015). The Impact of Cosumers’ Attitude on Online Video Advertising towards Product Branding. iBuss Management, 3(2), 77-101.
Gürkaynak, G., Kama, Ç. O., & Ergün, B. (2018). Navigating the uncharted risks of covert advertising in influencer marketing. Business Law Review, 39(1), 17-19.
Hasanah, R., & Wahid, N. A. (2019). The Mediating Role of Consumer’s Attitude toward Advertising on the Relationship between Advertisement Content Credibility and Attitude toward Brand: The Case of Beauty Soap in Indonesia. International Journal
of Multicultural and Multireligious Understanding, 6(9), 12-21.
Hautz, J., Füller, J., Hutter, K., & Thürridl, C. (2014). Let users generate your video ads? The impact of video source and quality on consumers' perceptions and intended
behaviors. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 28(1), 1-15.
Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis. A Regression-Based Approach. The Guilford Press.
Holbrook, M. B., & Batra, R. (1987). Assessing the role of emotions as mediators of consumer responses to advertising. Journal of Consumer Research, 14(3), 404-420.
Hutchinson, A. (2019, January 31). Instagram Stories is Now Being Used by 500 Million People Daily. Retrieved from https://www.socialmediatoday.com/news/instagram-stories-is-now-being-used-by-500-million-people-daily/547270/
Hutter, K. (2015). Unusual location and unexpected execution in advertising: A content analysis and test of effectiveness in ambient advertisements. Journal of Marketing Communications, 21(1), 33-47.
brengen. Retrieved from https://business.instagram.com/blog/bringing-interactivity-to-instagram-stories-ads?locale=nl_NL
Jaakonmäki, R., Müller, O., & vom Brocke, J. (2017). The Impact of Content,
Context, and Creator on User Engagement in Social Media Marketing. Proceedings of
the 50th Hawaii international conference on system sciences (HICSS), 1152-1160.
Johnson, T. (2017, June 20). Instagram Insights & Analytics: A Deep Dive. Retrieved from
https://www.cpcstrategy.com/blog/2017/06/instagram-insights-analytics/
Kapitan, S., & Silvera, D. H. (2016). From digital media influencers to celebrity endorsers: attributions drive endorser effectiveness. Marketing Letters, 27(3), 553-567.
Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of Social Media. Business Horizons, 53(1), 59-68.
Katz, E., & Lazarsfeld, P. F. (1955). Personal Influence: the Part Played by People in the Flow of Mass Communications. Canadian Journal of Economics, 80(13), 1583- 1583.
Keller, K. L. (1993). Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand equity. Journal of Marketing, 57(1), 1-22.
Kerkhofs, K. (2016, February 22). Wat moet je weten over Instagram Stories. Retrieved from https://www.marketingonline.nl/blog/wat-moet-je-weten-over-instagram-stories
Kietzmann, J. H., Hermkens, K., McCarthy, I. P., & Silvestre, B. S. (2011). Social media? Get serious! Understanding the functional building blocks of social media. Business
Horizons, 54(3), 241-251.
Kim, A. J., & Ko, E. (2010). Impacts of luxury fashion brand’s social media marketing on customer relationship and purchase intention. Journal of Global Fashion
Marketing, 1(3), 164-171.
An empirical study of luxury fashion brand. Journal of Business Research, 65(10), 1480-1486.
Killian, G., & McManus, K. (2015). A marketing communications approach for the digital era: Managerial guidelines for social media integration. Business Horizons, 58(5), 539-549.
Kras, J. (2018, November 30). Social mediagebruik in Europa varieert sterk per land.
Retrieved from https://www.welingelichtekringen.nl/media/868940/social-mediagebruik-in-europa-varieert-sterk-per-land.html
Lawrence, B., Fournier, S., & Brunel, F. (2013). When companies don't make the ad: A multimethod inquiry into the differential effectiveness of consumer-generated advertising. Journal of Advertising, 42(4), 292-307.
Lee, M., & Youn, S. (2009). Electronic word of mouth (eWOM) How eWOM platforms influence consumer product judgement. International Journal of Advertising, 28(3), 473-499.
Lee, S. Y. (2010). Ad-induced affect: The effects of forewarning, affect intensity, and prior brand attitude. Journal of Marketing Communications, 16(4), 225-237.
Lee, C. S., & Sin, S. C. J. (2016, December). Why Do People View Photographs on Instagram? In International Conference on Asian Digital Libraries (pp. 339-350). Springer, Cham.
Li, H., Edwards, S. M., & Lee, J. H. (2002). Measuring the intrusiveness of advertisements: Scale development and validation. Journal of Advertising, 31(2), 37-47.
Luo, C., Luo, X. R., Schatzberg, L., & Sia, C. L. (2013). Impact of informational factors on online recommendation credibility: The moderating role of source
credibility. Decision Support Systems, 56, 92-102.
advertisement: The roles of brand familarity and repetition. Journal of
Advertising, 17(3), 27-35.
MacKenzie, S. B., Lutz, R. J., & Belch, G. E. (1986). The role of attitude toward the ad as a mediator of advertising effectiveness: A test of competing explanations. Journal of
Marketing Research, 23(2), 130-143.
Marchand, A., Hennig-Thurau, T., & Best, S. (2015). When James Bond shows off his Omega: does product placement affect its media host?. European Journal of
Marketing, 49(9/10), 1666-1685.
Martin, K., & Todorov, I. (2010). How will digital platforms be harnessed in 2010, and how will they change the way people interact with brands?. Journal of Interactive
Advertising, 10(2), 61-66.
Matthes, J., Schemer, C., & Wirth, W. (2007). More than meets the eye: Investigating the hidden impact of brand placements in television magazines. International Journal of
Advertising, 26(4), 477-503.
McCoy, S., Everard, A., Polak, P., & Galletta, D. F. (2008). An experimental study of antecedents and consequences of online ad intrusiveness. Intl. Journal of Human–
Computer Interaction, 24(7), 672-699.
McMahan, C., Hovland, R., McMillan, S. (2009). Online marketing communications: Exploring online consumer behavior by examing gender differences and interactivity within internet advertising. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 10 (1), 61-76.
Peréz, S. (2016). Instagram officially announces its new business tools. Retrieved from
https://techcrunch.com/2016/05/31/instagram-officially-announces-its-new-business-tools/?guccounter=1&guce_referrer_us=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLm5sLw&gu ce_referrer_cs=v3fg9lQ-D2YidZLhb6JJ-w
In P. Verlegh, H. Voorveld & M. Eisends (Eds), Advances in Advertising Research (Vol. 6, pp 309-323). Wiesbaden, Germany: Springer Fachmedien.
Rejón-Guardia, F., & Martínez-López, F. J. (2014). Online advertising intrusiveness and consumers’ avoidance behaviors. In Handbook of strategic e-business management, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 565-586.
Russell, C. A. (2002). Investigating the effectiveness of product placements in television shows: The role of modality and plot connection congruence on brand memory and attitude. Journal of Consumer Research, 29(3), 306-318.
Shelly, J. (2016). The Video Marketing Explosion [Infographic]. Retrieved from https://www.curalate.com/blog/video-marketing-social-ads/
Spaans, H. (2019, April 25). Influencers inzetten? 5 juridische aspecten om rekening mee te houden. Retrieved from https://imu.nl/social-media/influencers-juridisch/
Spears, N., & Singh, S. N. (2004). Measuring attitude toward the brand and purchase intentions. Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 26(2), 53-66. Uzunoğlu, E., & Kip, S. M. (2014). Brand communication through digital influencers:
Leveraging blogger engagement. International Journal of Information
Management, 34(5), 592-602.
Van Reijmersdal, E. (2009). Brand placement prominence: good for memory! Bad for attitudes?. Journal of Advertising Research, 49(2), 151-153.
Van der Veer, N., Boekee, S., & Hoekstra, H. (2019). Nationale social media Onderzoek 2019. Newcom Research.
Weijenborg, I. (2012, September 4). (Social) media worldwide: hoe culturen verschillen in
mediagebruik. Retrieved from
https://www.heuvelmarketing.com/blog/bid/78225/social-media-worldwide-hoe-culturen-verschillen-in-mediagebruik
Wilson, R. T., & Till, B. D. (2011). Product placements in movies and on Broadway: A field study. International Journal of Advertising, 30(3), 373-398.
Appendix Appendix A. Stimuli materials
Condition influencer as source with a subtle presentation style
