Will celebrity’s attractiveness play a role in consumer’s purchasing behavior of high involvement products when moderated by the social risk factor?

(1)

Universiteit van Amsterdam

Will celebrity’s attractiveness

play a role in consumer’s

purchasing behavior of high

involvement products when

moderated by the social risk

factor?

Name: Shahinda Samir Badawi

Student number: 10297804

Submission date: 8-29-2015

Version Submitted: Final

Master of Business Administration – Marketing track

University of Amsterdam

(2)

1

Statement of Originality

This document is written by Student: Shahinda Samir Badawi, 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.

(3)

2

Acknowledgment

First of all, I am grateful to God for the good health and wellbeing that were necessary to

complete this research.

I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my thesis supervisor Dr. Karin Venetis for her

advice, insightful comments and encouragement during the realization of this thesis. Her great

patience and support helped me during the times I got stuck.

I am also grateful to the study advisers at the UvA school of Economics and Business,

especially Melianthe Hulsbergen. I am extremely thankful and indebted to her for the sincere

and valuable guidance and encouragement extended to me.

Finally, I wish to thank my parents, Ebtesam Hussein and Samir Badawi, and my brothers for

their love and kindness. My deepest thanks to my husband, Mostafa Abdalla for his love,

(4)

3

Table of Figures

Figure 1: Share of worldwide internet users who find brands through celebrity endorsements as of 4th quarter 2014, by age group ... 7

Figure 2: Thesis Outline ... 13

Figure 3: Effectiveness of TV advertisements featuring celebrities ... 15

Figure 4: Estimated Marginal Means on the Customer behavior (Purchase, Try, Seek) ... 37

List of Tables

Table 1: Distribution of Attractiveness Effect on Consumer Purchasing behavior ... 36

Table 2: Effect of High and low Social risks on the Consumer purchasing behavior ... 36

(6)

5

1. Management Summary

Celebrity endorsement has become one of the important tools in advertisement. This paper

aims at investigating the impact of celebrity endorsement, with respect to their physical

attractiveness, on the consumer’s purchasing behavior for high involving products in high

social risk situations. For this purpose data have been collected from 107 respondents in an

online questionnaire form, and Manova tests were run in SPSS to verify the devised model.

With high involving products, the celebrity physical attractiveness has shown statistically significant positive impact on consumer’s purchasing behavior (purchase, try, or seek) when

moderated by high social risk situations respectively (p<0.001, p<0.001, p<0.001) as opposed

to low social risk ones (p=0.313, p=0.860, p=0.328). Accordingly, Companies using celebrity

endorsement strategy for their promotion will, therefore, need to carefully select the endorsing

celebrity with consideration to their attractiveness, the level of involvement and the degree of

(7)

6

2. Introduction

McCracken defines a celebrity endorser as“Any individual who enjoys public recognition and

who uses this recognition on behalf of a consumer good by appearing with it in an advertisement” (McCracken, 1989). While according to Friedman & Friedman “A celebrity endorser is an individual who is known to the public (actor, sports figure, entertainer, etc.) for his or her achievements in areas other than that of the product class endorsed” (Friedman &

Friedman, 1979). Not only that they are recognized by a large number of people, they also have

distinct features compared to non-celebrities (Silvera & Austad, 2004). Those features could

be the perceived level of expertise and trustworthiness of the celebrity (Ohanian, 1991) or the celebrity’s physical attractiveness (McGuire, 1985; Singer, 1983; Dholakia & Sternthal, 1977).

Celebrities can be also considered as a reference group, a term that can be defined as ‘’any

person or group of persons that serve as a point of comparison (or reference) for an individual by communicating values, attitudes and providing a specific guide for behavior” (Shiffman &

Kanuk, 2006).

The history of celebrity endorsement as a communication mean in advertising is almost as old

as marketing itself, according to Bartels (1988) the marketing theory started by the beginning

of the 20th century, and in the history there are examples of early appearances of celebrities and

iconic figures featuring brands for advertising purposes, hose will be mentioned and further

explained in the literature review.

Evidence of increasing use of celebrities in endorsements was recorded, for example most

recent findings in a study on internet users claim that almost quarter of teens aged between 16

(8)

7

Figure 1: Share of worldwide internet users who find brands through celebrity endorsements as of 4th quarter 2014, by age group

Quoted from (Statista, 2015)

Numerous studies suggest that the high costs associated with celebrity endorsed

advertisements of different types (television, printed, online) can be justified by the favorable outcome on the consumer’s buying behavior and increased purchasing intention for different

types of products (Atkin & Block, 1983; Pughazhendi & Ravindran, 2012).

As for the economic worth of using a celebrity endorser in an advertisement, it has been proven that they have a positive effect on the customer’s purchasing decision of the endorsed product

and that the sales income generated are substantially higher compared to non-celebrity

advertisements (Agrawal & Kamakura, 1995; Mathur et al., 1997; Erdogan, 1999).

There are evidence of the economic worth and financial effects associated with the use of celebrity endorsement which are elaborated in the literature review section.

(9)

8

The reason behind the continuously growing employment of celebrity endorsement is that

companies find advertisements delivered by celebrities more favorable to customers in terms

of appeal, attention, recall and possibly the purchasing decision compared to non-celebrity

advertisements (Cooper, 1984; Dean & Biswas, 2001).

Friedman et al. (1976) found that a celebrity endorsed fictitious advertisement recorded higher

ratings on believability and purchase intention compared to the non- celebrity advertisement.

Also Atkin and Block (1983) found more favorability and more purchasing intention in the

case of a celebrity endorsed an alcohol brand compared to a non-celebrity endorsed

advertisement.

Endorsers are often perceived by the customer as attractive, appealing and can attract the

attention of the audience. They also positively affect the recall of the marketing communication

message sent via the advertisement. For instance, Friedman and Friedman (1979) tested the

effect of a celebrity endorser on the recall of the brand name and the advertisement using

different fictitious advertisements featuring both celebrities and non-celebrities. The results

were in favor of the celebrity endorser. Also Misra and Beatty (1990) found that brand recall

is higher when the advertisement features a celebrity who is more relevant or more matching

to the product endorsed.

Marketers choose celebrity endorsers based on their likability, physical attractiveness as well

the celebrity’s social status (Kamins M. A., 1990). They state that when the brand name is

associated with the celebrity, his/her positive attributes can be transferred to the brand name which consequently would enhance the brand’s market position (McCracken, 1989).

McCracken justified this finding by analyzing the case of the American actor James Garner

(10)

9

(maturity, American-ness, confidence, maleness and good humor) became the qualities of the

product endorsed (the Mazda car) which was the reason behind the brand success in this case.

The consumer’s perception and its impact on the decision making process involve

an amount of risks. Several types of perceived risks have been identified in the

literature. Foxall, Goldsmith and Brown (1994) categorized the following risk types to either situational or product related risks which can affect the consumer’s

decision making process: Functional or Performance risk, Physical risk,

Psychological risk, Time risk, and Social risk, each will be defined in the literature

review; those risk types were derived from the authors’ categorization of the

consumer needs that the consumer seeks to satisfy through purchasing behavior:

1)Psychological needs, which are the needs that can be met by products of

functional or utilitarian purposes, 2)Social needs, which can be met by products that

represent consumers to other people and expresses their membership in a social

class or group, 3)Symbolic needs, which are psychosocial needs such as sex and

dominance that need to be expressed usually through symbols, 4)Hedonic needs,

which are linked to the pleasures of the five senses, 5)Cognitive needs, which come

from the curious nature of the consumer that drives him to know about its

environment, and 6)Experimental needs, which arise because of the ever changing

feelings and emotions that affect the consumer that constantly are sought to be

modified.

This thesis focuses on the social risk since the social need/factor, as has been

discussed before, is one of the most influential factors on the consumer buying

(11)

10

Based on the above, one can confidently say that celebrity endorsement is a factor that

influences, among others, consumers’ purchasing behavior. According to Kotler and

Armstrong (2011), celebrity endorsement could be linked to the social factors that influence the consumer’s behavior. And according to some studies, the consumer’s motivation to buy is

strongly related to the congruency between self-esteem and the image of the product he/she will consume. Even if the “actual” self-image is not consistent or similar to the product image,

the “ideal” self-image is more influential on the buying decision process (Sirgy, 1982; Hong &

Zinkhan, 1995).

This is also consistent with the findings of Kelman who stated in his theory the process of

social influence that “An individual adopts behavior derived from another person or a group

because this behavior is associated with a satisfying self-defining relationship to this person or group” (Kelman, 1961).

This can be linked to the use of a celebrity endorser in an advertisement where the perceived image of a celebrity was proven to influence consumers’ attitude and behavior positively

(Mathur et. al., 1997).

According to Kotler (2000), consumer decision making varies also with the degree of the buyer

involvement as well as the product type. The buying decision is considered to be high involving

typically when the product is expensive, bought infrequently, risky, and self-expressive, where

the buyer first develops beliefs about the product, then develops an attitude about it and finally

makes a thoughtful choice.

The buying decision is considered to be low involving, however, when the buyer switches

(12)

11

buying decision also has to do with low prices or frequently bought products that need little

evaluation.

Some Studies have also shown that the use of a celebrity endorser is most effective when

advertising for a low involvement product where the attractiveness of the communicator is

more important than the level of expertise. Those studies suggest that the celebrity endorser works on the effect and cognition components of the consumer’s personality (Baker &

Churchill, 1977; Chaiken, 1979; Debevec & Kernan, 1984; Petty & Cacioppo, 1980). This

could further lead to raise the consumer’s purchasing intention (Friedman et al., 1976;

Petroshius & Schulman, 1989).

Numerous research have investigated the relationship between the celebrity endorsement and the consumer’s purchasing behavior. In most of these studies the emphasis is on the

significance of this relationship with high and low levels of involvement (Petty & Cacioppo,

1980; Petty et al., 1981; Kamins et al., 1989; Callcoat & Phillips, 1996). Various studies tested

the effect of high involvement messages on personal relevance and the results showed that

those messages created more personal connections with the consumer compared to low

involvement messages (Engel & Roger, 1982; Krugman, 1965; Petty & Cacioppo, 1979; Sherif

& Hovland, 1961). However, there seems to be a knowledge gap when it comes to the effect

of attractiveness on high involving purchasing behavior, particularly when paired with high

social risk situations. To our knowledge, this relationship has not been tested using a

quantitative methodology.

(13)

12

Will celebrity’s attractiveness play a role in consumer’s purchasing

behavior of high involvement products when moderated by the social

risk factor?

2.1. Theoretical relevance

As earlier mentioned, the majority of research into consumer behavior is focused on the relationship between the celebrity endorsement and the consumer’s purchasing behavior with

regard to different aspects of the endorser, and the differences between high and low involving

products. However and to our knowledge, there are seldom studies, if any, that measure the

moderating effect of the social risk factor in the relationship between celebrity attractiveness and the consumer’s purchasing behavior with the focus on high involving products. This thesis

will seek to fill this gap in the body of knowledge and shed the light on another dimension of

this relationship.

2.2. Marketing relevance

Given their high cost, it is deemed critical for companies and marketers to know how to use

and employ the celebrity endorsers (as a reference group) in an advertisement or a brand in

such a way that positively affects the consumer’s behavior considering the social relevance of

the celebrity to the consumer.

2.3. Research Outline

To better address the research question, this paper comes to adopt a quantitative methodology

(14)

13

This chapter, the introduction, tried to offer the reader at-a-glance overview of the consumer

behavior and celebrity endorsement which led to the research question in hand. This will then

be followed by the literature review (chapter 2) which highlights the theoretical background of

the study. The research methodology comes in chapter 3 to describe the methods and data

analysis tools. Chapter 4 outlines the results of the research hypotheses testing. The discussion

of the findings and main conclusion along with the research limitations are presented in chapter

5 and 6 respectively.

Figure 2: Thesis Outline

Chapter 1: Introduction Chapter 2: Literature Review Chapter 3: Methodology

Chapter 4: Results Chapter 5: Discussion Chapter 6: Conclusion and Limitations

(15)

14

3. Literature review

In this chapter the following topics will be elaborated: the history of celebrity endorsement, the celebrity endorser’s attributes, and the social status concept in relation to celebrity endorser’s

economic worth, consumer behavior, the purchasing decision, the social risk factor and the products’ level of involvement.

3.1. History of celebrity endorsement

Today companies worldwide make use of celebrity endorsers in their marketing

communication. The market is currently overwhelmed with numerous international brands,

which tempt the companies to make huge investments in celebrity endorsers (Erdogan, 1999;

Jyothi & Rajkumar, 2005). For example, in 2010 Maria Sharapova renewed her contract

with Nike Inc. for $70 million over eight years and in 2011 the luxury fashion house, Louis

Vuitton, signed a $10 million contract with Angelina Jolie for its 18 months core values

campaign (Folger, 2011).

The phenomenon of employing celebrity endorsers in advertisements or for a brand’s

marketing communication is not recent (Kaikati, 1987). It goes back to the late nineteenth

century. Among the earliest examples are the appearance of queen Victoria in association with Cadbury's Cocoa , Pope Leo XIII’s endorsement of Vin Mariani, a French tonic wine, in 1899

and in 1883 Lillie Langtry, an English actress, endorsed for Pears Soap (Sherman, 1985;

Agrawal & Kamakura, 1995; Erdogan, 1999; Garthwaite, 2014).

Over the following decades, the use of celebrity endorsement has increased substantially. In

1975 10% of television advertisements featured celebrities (Forkan, 1975). In 1978, it went up

to 20% (Sherman, 1985) and approximately one in every six advertisements featured a celebrity

(16)

15

commercials feature celebrities (Shimp, 2003). In an online based survey in the 4th quarter of

2014, it was found out that 24 percent of all internet users worldwide, aged 16 to 24 years,

discovered new brands through celebrity endorsements (Statista.com, 2015).

Although the celebrity endorser’s effect has been studied in the past from different angles, the

findings of these studies can be challenged nowadays, according to Agrawal and Kamakura

(1995). They state that since the advertising mechanisms and effects generally change over

time, the effect and the dynamics of the celebrity endorsement as a marketing means change as

well and need to be examined at different points of time.

Strikingly, results of recent statistics of the celebrity endorsement effectiveness on the brands

endorsed in TV advertisements compared to non-celebrity advertisements showed almost no

difference. The study was conducted in the US among 2,577 adults of 18 years old and above

and examined 12,000 advertisements, of which more than 1,200 featured a celebrity

(MarketingCharts, 2014) (Figure-3).

Figure 3: Effectiveness of TV advertisements featuring celebrities

(17)

16

3.2. The Celebrity’s characteristics and attributes

There are some important factors or characteristics about the celebrity endorser that were found to be most effective in consumer’s attitude changing. This includes source credibility, source

attractiveness and source power (Till & Schimp, 1998; Belch & Belch, 2001; Ohanian, 1990).

Particularly Solomon et al. (2006) found that the factors that are most effective are the endorser’s attractiveness and source credibility (Solomon et al., 2006).

According to Ohanian (1990) a credible source, in this case a celebrity, should have two

attributes: trustworthiness and expertise. A source can be perceived as an expert if he/she is

knowledgeable, experienced, and qualified to talk about the endorsed product. Ohanian (1990)

also states that source expertise is a persuasive communication means that should have a

positive effect on attitude change of the consumer.

Trustworthiness mainly reflects the celebrity’s honesty and believability about the message

regarding the endorsed product as perceived by the audience (Schiffman & Kanuk, 2004). In

addition and according to Ohanian (1990), if a celebrity is perceived as trustworthy, the

message communicated will have greater positive effect on the receiver who will in turn have more confidence and will consider the celebrity’s opinion more valid.

Moreover, Belch and Belch (2001) state that when the message endorsed comes from a credible

source, it influences the beliefs, opinions and attitudes of the receiver. This consequently will affect the product’s company as it will gain a loyal consumer. Source credibility is perceived

by the recipient as having relevant knowledge, skill or expertise, and who is trustworthy to give

unbiased, objective information.

Source attractiveness is more related to physical attributes for the celebrity endorser, such as

similarity, familiarity and likeability. The attractiveness of a celebrity can affect the receiver in

(18)

17

of relationship with the source by adopting similar beliefs, attitudes, preference or behavior.

Similarity is when a receiver or consumer is easily influenced by the endorsed message if it’s

coming from a source that is perceived as similar to him/her and if the communicator and

receiver have similar needs, goals, interests and lifestyles. The message is then better

understood and received. Therefore, marketers often hire foreign nationals as salespeople so

customers can relate more easily to them (Ohanian, 1990).

Another example in advertising is a popular commercial in a campaign for Budweiser beer. A

cast group of friends greet each other with an exaggerated “Whassup?” when they speak with

one another or get together to watch a game and enjoy a beer (Belch & Belch, 2001; Ohanian,

1990). Familiarity is the level of knowledge of a celebrity. The more exposure the celebrity

receives, the more familiar he/she seems to the audience (Belch & Belch, 2001). Likeability

refers to the affection for the source as a result of physical appearance, behavior or other

personal traits (Belch & Belch, 2001). Likability is also described as an attraction to the

endorser due to his/her physical appearance and behavior (McGuire, 1985). In some studies

likeability is directly related to the physical appearance (Horai & Fatoullah, 1974; Dion &

Stein, 1978) and can be identified as a subcomponent of attractiveness (Burgoon, 1976).

Source power is when a source is perceived as being able to administer positive or negative

sanctions to the receiver. However, the source power is very difficult to have an effect in an

advertisement and applies more in situations involving personal communication and influence

such as in a personal selling situation. The sales representative for example may have some

power over a buyer if the latter was offered receiving special rewards in return, while in

advertisements the communicator can neither offer a reward nor determine whether the receiver

(19)

18

3.3. Physical Attractiveness Effects

The topic of physical attractiveness has been quite extensively researched. There are many

studies in the literature that proved physically attractive source as perceived by the target

audience as more agreeable, better liked and induces attitude change when compared to less

attractive ones (Caballero & Solomon, 1984; Chaiken, 1979; Horai & Fatoullah, 1974; Joseph,

1982; Kulka & Kessler, 1978; Mills & Aronson, 1965; Mills & Harvey, 1972; Petty &

Cacioppo, 1980). It was also found that the physical attractiveness of an endorser has a positive effect on the consumer’s impression of the products by influencing the consumer’s evaluation

of the aesthetic qualities of an advertisement (Baker & Churchill, 1977). Attractiveness can as

well lead to higher verbal and behavioral compliance (Debevec, Madden, & Kernan, 1986).

Sirgy (1982) however stated in his study some interesting results. Most research focus on the

facial attractiveness. Ironically, attractiveness was found to have little to no effect on brand’s

name recognition although most of the judges or respondents usually show consistency in

attractiveness rating regardless of their sex, age, geographic region, and social economic class.

Other studies have even criticized the over use of employing physical attractiveness in

advertisements such as Downs and Harrison’s (1985) analysis of American commercials. In

their study they have raised the concern that some advertisements are reinforcing consumers’

preoccupation with physical attractiveness. This in turn might lead to social consequences such

as shaping stereotypes based on the physical appearance.

Because the term is highly subjective, there is no unambiguous definition in the literature for

physical attractiveness as it can vary across cultures. That said what is perceived as attractive

in Japan for example can be unattractive in the USA (De Mooij, 2011). Authors such as Kamins

(1990) identified attractive and unattractive celebrities by asking respondents to evaluate

(20)

19

‘extremely physically unattractive’. As for Ohanian (1990), she developed the source

credibility scale by using multiple subscales that together concludes who is perceived as

attractive and who is not. The subscales tend to be physically based adjectives such as

attractive, classy, beautiful, elegant and sexy.

In an advertising research, Smith and Engel (1968) studied the effect of the physical attractiveness of female models on subjects’ perceptions of endorsed automobiles; their study

was survey based and the test subjects were 120 men. Half the participants where shown a

picture of the automobile accompanied with an attractive female model, while the other half

were shown a picture of only the car. Those who saw the car with the attractive female model

rated the car as significantly more appealing and better designed, compared to those who saw

the advertisement of the car by itself. They also estimated it to be more expensive (by an

average of $340), faster, and less safe. Those results indicate how prevailing the effect of

attractiveness on the perception of endorsed products can be.

In line with Smith and Engel’s study (1968), Kelman (1961) and Shimp (2003) found that

physical attractiveness of a celebrity endorser is a necessary characteristic for a celebrity who can influence the consumer’s purchasing behavior. For example, Shimp (2003) in his study

attributed the success of the Russian tennis player Anna Kournikova as a celebrity endorser for

many brands not to her credibility or to her exceptional skills, but rather to her physical

appearance that is perceived as highly attractive; it was recorded that her earning just from

endorsement was an estimate of 10 million dollars a year.

However, in marketing an attractive endorser may not be as effective in all product groups and

is required to be consistent with a specific product image. For example, the American actress

Mary Tyler Moore served as a poor celebrity endorser for vacuum cleaners (Friedman &

(21)

20

3.4. Social status

Research has shown that individuals' status within their social group influences personal

well-being, social cognition, and emotional experience (Adler et al., 2000; Barkow, 1975;

Eibl-Eibesfeldt, 1989; Fiske, 1993; Keltner et al., 1998). The effectiveness of a celebrity endorser

can partially depend on the meaning he/she brings to the endorsement process. Those meanings

can be a distinction of status, class, or personality and lifestyle type (McCracken, 1989). In

this paper the focus will be on the effect of the social class, which refers to a national status

hierarchy by which groups and individuals are distinguished in terms of esteem and prestige.

There are four social class groups that can be used for consumer analysis: upper, middle,

working, and lower class. The identification with each class is influenced by many personal

attributes, such as one’s level of education and occupation and social attributes such as status

aspiration, physical appearance and social acceptance by a particular class (Peter & Olson,

2001). In practice, brands have targeted their audience of consumers in their advertisements

accordingly. For example, Audrey Hepburn represented upper class and high social status,

while Madonna is more associated with the middle class (Walker et al., 1992).

Social status can also be defined as a higher position compared to others on some dimension

(e.g., academic or athletic skill, physical attractiveness or wealth) that is deemed important by

society (Hyman, 1942). Social status is one of the social context’s dimensions that could

influence consumers’ feelings and their advertising response. For example, members of groups

that have been historically ignored by advertising may feel more positively towards an

advertised product simply because it is directed towards their group or they feel targeted by the

(22)

21

In developing countries, some people with modest financial status are willing to pay a premium

for branded products to improve their social status level, which refers to the importance of

being socially recognized (Van Kempen, 2004).

Social status has been linked to physical attractiveness in many studies in the literature; there

are a number of positive social traits that result from physical attractiveness. For example

Feingold (1992) found that physical attractiveness results in having more dates and more

friends. Others found that it has a halo effect which might give the impression that an attractive

person is in possession of unrelated positive characteristics, such as social skills. Consequently,

it may lead other group members to grant him a higher social status (Ashmore & Longo, 1995;

Eagly et al., 1991).

3.5. Economic worth

Evidence of the financial effects associated with the use of celebrity endorsement is, for

example, linked to the 8% increase in sales of Pepsi Co. to be $7.7 billion in the first year of

using Michael Jackson as a celebrity endorser in 1984 (Gabor et al., 1987; Herrera, 2009).

In 2000 Sainsbury’s supermarkets started employing Jamie Olivier as their celebrity endorser

in television and radio advertisements. A partnership that is one of the longest standing brand alliance in the UK . While Sainsbury’s made a deal with him worth a £2m a year, Sainsbury’s

sales jumped by $1bn. or a £200m gross profit in the first two years (Strategic Directions,

2011).

In a more recent study celebrity endorsers, in particular athletes were found to generally have

a positive pay-off in brand-level sales. In an absolute sense (and relative to the firm’s

competitors), a 4% increase in sales which corresponds with around $10m in additional sales

(23)

22

an estimate of $50bn is being spent worldwide on event sponsorships and celebrity

endorsements. This number has risen over the last few years, indicating that businesses are

benefiting from the celebrity endorsers (Forbes, 2015).

Among most famous and expensive celebrity endorsement deals in the last decade are George Clooney’s, the famous American film star, contract with coffee making company Nespresso

that started in 2005. His earnings are estimated to be $50m to date. Beyonce Knowles, the

American singer and star, signed a 10 year contract for $50m with the beverage company Pepsi

in 2012. Reality TV star Kim Kardashian’s latest affiliation is with Glu Mobile, the app. Gaming company, the celebrity signed the contract in exchange for 45% of the company’s net

profits, which are estimated to be between $43-85m to date. In 2010, teen celebrity Justin Bieber was paid $12m to feature OPI’s new nail polish line “One Less Lonely Girl collection”

(The Richest, 2015).

3.6. Consumer behavior and purchasing decision making: differences between high and low involving products

Consumer behavior can be defined as the mental, emotional and physical activities that people

use during selection, purchase, use and dispose of products and services that satisfy their needs

and desires (Kotler et al. 1999).

According to Kotler et al. (1999), the central question for marketers is: “how do consumers

respond to various marketing stimuli that the company might use?” (p.229), they also

mentioned that the perception of different situations affects consumer behavior and that the

company that really understands how consumers will respond to different product features,

prices and advertising appeals has a great advantage over its competitors.

A consumer’s purchasing behavior can be influenced by four major factors:

(24)

23

consumer’s social class. Those factors are considered the most basic of a person’s behavior and

are often inherited or learnt from the family; ii) Social factors refer to the small groups the

consumer belongs to or his/her social networks, the family and the social role or status; iii)

Personal factors include age and life cycle stage, occupation, economic situation, lifestyle and

personality and self-concept; and iv) Psychological factors such as consumer’s motivation,

perception, learning, beliefs and attitude (Kotler & Armstrong, 2011).

The consumer purchasing process (also known as consumer buying process) consists of 5 main

stages (Engel et al., 1968; Dewey, 2007):

1. Problem/need recognition. This is the most important step in the process where the

consumer identifies a need that was triggered by a stimuli either internal, such as hunger

or thirst, or external, such as viewing and advertisement (Kotler et al., 2009).

2. Information search. This is the buyer’s effort in searching the internal and external

business environments to identify and observe sources of information related to the

focal buying decision. Consumers can rely on print, visual and/or voice media for

getting information.

3. Evaluation of alternatives. At this stage, consumers evaluate different products/brands

on the basis of varying product attributes and whether these can deliver the benefits that customers are seeking. Factors that can influence this stage are the customer’s attitude

and level of involvement.

4. Purchase decision. The stage where the purchase takes place, unless interrupted by

negative feedback from other customers, level of motivation or any unforeseen

situations such as relocation or sudden job loss.

5. Post-purchase behavior. During this stage consumers compare the product with their

(25)

24

According to Kotler (2000), consumer decision making varies also with the degree

of the buyer involvement and the degree of differences among brands.

The buying decision is considered to be high involving typically when the product is

expensive, bought infrequently, risky and self-expressive. Where the buyer first

develops beliefs about the product, then develops attitude about it, and finally

makes a thoughtful choice. Kotler (2000) gives examples of high involving products

such as carpeting and personal computers.

The buying decision is considered to be low involving when the buyer switches brands for the

sake of variety rather than dissatisfaction and when a buyer has some beliefs about the product,

chooses a brand with little evaluation then evaluates the product, such as salt or soap, during

consumption (Kotler, 2000).

There are also different studies stating that high involvement messages have greater personal

relevance and create more personal connections with the consumer. The reason is because those

messages are more linked to people, their possessions, their goals and their values compared

to low involvement messages and have greater self-relevance. Also the amount of time exerted

by the consumer in the information processing and the size of the expected satisfaction with

the product purchased corresponds to the level of involvement with the product. The quality

of the arguments as well in the advertised message were shown to have a higher effect on consumer’s persuation in high involvement than in low involvement (Engel & Roger, 1982;

Krugman, 1965; Petty & Cacioppo, 1979; Sherif & Hovland, 1961).

In a relevant study, Byrne (1971) introduced his reinforcement theory of attraction to

investigate the relationship between the interpersonal attraction and attitude similarity, his theory suggests that the influence of an attractive source will depend on the product’s

(26)

25

Some studies suggest that the celebrity endorser works on the effect and cognition components of the consumer’s personality. So the use of a celebrity endorser is most effective when

advertising for a low involvement product where the attractiveness of the communicator is

more important than the level of expertise (Baker & Churchill, 1977; Chaiken, 1979; Debevec & Kernan, 1984). This could lead to higher the consumer’s purchasing intention (Friedman et

al. 1976; Petroshius & Schulman, 1989).

Additionally, in their Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM), Petty and Cacioppo (1980) drew

an experiment to test how the impact of a celebrity endorser varies between high and low

involving products. They found that peripheral cues such as the likability and attractiveness

have more impact on low involvement products. However, in high involvement products the

message itself is the effective and persuasive factor in the advertisement.

In a follow up study, findings revealed a significant impact of celebrity endorsers on both

attitude and message recall and recognition under low involvement conditions. Arguably, the

authors interpreted these findings on the basis that consumers seeking high involvement

products are more interested in the product itself and are likely to assess the brand rather than

the personality of the celebrities (Petty et al., 1983).

On the other hand, contradictory findings were revealed in other studies regarding the high

involvement products, suggesting that the message endorsed by a credible source such as a celebrity, can influence the target audience’s perception and more likely their attitude and

behavior as well (Dholakia & Sternthal, 1977; Hovland et al., 1953; Hovland & Weiss, 1951).

The same results were found even regardless of the trustworthiness or the expertise of the

(27)

26

Also Atkin and Block’s (1983) suggested in a study that measured the effect of celebrity

endorsers on young audience in an advertisement for alcohols, that when purchasing products

with high social and/or psychological risks, a celebrity endorser is a highly effective variable.

The above mentioned studies however, never tested whether this positive effect or relationship

was due to the attractiveness or the expertise of the celebrity under the high involvement

circumstances.

Based on the above, the findings regarding how effective celebrity endorsers are on the consumer’s purchasing behavior in high involving products are discrepant. There is also a

general agreement among scholars mentioned previously that in high involving products the

consumer is more likely to be affected by ‘rational’ cues, rather than emotional, in the process

of the purchasing behavior, therefor in an advertisement for a high involving product a

consumer is more likely to respond to a celebrity who is perceived as trustworthy or an expert

on the product endorsed rather than how attractive or likable this celebrity is.

3.7. The social risk factor

According to Kotler and Armstrong (2011), celebrity endorsement belongs to social factors which influence the consumer’s behavior. The social factors they mention are small groups,

family, social roles and status. The consumer’s social status can be affected by reference groups

to which they belong. Kotler and Armstrong (2011) state that reference groups influence the person’s attitude and self-concept and may affect the consumer’s product and brand choices.

”"It (the reference group’s influence, SS) tends to be strongest when the product is visible to others whom the buyer respects”(pp. 139) . Apart from the social factor they mentioned three

other factors: 1) cultural factors, which mean the consumer’s own culture, sub-cultural aspects and the consumer’s social class. Those factors are considered to be the most basic of a person’s

(28)

27

and life cycle stage, occupation, economic situation, lifestyle and personality and self-concept; 3) psychological factors such as consumer’s motivation, perception, learning, beliefs and

attitude (Kotler & Armstrong, 2011).

Since consumers within each social group often have similar values, lifestyles and behavior,

this makes the social status an important concept for marketers as it provides a base for market

segmentation and direction for customized promotional messages. The use of a particular advertised brand, which is perceived as a high social class brand, might raise one’s status in

the eyes of others. Similarly the use of a low social class brand might risk the consumer to be

perceived by others as of less social status. For example, if one would want to impress someone,

he might try to buy a brand or a product with a certain image that would reflect good taste

(Solomon et al., 2002).

3.8. Consumer Involvement: High vs. Low

Coulter et al. (2003) define consumer involvement as the importance and personal dependency to a product based on the consumer’s motivation to engage with the product or the content

advertised. The level of involvement also increases, particularly when it’s linked to important

life events.

The categorization of products into low and high involvement is based on the risk perceptions

consumers have when purchasing products. High involvement happens when a consumer

anticipates that the purchase has a personal relation to him/her. There is a high risk about the

purchase when the situation involves elements such as good taste, self-image and opinion of

(29)

28

search for buying. The reason behind that is to decrease the risk of being judged in his peer

group based on his brand choices or purchasing decisions (Friedman & Friedman, 1979).

Krugman (1965) proposes a theory that when consumers are exposed to the media, they either show high or low personal involvement with the advertising messages or ‘communication

involvement’ in terms of number of connections, experiences, personal references per minute

that the viewer makes between his own life and the stimulus or lack of personal involvement.

In the high involvement situations, consumers pay attention to the messages received and

consequently form attitudes towards the advertised brands according to their personal

evaluation. This was described by Krugman (1965) as a learning process prior to the purchase.

In low involvement situations, the consumer processing of information is very limited and the

final attitude towards the brand advertised is formed mostly through personal post, rather than

prior to purchasing (Krugman, 1965).

Among the factors that could affect the celebrity endorsement is the level of involvement which could be defined as a consumer’s enduring perceptions of the importance of the product

category based on the consumer’s inherent needs, values and interests (Zaichkowsky, 1985; De

Wulf et al., 2001).

The consumer’s perception and its impact on the decision making process involves an amount

of perceived risks. Foxall and Goldsmith (1994) define perceived risk as the function of two

factors. The first is the amount of uncertainty present in the information a consumer has about

a product. The second factor is the extent of the consequences of those risk types” (pp. 58-59),

which could be either situational or product related and can affect the consumer’s decision

(30)

29

Foxall, Goldsmith and Brown (1994) mention the following risk types which could be either

situational or product related and can affect the consumer’s decision making process: 1)

Functional or performance risk which means the possibility that a choice may not turn out to

be of benefit as expected or perform as desired; 2) Physical risk which is the possibility that

physical harm may happen as a result of a product choice due to quality and safety; 3) Psychological risk which is the possibility that a specific choice may damage a person’s

self-esteem or self-image; 4) Social risk which is the possibility that a choice will not be approved

by others or may cause social embarrassment or rejection; 5) Time risk which is the possibility that the ability to satisfy the consumer’s want would decline over time. Kamins et al. (1989)

mention also the financial risk which is the possibility that an amount of money could be lost

if a consumer made the wrong purchasing decision and the product bought did not satisfy the

expected money value or performance level.

3.9. Conceptual model and hypotheses

The conceptual model developed for this thesis can be illustrated as follows:

Celebrity Endorser’s Attractiveness Customer's purchasing behavior Level of Social Risk

(31)

30 The following hypotheses will be tested:

H1: In high involvement situations a high attractive celebrity will have no or low effect on

consumer’s purchasing behavior compared to a low attractive celebrity endorser.

H2: In high involvement situations social risk degree will have a moderating effect on the

relationship between celebrity attractiveness and consumer's purchasing behavior. An

attractive celebrity will have a significantly higher positive effect on the purchasing behavior

(32)

31

4. Methodology

This chapter explains the research methodology which was chosen in order to assess the

conceptual model created for this research. First, there is an explanation of the research method,

and then the following will be elaborated: Explanation of the sampling method, research

procedure and measurements. The hypotheses were tested with a 2 (Celebrity attractiveness

involvement: yes versus no) x 2 (Level of social risk: high versus low) factorial experiment. It

was done in order to test the effect of the celebrity attractiveness moderated by the level of social risk on the consumer’s purchasing behavior. Results were collected with the use of an

online based questionnaire.

4.1. Research Method

The nature of the proposed research question suggests using numerical data collection methods

with structured questions targeting a selection of participants (a representative sample) with

predetermined answers in order to be able to test the hypotheses and the relationships among

variables (Saunders et al., 2007). Hence, for this research a quantitative approach was applied.

The collection of survey data for this research was via self-administrated questionnaires, those

questionnaires were in line and structured similarly to questionnaires that were previously

designed or selected by other scholars in the literature who were dealing with similar research

questions. The designed questionnaires were distributed online via www.qualtrics.com, the

online questionnaires included the situations and variables manipulated in a way that can give

different options on a designed scale. The answers were collected and the results were analyzed

(33)

32 4.2. Research Design

This quantitative study falls apart in: 1) pretests and 2) the main test.

The pretest was necessary in order to determine which test products and celebrity endorsers

should be used in the survey. This is in line with Friedman and Friedman (1979). To select

appropriate product categories and celebrities for the pretest, a group of product categories and

celebrities were chosen to be rated by the test group. According to the subject of the main study,

the chosen product categories were to be high involving and should vary between high and low

on the social risk level. Of course, the results of the pretest should not be generalized to those

who have not been pretested (Bryman, 2008).

Participants of both pretests as well as for the main test were selected on a non-probability

convenience sampling basis since it’s easy to conduct and is likely to reach the targeted

number of participants; however this method is known to be the least reliable one(Blumberg

et al, 2005).

Each pretest had 20 participants of the target group (friends and fellow students aged between

18 and 35 of both genders).

4.3. Pretest

Two pretests were conducted via online questionnaires: The first pretest consisted of two

questions. The first question included a number of suggested celebrities chosen on the basis of

being well known to the target group, having experience in advertising and of both genders.

The respondents were to rate how attractive those celebrities according to their perception using

the source-credibility five-point scale (Ohanian, 1990). The second question included a number

of suggested high involvement product categories that rank either high or low on the FCB grid, which categorizes consumer’s attitudes toward products in terms of involvement and think-feel

(34)

33

dimensions (Ratchford, 1987). The respondents were to rate the perceived social risk of each

product category on a seven-point Likert scale. (Appendix A)

The second pretest was designed for manipulation check and to make sure that the chosen

celebrities (resulting from the first pretest) were rated almost the same on the scales of the other

two attributes Trustworthiness and Expertise (Ohanian, 1990)(Appendix B).

4.4. Pretest Data Analysis and Results

A total of 20 respondents, from a convenience sample, analyzed the physical attractiveness of

8 different celebrities (George Clooney, Beyonce, Angelina Jolie, Leonardo Dicaprio, Rowan

Atkinson, Sean Penn, Serena Williams and Rebel Wilson). George Clooney and Angelina Jolie

were perceived as the celebrities with the highest attractiveness score (M= 5.23) and (M= 5.00)

respectively. While Serena Williams and Rowen Atkinson were perceived as the least attractive

with scores (M= 2.77) and (M= 2.84) respectively.

Based on the second pretest, which had 10 respondents, George Clooney and Rowan Atkinson

were chosen for being both male celebrities and for having similar scores on the perceived level

of trustworthiness (M= 4.45) and (M= 4.35) respectively.

For the high-involving product categories, the highest score on perceived social risk was for

the sports car (M= 3.32), and the lowest score on perceived social risk was for life insurance

(M= 2.68).

In both categories, George Clooney and Rowan Atkinson showed similar level of expertise that

were neither extremely high nor extremely low. The scores are as follows:

George Clooney + Sports car (M= 4.37)

(35)

34

Rowan Atkinson + Sports car (M= 4.37)

Rowan Atkinson + Life insurance (M= 4.5)

4.5. Main Experiment

The main online survey has been conducted among 120 respondents who belong to the target

group (friends and fellow students aged between 18 and 35 of both genders). The questionnaire

was designed using the pretests results of chosen celebrities and product categories. Respondents’ demographics will be elaborated in the next chapter along with manipulation

(36)

35

5. Results

5.1. Manipulation checks

Test subjects were asked in the online survey to state whether they are familiar with the two

celebrities George Clooney, representing the attractive celebrity endorser, and Rowan

Atkinson, representing the non-attractive endorser. Hundred percent of the subjects indicated ‘yes’. To avoid that test subjects make their choices based on the celebrity-product match, each

test subject got redirected to only one of two copies of the surveys A or B. Both copies have

the same set of questions, however the celebrity-product match was different on each, the main

test set of questions and the fictitious advertisements are represented in the appendices C and

D.

The respondents consisted of fellow students, family, friends and others who could be reached

via friends or social media. It is hard to say the exact number of questionnaires that were

distributed; however it is known that 120 participants in total filled in the online questionnaire.

During data cleaning, 13 questionnaires were discarded due to missing values. The total

number of respondents for both surveys is 107, all from same age group between 18 and 35.

The percentage of female subjects was higher in both surveys: 67 percent in survey A compared

to 33 percent male subjects, where in survey B female subjects were 63 percent compared to

37 percent of male subjects.

To test the hypotheses a 2(Attractive:no vs yes)x2(Risk:high vs low) Manova was conducted

with purchase, try and seek as dependent variables.

Multivariate main effects were found of Attractive (Wilks’ Lambda=0.96, F(3,207)=3.14,

p=0.03, η2=0.04) and Risk (Wilks’ Lambda=0.90, F(3,207)=7.44, p<0.001, η2=0.10).

Subsequent univariate analyses showed that Attractive had a significant effect on purchase (F(1,209)=4.93, p=0.027, η2=0.02), where yes (M=3.54, SD=1.83) scored higher than no

(37)

36

(M=3.02, SD=1.54). Attractive also had a significant effect on try (F(1,209)=9.75, p=0.002, η2=0.04), where yes (M=4.16, SD=1.93) scored higher than no (M=3.40, SD=1.71). And

finally, Attractive also had a significant effect on seek (F(1,209)= 4.06, p=0.045, η2=0.19),

where yes (M=3.58, SD=1.88) scored higher than no (M=3.09, SD=1.62). Table-1

Table 1: Attractiveness Effect on Consumer Purchasing behavior

Attractiveness Effect Yes No Mean SD Mean SD Purchase 3.54 1.83 3.02 1.54 Try 4.16 1.93 3.40 1.71 Seek 3.58 1.88 3.09 1.62

To be thorough, the main effects of Risk, of which there are no hypotheses, are also treated

here. Risk had an effect on purchase (F(1,209)=10.19, p=0.002, η2=0.04), where high

(M=3.64, SD=1.80) scored significantly higher than low (M=2.92, SD=1.53). Risk also had an effect on try (F(1,209)=22.17, p=0.000, η2=0.09), where high (M=4.34, SD=1.94) scored

significantly higher than low (M=3.22, SD=1.59). And finally, Risk also had an effect on seek (F(1,209)=8.71, p=0.004, η2=0.04), where high (M=3.69, SD=1.89) scored significantly

higher than low (M=2.99, SD=1.57). Table-2

Table 2: Effect of High and low Social risks on the Consumer purchasing behavior

Risk effect High Low

Mean SD Mean SD

Purchase 3.64 1.80 2.92 1.53

Try 4.34 1.94 3.22 1.59

(38)

37

Then, with respect to interaction between Attractive and Risk, the Manova showed a multivariate effect (Wilks’ Lambda=0.94, F(3,207)=4.36, p=0.005, η2=0.06). The subsequent

univariate analyses showed that there was a significant interaction effect on purchase (F(1,209)=11.25, p=0.001, η2=0.05). To break down this effect, a simple effects analysis was

performed which showed that the effect of Attractive in the low-Risk condition on purchase

was not significant (Myes=2.78 vs Mno=3.04, p=0.313), while in the high risk condition yes

scored significantly higher (Myes=4.24 vs Mno=3.00, p<0.001).

There was also a significant interaction effect on try (F(1,210)=8.25, p=0.004, η2=0.04). The

simple effects analysis showed that the effect of Attractive in the low risk condition was not

significant (Myes=3.25 vs Mno=3.20, p=0.860), while in the high risk condition yes scored

significantly higher (Myes=5.03 vs Mno=3.62, p<0.001).

Finally, there was a significant interaction effect on seek (F(1,210)=11.57, p=0.001, η2=0.05).

The simple effects analysis showed that the effect of Attractive in the low risk condition was

not significant (Myes=2.82 vs Mno=3.14, p=0.328), while in the high risk condition yes scored

significantly higher (Myes=4.28 vs Mno=3.04, p<0.001) (Figure-4) (Table-3) (Appendix E).

So, H2A, H2B and H2C are accepted.

(39)

38

Figure: 4-a Figure: 4-b

Figure: 4-c

(40)

39

Table 3: Attractiveness interaction effect on (Purchase, Try and Seek)

Attractiveness interaction

with social risk

High social risk Low social risk

Purchase p<0.001 p=0.313

Try p<0.001 p=0.860

(41)

40

6. Discussion

In this chapter, a discussion will be carried out on the implications of the results, for both theory

and practice, in the light of the former literature and theoretical framework that this study was

based upon. Also the limitations of the research come forward and some opportunities for

future research are suggested.

Many studies have proven that the use of celebrity endorsement is most effective in the case of

low involving products and lead to higher purchasing intention (Baker & Churchill, 1977;

Chaiken, 1979; Friedman et al., 1976; Petroshius & Schulman, 1989). The reason behind this

conclusion is that the celebrity works on the affect and cognition parts of the consumer’s

personality which is particularly true in case the celebrity was perceived by the consumer as

highly attractive (Debevec & Kernan, 1984; Petty & Cacioppo, 1980).

The aforementioned findings are found to be acceptable and convincing, although the focus

was more on low involving products while the study in hand focuses on high involving

products.

The previous findings also point out the importance of the emotional link between the consumer

and the product endorsed via the attractiveness of the celebrity. The study in hand suggests that

the celebrity attractiveness effect can be generalized for both high and low involving products

provided that there is a focus on the emotional state of the consumer as well as a link between the advertisement and the consumer’s social status.

Literature also showed that in high involving products the focus is more on the message

advertised and the product itself, which have more persuasive effect on the consumer (Petty et

al., 1983). Kotler (2000) states that in the high involving product purchasing, the consumer is

(42)

41

research before making a decision. Those findings, however true, were more concerned with

the more expensive products or those that carry a higher functional risk compared to low

involving products. The aforementioned findings might have overlooked the fact that by Kotler’s definition (2000), high involving products are also self expressive or risky, and that

risk can be an emotional or social risk. The study in hand shows that the emotional link,

previously mentioned in the case of low involving products, is still effective even in high

involving products where an attractive celebrity leads to a high purchasing intention. And after

adding the social risk factor the effect was even significantly higher. This stresses on the

importance of the emotional factor and the power of the social risk factor. This also leads to the conclusion that marketers can affect the consumer’s purchasing decision emotionally in

several ways including making a link in the advertisements between the consumer’s social

status and the product endorsed and by introducing a physically attractive celebrity.

Even though there were some exceptions in the literature which gave different findings regarding the effect of celebrity endorsers on the consumer’s purchasing intention in the case

of high involvement, this discrepancy was based on the consumer’s perception of the celebrity

as of high expertise and had more relevance to the product endorsed regardless of the celebrity’s trustworthiness or physical attractiveness (Ohanian, 1991). Ohanian’s study did not

consider the social risk factor whether it has an effect on this relationship between a celebrity

and the consumer. The study in hand tested this effect after establishing a neutral level of

expertise for both celebrities used for the main test. The results indicate that in cases where

there is a high social risk, an attractive celebrity can lead to higher purchasing intention

regardless of the expertise level of the celebrity endorser. The practical implication of this is

that marketers can affect the consumer’s perception of a celebrity endorser in an advertisement

and consequently his/her purchasing decision via two routes: either cognition by introducing

(43)

42

a celebrity who can represent the upper social class especially if the celebrity is physically attractive.

Another case where the celebrity endorser was more effective in high involving situations is

where the product endorsed has more personal relevance to the consumer and where the

advertisement created more connections with the consumer, regardless of the celebrity

attractiveness (Krugman, 1965; Friedman & Friedman, 1979). Those findings succeeded to

consider the emotional connection of the product with the consumer, especially the Friedman & Friedman’s study (1979) which focused on the product type. The Friedmans’ study

considered as well the celebrity attractiveness and the social risk factor; however there were no

comparisons made or manipulations for the levels of attractiveness or social risk. It is also

worth mentioning that the test subjects of this study were of only one category which is middle

class white housewives in the city of Brooklyn, which means that the results cannot be

generalized. More in depth research is needed to determine the effectiveness of the celebrity

attractiveness level.

The effect of high social risk situations on the purchasing behavior of the consumer has been

supported by the literature (Van Kempen, 2004; Atkin & Block, 1983; Kotler & Armstrong,

2011). Accordingly, it was assumed in this research that the attractiveness of a celebrity can

create more social and personal relevance to the consumer when endorsing high involving

products. This in turn can reflect higher purchasing intention. By proving this hypothesis and

the moderating effect of the social risk on the relationship between celebrity attractiveness and consumer’s purchasing intention for high involving products, it would provide valuable

insights for marketers on when to use this expensive, yet widely used, marketing

communication mean and how to make the most out of it in terms of return on investment for

(44)

43

The findings of this study are in line with previous studies that suggested an attractive celebrity will lead to higher consumer’s purchasing intention (Friedman et al., 1976; Petroshius &

Schulman, 1989). This study also attempted to explore in more details the different aspects affecting the relationship. The results are explained as follows:

Hypothesis 1 was based on the notion that the attractiveness of a celebrity endorser will be

more effective in low involving situations where the peripheral cues are more effective on the

purchasing behavior compared to high involving ones where the product and the advertisement

message itself is more determinant (Petty & Cacioppo, 1980). Consequently it was expected

to have no to low effect of attractiveness in high involving situation.

Interestingly, the results show a significant positive effect on the purchasing intention when

comparing an attractive celebrity to a non-attractive one, which contradicts some previous

studies in the literature as mentioned earlier. The reason behind this finding could be that the

attractive celebrity used for the test had higher visibility in famous brands advertisements than

the less attractive celebrity.

Hypothesis 2 was confirmed by the results that show significant impact of the risk factor as an

independent variable on purchasing effect which is in line with past studies in the literature

(Atkin & Block, 1983; Friedman & Friedman, 1978). When attractiveness variable is paired

with a high social risk condition, a significantly higher score was resulted in the effect on the

(45)

44

7. Conclusion

Hypothesis 1 was rejected and Hypothesis 2 was confirmed. The research test leads to the

following conclusions:

 An attractive celebrity endorser will have a more positive effect on consumer purchasing behavior for high involving products compared to a non-attractive celebrity

endorser.

 Consumers will tend to have higher purchasing intention for high involving products under high social risk situations compared to under low social risk situations.

 In high social risk situations, an attractive celebrity will have a higher impact on purchasing behavior of high involving products compared to low social risk situations.